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.
OBJECTIVE
To describe, in a setting of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the theoretical dosimetric advantages of proton arc stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in which the beam penumbra of a rotating beam is used to reduce the impact of range uncertainties.


METHODS
Thirteen patients with early-stage NSCLC treated with proton SBRT underwent repeat planning with photon volumetric modulated arc therapy (Photon-VMAT) and an in-house-developed arc planning approach for both proton passive scattering (Passive-Arc) and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT-Arc). An arc was mimicked with a series of beams placed at 10° increments. Tumor and organ at risk doses were compared in the context of high- and low-dose regions, represented by volumes receiving >50% and <50% of the prescription dose, respectively.


RESULTS
In the high-dose region, conformality index values are 2.56, 1.91, 1.31, and 1.74, and homogeneity index values are 1.29, 1.22, 1.52, and 1.18, respectively, for 3 proton passive scattered beams, Passive-Arc, IMPT-Arc, and Photon-VMAT. Therefore, proton arc leads to a 30% reduction in the 95% isodose line volume to 3-beam proton plan, sparing surrounding organs, such as lung and chest wall. For chest wall, V30 is reduced from 21 cm(3) (3 proton beams) to 11.5 cm(3), 12.9 cm(3), and 8.63 cm(3) (P=.005) for Passive-Arc, IMPT-Arc, and Photon-VMAT, respectively. In the low-dose region, the mean lung dose and V20 of the ipsilateral lung are 5.01 Gy(relative biological effectiveness [RBE]), 4.38 Gy(RBE), 4.91 Gy(RBE), and 5.99 Gy(RBE) and 9.5%, 7.5%, 9.0%, and 10.0%, respectively, for 3-beam, Passive-Arc, IMPT-Arc, and Photon-VMAT, respectively.


CONCLUSIONS
Stereotactic body radiation therapy with proton arc and Photon-VMAT generate significantly more conformal high-dose volumes than standard proton SBRT, without loss of coverage of the tumor and with significant sparing of nearby organs, such as chest wall. In addition, both proton arc approaches spare the healthy lung from low-dose radiation relative to photon VMAT. Our data suggest that IMPT-Arc should be developed for clinical use.
Francis H. Burr Proton Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. jseco@partners.org
Joao
J
Seco
Guan
G
Gu
Tiago
T
Marcelos
Hanne
H
Kooy
Henning
H
Willers
D002289:Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008168:Lung / Q000528:radiation effects; D008175:Lung Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D008297:Male; D059351:Organ Sparing Treatments / Q000379:methods; D058958:Organs at Risk / Q000528:radiation effects; D017785:Photons / Q000627:therapeutic use; D061766:Proton Therapy / Q000379:methods*; D011832:Radiation Injuries / Q000517:prevention & control; D016634:Radiosurgery / Q000379:methods*; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D050397:Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated / Q000379:methods*; D012062:Relative Biological Effectiveness; D035441:Thoracic Wall / Q000528:radiation effects; D035501:Uncertainty