title: A treatment planning inter-comparison of proton and intensity modulated photon radiotherapy.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  A comparative treatment planning study has been undertaken between standard photon delivery techniques,b intensity modulated photon methods and spot scanned protons in order to investigate the merits and limitations of each of these treatment approaches.
  
  
  METHODS
  Plans for each modality were performed using CT scans and planning information for nine patients with varying indications and lesion sites and the results have been analysed using a variety of dose and volume based parameters.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Over all cases, it is predicted that the use of protons could lead to a reduction of the total integral dose by a factor three compared to standard photon techniques and a factor two compared to IM photon plans. In addition, in all but one Organ at Risk (OAR) for one case, protons are predicted to reduce both mean OAR dose and the irradiated volume at the 50% mean target dose level compared to both photon methods. However, when considering the volume of an OAR irradiated to 70% or more of the target dose, little difference could be shown between proton and intensity modulated photon plans. On comparing the magnitude of dose hot spots in OARs resulting from the proton and IM photon plans, more variation was observed, and the ranking of the plans was then found to be case and OAR dependent.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The use of protons has been found to reduce the medium to low dose load (below about 70% of the target dose) to OARs and all non-target tissues compared to both standard and inversely planned photons, but that the use of intensity modulated photons can result in similar levels of high dose conformation to that afforded by protons. However, the introduction of inverse planning methods for protons is necessary before general conclusions on the relative efficacy of photons and protons can be drawn.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiation Medicine, The Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland.
authors.forename: A J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Lomax
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Bortfeld
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Goitein
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Debus
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Dykstra
authors.forename: P A
authors.initials: PA
authors.lastname: Tercier
authors.forename: P A
authors.initials: PA
authors.lastname: Coucke
authors.forename: R O
authors.initials: RO
authors.lastname: Mirimanoff
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D017785:Photons; D011522:Protons; D011832:Radiation Injuries / Q000517:prevention & control; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods; D020266:Radiotherapy, Conformal / Q000379:methods; D011882:Radiotherapy, High-Energy / Q000379:methods*; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed
chemical_list: D011522:Protons