Dosimetric comparison of intensity-modulated proton therapy and proton arc therapy for pediatric ependymoma
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/1651-226X.2025.42001Keywords:
proton arc therapy, intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), Robust optimization, robust evaluation, linear energy transferAbstract
Background and purpose: Proton Arc Therapy (PAT) is an emerging proton therapy treatment modality with the potential to reduce radiation exposure to healthy tissues compared to conventional Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) with fewer beams. This is an attractive option for treating pediatric patients, who are vulnerable to radiation-induced side effects. There is, however, a need to investigate the redistribution of dose to the target volume and organs at risk. In this study, we therefore explored the potential of PAT in proton therapy of pediatric ependymoma.
Methods and materials: Three-field IMPT and PAT treatment plans for 10 pediatric ependymoma patients were optimized using the Eclipse treatment planning system. The PAT plans consisted of 8 fields, spanning 170 degrees. Both modalities were robustly optimized with a ± 2 mm isocenter shift and a ± 3% range uncertainty.
Results: PAT showed improved CTV coverage compared to three-field IMPT, with a distinct increase in D98%. A clear dose reduction was found for the cochleae, with median values of 9.32 Gy(Relative Biological Effectiveness [RBE]) [0.76 – 30.40 Gy(RBE)] and 18.30 Gy(RBE) [1.24 – 29.75 Gy(RBE)] for PAT and IMPT, respectively, for the right cochlea. For the left cochlea, the respective doses were 12.34 Gy(RBE) [2.81 – 30.94 Gy(RBE)] and 18.49 Gy(RBE) [4.27 – 31.97 Gy(RBE)]. No significant difference for the brain integral dose was found between the two modalities.
Interpretation: PAT can improve the dosimetric outcome of proton therapy in pediatric ependymoma patients. Organs at risk dose varied on a patient-to-patient basis; thus, individual treatment plan comparisons are recommended.
Downloads
References
Ding X, Li X, Zhang JM, Kabolizadeh P, Stevens C, Yan D. Spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy: the first robust and delivery-efficient spot-scanning proton arc therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96(5):1107–16.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.08.049 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.08.049
Bhatia S, Sklar C. Second cancers in survivors of childhood cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2002;2(2):124–32.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc722 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc722
Oeffinger KC, Mertens AC, Sklar CA, Kawashima T, Hudson MM, Meadows AT, et al. Chronic health conditions in adult survivors of childhood cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(15):1572–82.
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa060185 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa060185
Toussaint L, Indelicato DJ, Muren LP, Stokkevag CH. Risk of second primary cancer from proton arc therapy of pediatric brain tumors. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2023;27:100480.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2023.100480 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2023.100480
Ding X, Zhou J, Li X, Blas K, Liu G, Wang Y, et al. Improving dosimetric outcome for hippocampus and cochlea sparing whole brain radiotherapy using spot-scanning proton arc therapy. Acta Oncol. 2019;58(4):483–90.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2018.1555374 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2018.1555374
Sanchez-Parcerisa D, Kirk M, Fager M, Burgdorf B, Stowe M, Solberg T, et al. Range optimization for mono- and bi-energetic proton modulated arc therapy with pencil beam scanning. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61(21):N565–74.
https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/61/21/N565 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/61/21/N565
Seco J, Gu G, Marcelos T, Kooy H, Willers H. Proton arc reduces range uncertainty effects and improves conformality compared with photon volumetric modulated arc therapy in stereotactic body radiation therapy for non-small cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;87(1):188–94.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.04.048 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.04.048
Li X, Kabolizadeh P, Yan D, Qin A, Zhou J, Hong Y, et al. Improve dosimetric outcome in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer treatment using spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy. Radiat Oncol. 2018;13(1):35.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-018-0981-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-018-0981-6
Liu G, Zhao L, Qin A, Grills I, Deraniyagala R, Stevens C, et al. Lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy: a feasibility study. Front Oncol. 2021;11:664455.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.664455 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.664455
de Jong BA, Battinelli C, Free J, Wagenaar D, Engwall E, Janssens G, et al. Spot scanning proton arc therapy reduces toxicity in oropharyngeal cancer patients. Med Phys. 2022;50(3):1305–17.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.16098 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.16098
de Jong BA, Korevaar EW, Maring A, Werkman CI, Scandurra D, Janssens G, et al. Proton arc therapy increases the benefit of proton therapy for oropharyngeal cancer patients in the model based clinic. Radiother Oncol. 2023;184:109670.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109670 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109670
Johnson PB, Mamalui M, Brodin P, Janssens G. Secondary cancer risk in six anatomical sites when using PAT, IMPT, and VMAT/IMRT radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2024;199:110421.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110421 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110421
Lambrecht M, Eekers DBP, Alapetite C, Burnet NG, Calugaru V, Coremans IEM, et al. Radiation dose constraints for organs at risk in neuro-oncology; the European Particle Therapy Network consensus. Radiother Oncol. 2018;128(1):26–36.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2018.05.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2018.05.001
DNOG. Nationale retningslinjer for proton behandling [Internet]. 2018. [Cited date - 17.10.2024] Available from: https://www.dnog.dk/assets/files/Retningslinier%20PDF/DNOG%202018%20Proton%20retningslinjer.pdf
Grassberger C, Trofimov A, Lomax A, Paganetti H. Variations in linear energy transfer within clinical proton therapy fields and the potential for biological treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;80(5):1559–66.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.10.027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.10.027
