Loading…

Robust mixed electron‐photon radiation therapy planning for soft tissue sarcoma

BACKGROUNDMixed electron-photon beam radiation therapy (MBRT) is an emerging technique in which external electron and photon beams are simultaneously optimized into a single treatment plan. MBRT exploits the steep dose falloff and high surface dose of electrons while maintaining target conformity by...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Medical physics (Lancaster) 2023-10, Vol.50 (10), p.6502-6513
Main Authors: Heng, Veng Jean, Serban, Monica, Renaud, Marc‐André, Freeman, Carolyn, Seuntjens, Jan
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c255t-a5d3d3c21fc9f3b38808908cc65fd4f6170d8cff416b110a9d207334b8dc8a933
container_end_page 6513
container_issue 10
container_start_page 6502
container_title Medical physics (Lancaster)
container_volume 50
creator Heng, Veng Jean
Serban, Monica
Renaud, Marc‐André
Freeman, Carolyn
Seuntjens, Jan
description BACKGROUNDMixed electron-photon beam radiation therapy (MBRT) is an emerging technique in which external electron and photon beams are simultaneously optimized into a single treatment plan. MBRT exploits the steep dose falloff and high surface dose of electrons while maintaining target conformity by leveraging the sharp penumbra of photons. PURPOSEThis study investigates the dosimetric benefits of MBRT for soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients. MATERIAL AND METHODSA retrospective cohort of 22 STS of the lower extremity treated with conventional photon-based Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) were replanned with MBRT. Both VMAT and MBRT treatments were planned on the Varian TrueBeam linac using the Millenium multi-leaf collimator. No electron applicator, cutout or additional collimating devices were used for electron beams of MBRT plans. MBRT plans were optimized to use a combination of 6 MV photons and five electron energies (6, 9, 12, 16, 20 MeV) by a robust column generation algorithm. Electron beams in this study were planned at standard 100 cm source-axis distance (SAD). The dose to the clinical target volume (CTV), bone, normal tissue strip and other organs-at-risk (OARs) were compared using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTSAs part of the original VMAT treatment, tissue-equivalent bolus was required in 10 of the 22 patients. MBRT plans did not require bolus by virtue of the higher electron entrance dose. CTV coverage by the prescription dose was found to be clinically equivalent between plans of either modality: V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ (MBRT) = 97.9 ± 0.2% versus V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ (VMAT) = 98.1 ± 0.6% (p=0.34). Evaluating the absolute paired difference between doses to OARs in MBRT and VMAT plans, we observed lower V 20Gy $V_{\text{20Gy}}$ to normal tissue in MBRT plans by 14.9 ± 3.2% ( p < 10 - 6 $p
doi_str_mv 10.1002/mp.16709
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2863303703</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2863303703</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c255t-a5d3d3c21fc9f3b38808908cc65fd4f6170d8cff416b110a9d207334b8dc8a933</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkMtKxDAYhYMoWEfBR8jSTcc_l7bpUgZvMCCKrkOaixNpm5qk4Ox8BJ_RJ3G8LFydszh8HD6ETgksCQA9H6YlqRto91BBecNKTqHdRwVAy0vKoTpERym9AEDNKijQ_UPo5pTx4N-swba3Oscwfr5_TJuQw4ijMl5lv2t5Y6Oatnjq1Tj68Rm7EHEKLuPsU5otTirqMKhjdOBUn-zJXy7Q09Xl4-qmXN9d364u1qWmVZVLVRlmmKbE6daxjgkBogWhdV05w11NGjBCO8dJ3RECqjUUGsZ4J4wWqmVsgc5-uVMMr7NNWQ4-advv7tkwJ0lFzRiwBv5NdQwpRevkFP2g4lYSkN_W5DDJH2vsC-KbYUo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2863303703</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Robust mixed electron‐photon radiation therapy planning for soft tissue sarcoma</title><source>Wiley</source><creator>Heng, Veng Jean ; Serban, Monica ; Renaud, Marc‐André ; Freeman, Carolyn ; Seuntjens, Jan</creator><creatorcontrib>Heng, Veng Jean ; Serban, Monica ; Renaud, Marc‐André ; Freeman, Carolyn ; Seuntjens, Jan</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUNDMixed electron-photon beam radiation therapy (MBRT) is an emerging technique in which external electron and photon beams are simultaneously optimized into a single treatment plan. MBRT exploits the steep dose falloff and high surface dose of electrons while maintaining target conformity by leveraging the sharp penumbra of photons. PURPOSEThis study investigates the dosimetric benefits of MBRT for soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients. MATERIAL AND METHODSA retrospective cohort of 22 STS of the lower extremity treated with conventional photon-based Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) were replanned with MBRT. Both VMAT and MBRT treatments were planned on the Varian TrueBeam linac using the Millenium multi-leaf collimator. No electron applicator, cutout or additional collimating devices were used for electron beams of MBRT plans. MBRT plans were optimized to use a combination of 6 MV photons and five electron energies (6, 9, 12, 16, 20 MeV) by a robust column generation algorithm. Electron beams in this study were planned at standard 100 cm source-axis distance (SAD). The dose to the clinical target volume (CTV), bone, normal