TL;DR: In the diseases studied, using various techniques of 3D-CRT, electrons, IMRT, and protons, protons are most optimal in treating retinoblastoma, medulloblastomas (posterior fossa and craniospinal), and pelvic sarcomas.
Abstract: Purpose: To calculate treatment plans and compare the dose distributions and dose–volume histograms (DVHs) for photon three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), electron therapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and standard (nonintensity modulated) proton therapy in three pediatric disease sites. Methods and Materials: The tumor volumes from 8 patients (3 retinoblastomas, 2 medulloblastomas, and 3 pelvic sarcomas) were studied retrospectively to compare DVHs from proton therapy with 3D-CRT, electron therapy, and IMRT. In retinoblastoma, several planning techniques were analyzed: A single electron appositional beam was compared with a single 3D-CRT lateral beam, a 3D-CRT anterior beam paired with a lateral beam, IMRT, and protons. In medulloblastoma, three posterior fossa irradiation techniques were analyzed: 3D-CRT, IMRT, and protons. Craniospinal irradiation (which consisted of composite plans of both the posterior fossa and craniospinal components) was also evaluated, primarily comparing spinal irradiation using 3D-CRT electrons, 3D-CRT photons, and protons. Lastly, in pelvic sarcoma, 3D-CRT, IMRT, and proton plans were assessed. Results: In retinoblastoma, protons resulted in the best target coverage combined with the most orbital bone sparing (10% was the mean orbital bone volume irradiated at ≥5 Gy for protons vs. 25% for 3D-CRT electrons, 69% for IMRT, 41% for a single 3D lateral beam, 51% for a 3D anterolateral beam with a lens block, and 65% for a 3D anterolateral beam without a lens block). A single appositional electron field was the next best technique followed by other planning approaches. In medulloblastoma, for posterior fossa and craniospinal irradiation, protons resulted in the least dose to the cochlea (for only posterior fossa irradiation at ≥20 Gy, 34% was the mean cochlear volume irradiated for protons, 87% for IMRT, 89% for 3D-CRT) and hypothalamus-pituitary axis (for only posterior fossa irradiation at ≥10 Gy, 21% was the mean hypothalamus-pituitary volume irradiated for protons, 81% for IMRT, 91% for 3D-CRT); additional dose reductions to the optic chiasm, eyes, vertebrae, mandible, thyroid, lung, kidneys, heart, and liver were seen. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy appeared to be the second best technique for posterior fossa irradiation. For spinal irradiation 3D-CRT electrons were better than 3D-CRT photons in sparing dose to the thyroid, heart, lung, kidney, and liver. With pelvic sarcoma, protons were superior in eliminating any dose to the ovaries (0% of mean ovarian volume was irradiated at ≥2 Gy with protons) and to some extent, the pelvic bones and vertebrae. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy did show more bladder dose reduction than the other techniques in pelvic sarcoma irradiation. Conclusions: In the diseases studied, using various techniques of 3D-CRT, electrons, IMRT, and protons, protons are most optimal in treating retinoblastomas, medulloblastomas (posterior fossa and craniospinal), and pelvic sarcomas. Protons delivered superior target dose coverage and sparing of normal structures. As dose–volume parameters are expected to correlate with acute and late toxicity, proton therapy should receive serious consideration as the preferred technique for the treatment of pediatric tumors.
TL;DR: Electrons of about the energy suitable for superficial therapy may be used to produce an x-ray beam which is sufficiently penetrating for the treatment of even the deepest lesions, and the Stanford medical linear accelerator was designed to provide both x-rays and electron beams.
Abstract: The application of electron beams to radiation therapy has received increased attention in recent years. This interest stems largely from the special characteristics of the electron depth-dose distribution; the fall-off in depth dose near the end of the range of the electrons is particularly rapid for electron beams having energies less than about 10 Mev. Such an electron beam is suitable for the treatment of widespread, superficial lesions, where it is desirable to minimize the dose to deep tissues. All the common sources of super-voltage x-rays, apart from radioactive substances, are inherently capable of producing an external beam of electrons, though with varying degrees of complexity. Electrons of about the energy suitable for superficial therapy (several Mev) may be used to produce an x-ray beam which is sufficiently penetrating for the treatment of even the deepest lesions. The Stanford medical linear accelerator was designed to provide both x-rays and electron beams. The accelerator and its applic...