Paulino AC, Lobo M, Teh BS, Okcu MF, South M, Butler EB, et al. Ototoxicity after intensity-modulated radiation therapy and cisplatin-based chemotherapy in children with medulloblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;78(5):1445–50.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.09.031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.09.031
Scoccianti S, Detti B, Gadda D, Greto D, Furfaro I, Meacci F, et al. Organs at risk in the brain and their dose-constraints in adults and in children: a radiation oncologist’s guide for delineation in everyday practice. Radiother Oncol. 2015;114(2):230–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.01.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.01.016
Bhide SA, Harrington KJ, Nutting CM. Otological toxicity after postoperative radiotherapy for parotid tumours. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2007;19(1):77–82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2006.11.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2006.11.007
Engwall E, Battinelli C, Wase V, Marthin O, Glimelius L, Bokrantz R, et al. Fast robust optimization of proton PBS arc therapy plans using early energy layer selection and spot assignment. Phys Med Biol. 2022;67(6):065010.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ac55a6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ac55a6
Zhang G, Long Y, Lin Y, Chen RC, Gao H. A treatment plan optimization method with direct minimization of number of energy jumps for proton arc therapy. Phys Med Biol. 2023;68(8):085001.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/acc4a7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/acc4a7
Zhao L, You J, Liu G, Wuyckens S, Lu X, Ding X. The first direct method of spot sparsity optimization for proton arc therapy. Acta Oncol. 2023;62(1):48–52.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2023.2172689 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2023.2172689
Mahajan A, Stavinoha PL, Rongthong W, Brodin NP, McGovern SL, El Naqa I, et al. Neurocognitive effects and necrosis in childhood cancer survivors treated with radiation therapy: a PENTEC comprehensive review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2024;119(2):401–16.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.11.073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.11.073
Toussaint L, Indelicato DJ, Holgersen KS, Petersen JBB, Stokkevag CH, Lassen-Ramshad Y, et al. Towards proton arc therapy: physical and biologically equivalent doses with increasing number of beams in pediatric brain irradiation. Acta Oncol. 2019;58(10):1451–6.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2019.1639823 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2019.1639823
Carabe-Fernandez A, Bertolet-Reina A, Karagounis I, Huynh K, Dale RG. Is there a role for arcing techniques in proton therapy? Br J Radiol. 2020;93(1107):20190469.
https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20190469 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20190469
Cao W, Li Y, Zhang X, Poenisch F, Yepes P, Sahoo N, et al. Intensity modulated proton arc therapy via geometry-based energy selection for ependymoma. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2023;24(7):e13954.
https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13954 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13954
Wagenaar D, Schuit E, van der Schaaf A, Langendijk JA, Both S. Can the mean linear energy transfer of organs be directly related to patient toxicities for current head and neck cancer intensity-modulated proton therapy practice? Radiother Oncol. 2021;165:159–65.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2021.09.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2021.09.003
Bertolet A, Abolfath R, Carlson DJ, Lustig RA, Hill-Kayser C, Alonso-Basanta M, et al. Correlation of LET with MRI changes in brain and potential implications for normal tissue complication probability for patients with meningioma treated with pencil beam scanning proton therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2022;112(1):237–46.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.08.027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.08.027
Engeseth GM, Hysing LB, Yepes P, Pettersen HES, Mohan R, Fuller CD, et al. Impact of RBE variations on risk estimates of temporal lobe necrosis in patients treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy for head and neck cancer. Acta Oncol. 2022;61(2):215–22.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2021.1979248 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2021.1979248
Fjaera LF, Indelicato DJ, Handeland AH, Ytre-Hauge KS, Lassen-Ramshad Y, Muren LP, et al. A case-control study of linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness related to symptomatic brainstem toxicity following pediatric proton therapy. Radiother Oncol. 2022;175:47–55.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2022.07.022 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2022.07.022
Liu W, Mohan R, Park P, Liu Z, Li H, Li X, et al. Dosimetric benefits of robust treatment planning for intensity modulated proton therapy for base-of-skull cancers. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2014;4(6):384–91.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2013.12.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2013.12.001
Ding X, Li X, Qin A, Zhou J, Yan D, Stevens C, et al. Have we reached proton beam therapy dosimetric limitations? – a novel robust, delivery-efficient and continuous spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy is to improve the dosimetric outcome in treating prostate cancer. Acta Oncol. 2018;57(3):435–7.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2017.1358463 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2017.1358463
Liu G, Li X, Qin A, Zheng W, Yan D, Zhang S, et al. Improve the dosimetric outcome in bilateral head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment using spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy: a feasibility study. Radiat Oncol. 2020;15(1):21.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-1476-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-1476-9
Tattenberg S, Liu P, Mulhem A, Cong X, Thome C, Ding X. Impact of and interplay between proton arc therapy and range uncertainties in proton therapy for head-and-neck cancer. Phys Med Biol. 2024;69:055015.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ad2718 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ad2718
Argota-Perez R, Elstrom UV, Jensen K, Korreman SS. Robustness of multifield pseudo-arc proton therapy for sinonasal cancer. Acta Oncol. 2023;62(5):508–12.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2023.2214320 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2023.2214320
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Helge Henjum, Karoline Mo Feten, Erlend Hartvigsen, Kristian S. Ytre-Hauge, Camilla G. Boer, Camilla H. Stokkevåg
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