tissue strip and other organs-at-risk (OARs) were compared using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTSAs part of the original VMAT treatment, tissue-equivalent bolus was required in 10 of the 22 patients. MBRT plans did not require bolus by virtue of the higher electron entrance dose. CTV coverage by the prescription dose was found to be clinically equivalent between plans of either modality: V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ (MBRT) = 97.9 ± 0.2% versus V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ (VMAT) = 98.1 ± 0.6% (p=0.34). Evaluating the absolute paired difference between doses to OARs in MBRT and VMAT plans, we observed lower V 20Gy $V_{\text{20Gy}}$ to normal tissue in MBRT plans by 14.9 ± 3.2% ( p &lt; 10 - 6 $p&lt;10^{-6}$ ). Similarly, V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ to bone was found to be decreased by 8.2 ± 4.0% ( p &lt; 10 - 3 $p&lt;10^{-3}$ ) of the bone volume. CONCLUSIONFor STS with subcutaneous involvement, MBRT offers statistically significant sparing of OARs without sacrificing target coverage when compared to VMAT. MBRT plans are deliverable on conventional linacs without the use of electron applicators, shortened source-to-surface distance (SSD) or bolus. This study shows that MBRT is a logistically feasible technique with clear dosimetric benefits.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0094-2405</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2473-4209</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/mp.16709</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Medical physics (Lancaster), 2023-10, Vol.50 (10), p.6502-6513</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c255t-a5d3d3c21fc9f3b38808908cc65fd4f6170d8cff416b110a9d207334b8dc8a933</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Heng, Veng Jean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Serban, Monica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Renaud, Marc‐André</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freeman, Carolyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seuntjens, Jan</creatorcontrib><title>Robust mixed electron‐photon radiation therapy planning for soft tissue sarcoma</title><title>Medical physics (Lancaster)</title><description>BACKGROUNDMixed electron-photon beam radiation therapy (MBRT) is an emerging technique in which external electron and photon beams are simultaneously optimized into a single treatment plan. MBRT exploits the steep dose falloff and high surface dose of electrons while maintaining target conformity by leveraging the sharp penumbra of photons. PURPOSEThis study investigates the dosimetric benefits of MBRT for soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients. MATERIAL AND METHODSA retrospective cohort of 22 STS of the lower extremity treated with conventional photon-based Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) were replanned with MBRT. Both VMAT and MBRT treatments were planned on the Varian TrueBeam linac using the Millenium multi-leaf collimator. No electron applicator, cutout or additional collimating devices were used for electron beams of MBRT plans. MBRT plans were optimized to use a combination of 6 MV photons and five electron energies (6, 9, 12, 16, 20 MeV) by a robust column generation algorithm. Electron beams in this study were planned at standard 100 cm source-axis distance (SAD). The dose to the clinical target volume (CTV), bone, normal tissue strip and other organs-at-risk (OARs) were compared using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTSAs part of the original VMAT treatment, tissue-equivalent bolus was required in 10 of the 22 patients. MBRT plans did not require bolus by virtue of the higher electron entrance dose. CTV coverage by the prescription dose was found to be clinically equivalent between plans of either modality: V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ (MBRT) = 97.9 ± 0.2% versus V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ (VMAT) = 98.1 ± 0.6% (p=0.34). Evaluating the absolute paired difference between doses to OARs in MBRT and VMAT plans, we observed lower V 20Gy $V_{\text{20Gy}}$ to normal tissue in MBRT plans by 14.9 ± 3.2% ( p &lt; 10 - 6 $p&lt;10^{-6}$ ). Similarly, V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ to bone was found to be decreased by 8.2 ± 4.0% ( p &lt; 10 - 3 $p&lt;10^{-3}$ ) of the bone volume. CONCLUSIONFor STS with subcutaneous involvement, MBRT offers statistically significant sparing of OARs without sacrificing target coverage when compared to VMAT. MBRT plans are deliverable on conventional linacs without the use of electron applicators, shortened source-to-surface distance (SSD) or bolus. This study shows that MBRT is a logistically feasible technique with clear dosimetric benefits.