TL;DR: This model study shows that spinal irradiation of young children with photon and electron techniques results in a substantial risk of radiation-induced secondary cancers, and multiple beam IMXT seems to be associated with a particularly high risk of secondary cancer induction.
Abstract: The aim of this treatment planning comparison study was to explore different spinal irradiation techniques with respect to the risk of late side-effects, particularly radiation-induced cancer. The radiotherapy techniques compared were conventional photon therapy, intensity modulated x-ray therapy (IMXT), conventional electron therapy, intensity/energy modulated electron therapy (IMET) and proton therapy (IMPT).CT images for radiotherapy use from five children, median age 8 and diagnosed with medulloblastoma, were selected for this study. Target volumes and organs at risk were defined in 3-D. Treatment plans using conventional photon therapy, IMXT, conventional electron therapy, IMET and IMPT were set up. The probability of normal tissue complication (NTCP) and the risk of cancer induction were calculated using models with parameters-sets taken from published data for the general population; dose data were taken from dose volume histograms (DVH). Similar dose distributions in the targets were achieved with all techniques but the absorbed doses in the organs-at-risk varied significantly between the different techniques. The NTCP models based on available data predicted very low probabilities for side-effects in all cases. However, the effective mean doses outside the target volumes, and thus the predicted risk of cancer induction, varied significantly between the techniques. The highest lifetime risk of secondary cancers was estimated for IMXT (30%). The lowest risk was found with IMPT (4%). The risks associated with conventional photon therapy, electron therapy and IMET were 20%, 21% and 15%, respectively. This model study shows that spinal irradiation of young children with photon and electron techniques results in a substantial risk of radiation-induced secondary cancers. Multiple beam IMXT seems to be associated with a particularly high risk of secondary cancer induction. To minimise this risk, IMPT should be the treatment of choice. If proton therapy is not available, advanced electron therapy may provide a better alternative.
TL;DR: The pencil-beam algorithm (PBA) fit measured data from the eMLC and applicator-cutout systems equally well, and the resulting two-dimensional dose distributions, as predicted by the PBA, agreed well at common airgap distance.
Abstract: An electron multileaf collimator (eMLC) has been designed that is unique in that it retracts to 37 cm from the isocenter [63-cm source-to-collimator distance (SCD)] and can be deployed to distances of 20 and 10 cm from the isocenter (80 and 90 cm SCD, respectively). It is expected to be capable of arc therapy at 63 cm SCD; isocentric, fixed-beam therapy at 80 cm SCD; and source-to-surface distance (SSD), fixed-beam therapy at 90 cm SCD. In all positions, its leaves could be used for unmodulated or intensity-modulated therapy. Our goal in the present work is to describe the general characteristics of the eMLC and to demonstrate that its leakage characteristics and dosimetry are adequate for SSD, fixed-beam therapy as an alternative to Cerrobend cutouts with applicators once the prototype’s leaves are motorized. Our eMLC data showed interleaf electron leakage at 15 MeV to be less than 0.1% based on a 0.0025 cm manufacturing tolerance, and lateral electron leakage at 5 and 15 MeV to be less than 2%. X-ray leakage through the leaves was 1.6% at 15 MeV. Our data showed that beam penumbra was independent of direction and leaf position. The dosimetric properties of square fields formed by the eMLC were very consistent with those formed by Cerrobend inserts in the 20×20 cm 2 applicator. Output factors exhibited similar field-size dependence. Airgap factors exhibited almost identical field-size dependence at two SSDs (105 and 110 cm), consistent with the common assumption that airgap factors are applicator independent. Percent depth-dose curves were similar, but showed variations up to 3% in the buildup region. The pencil-beam algorithm (PBA) fit measured data from the eMLC and applicator-cutout systems equally well, and the resulting two-dimensional (2-D) dose distributions, as predicted by the PBA, agreed well at common airgap distance. Simulating patient setups for breast and head and neck treatments showed that almost all fields could be treated using similar SSDs as when using applicators, although head and neck treatments require placing the patient’s head on a head-holder treatment table extension. The results of this work confirmed our design goals and support the potential use of the eMLC design in the clinical setting. The eMLC should allow the same treatments as are typically delivered with the electron applicator-cutout system currently used for fixed-beam therapy.