</description><issn>0094-2405</issn><issn>2473-4209</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpNkMtKxDAYhYMoWEfBR8jSTcc_l7bpUgZvMCCKrkOaixNpm5qk4Ox8BJ_RJ3G8LFydszh8HD6ETgksCQA9H6YlqRto91BBecNKTqHdRwVAy0vKoTpERym9AEDNKijQ_UPo5pTx4N-swba3Oscwfr5_TJuQw4ijMl5lv2t5Y6Oatnjq1Tj68Rm7EHEKLuPsU5otTirqMKhjdOBUn-zJXy7Q09Xl4-qmXN9d364u1qWmVZVLVRlmmKbE6daxjgkBogWhdV05w11NGjBCO8dJ3RECqjUUGsZ4J4wWqmVsgc5-uVMMr7NNWQ4-advv7tkwJ0lFzRiwBv5NdQwpRevkFP2g4lYSkN_W5DDJH2vsC-KbYUo</recordid><startdate>202310</startdate><enddate>202310</enddate><creator>Heng, Veng Jean</creator><creator>Serban, Monica</creator><creator>Renaud, Marc‐André</creator><creator>Freeman, Carolyn</creator><creator>Seuntjens, Jan</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202310</creationdate><title>Robust mixed electron‐photon radiation therapy planning for soft tissue sarcoma</title><author>Heng, Veng Jean ; Serban, Monica ; Renaud, Marc‐André ; Freeman, Carolyn ; Seuntjens, Jan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c255t-a5d3d3c21fc9f3b38808908cc65fd4f6170d8cff416b110a9d207334b8dc8a933</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Heng, Veng Jean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Serban, Monica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Renaud, Marc‐André</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freeman, Carolyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seuntjens, Jan</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medical physics (Lancaster)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Heng, Veng Jean</au><au>Serban, Monica</au><au>Renaud, Marc‐André</au><au>Freeman, Carolyn</au><au>Seuntjens, Jan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Robust mixed electron‐photon radiation therapy planning for soft tissue sarcoma</atitle><jtitle>Medical physics (Lancaster)</jtitle><date>2023-10</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>6502</spage><epage>6513</epage><pages>6502-6513</pages><issn>0094-2405</issn><eissn>2473-4209</eissn><abstract>BACKGROUNDMixed electron-photon beam radiation therapy (MBRT) is an emerging technique in which external electron and photon beams are simultaneously optimized into a single treatment plan. MBRT exploits the steep dose falloff and high surface dose of electrons while maintaining target conformity by leveraging the sharp penumbra of photons. PURPOSEThis study investigates the dosimetric benefits of MBRT for soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients. MATERIAL AND METHODSA retrospective cohort of 22 STS of the lower extremity treated with conventional photon-based Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) were replanned with MBRT. Both VMAT and MBRT treatments were planned on the Varian TrueBeam linac using the Millenium multi-leaf collimator. No electron applicator, cutout or additional collimating devices were used for electron beams of MBRT plans. MBRT plans were optimized to use a combination of 6 MV photons and five electron energies (6, 9, 12, 16, 20 MeV) by a robust column generation algorithm. Electron beams in this study were planned at standard 100 cm source-axis distance (SAD). The dose to the clinical target volume (CTV), bone, normal tissue strip and other organs-at-risk (OARs) were compared using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTSAs part of the original VMAT treatment, tissue-equivalent bolus was required in 10 of the 22 patients. MBRT plans did not require bolus by virtue of the higher electron entrance dose. CTV coverage by the prescription dose was found to be clinically equivalent between plans of either modality: V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ (MBRT) = 97.9 ± 0.2% versus V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ (VMAT) = 98.1 ± 0.6% (p=0.34). Evaluating the absolute paired difference between doses to OARs in MBRT and VMAT plans, we observed lower V 20Gy $V_{\text{20Gy}}$ to normal tissue in MBRT plans by 14.9 ± 3.2% ( p &lt; 10 - 6 $p&lt;10^{-6}$ ). Similarly, V 50Gy $V_{\text{50Gy}}$ to bone was found to be decreased by 8.2 ± 4.0% ( p &lt; 10 - 3 $p&lt;10^{-3}$ ) of the bone volume. CONCLUSIONFor STS with subcutaneous involvement, MBRT offers statistically significant sparing of OARs without sacrificing target coverage when compared to VMAT. MBRT plans are deliverable on conventional linacs without the use of electron applicators, shortened source-to-surface distance (SSD) or bolus. This study shows that MBRT is a logistically feasible technique with clear dosimetric benefits.</abstract><doi>10.1002/mp.16709</doi><tpages>12</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0094-2405
ispartof Medical physics (Lancaster), 2023-10, Vol.50 (10), p.6502-6513
issn 0094-2405
2473-4209
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2863303703
source Wiley
title Robust mixed electron‐photon radiation therapy planning for soft tissue sarcoma
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T14%3A29%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Robust%20mixed%20electron%E2%80%90photon%20radiation%20therapy%20planning%20for%20soft%20tissue%20sarcoma&rft.jtitle=Medical%20physics%20(Lancaster)&rft.au=Heng,%20Veng%20Jean&rft.date=2023-10&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=6502&rft.epage=6513&rft.pages=6502-6513&rft.issn=0094-2405&rft.eissn=2473-4209&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/mp.16709&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2863303703%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c255t-a5d3d3c21fc9f3b38808908cc65fd4f6170d8cff416b110a9d207334b8dc8a933%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2863303703&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true