Fixed- versus Variable-RBE Computations for Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy

Simple item page
dc.citation.firstpage156en_US
dc.citation.issueNumber1en_US
dc.citation.journalTitleAdvances in Radiation Oncologyen_US
dc.citation.lastpage167en_US
dc.citation.volumeNumber4en_US
dc.contributor.authorYepes, Pabloen_US
dc.contributor.authorAdair, Antonyen_US
dc.contributor.authorFrank, Steven J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorGrosshans, David R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorLiao, Zhongxingen_US
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Amyen_US
dc.contributor.authorMirkovic, Draganen_US
dc.contributor.authorPoenisch, Falken_US
dc.contributor.authorTitt, Uween_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, Qianxiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorMohan, Radheen_US
dc.date.accessioned2021-12-17T20:09:11Zen_US
dc.date.available2021-12-17T20:09:11Zen_US
dc.date.issued2019en_US
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To evaluate how using models of proton therapy that incorporate variable relative biological effectiveness (RBE) versus the current practice of using a fixed RBE of 1.1 affects dosimetric indices on treatment plans for large cohorts of patients treated with intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Methods and Materials: Treatment plans for 4 groups of patients who received IMPT for brain, head-and-neck, thoracic, or prostate cancer were selected. Dose distributions were recalculated in 4 ways: 1 with a fast-dose Monte Carlo calculator with fixed RBE and 3 with RBE calculated to 3 different models—McNamara, Wedenberg, and repair-misrepair-fixation. Differences among dosimetric indices (D02, D50, D98, and mean dose) for target volumes and organs at risk (OARs) on each plan were compared between the fixed-RBE and variable-RBE calculations. Results: In analyses of all target volumes, for which the main concern is underprediction or RBE less than 1.1, none of the models predicted an RBE less than 1.05 for any of the cohorts. For OARs, the 2 models based on linear energy transfer, McNamara and Wedenberg, systematically predicted RBE >1.1 for most structures. For the mean dose of 25% of the plans for 2 OARs, they predict RBE equal to or larger than 1.4, 1.3, 1.3, and 1.2 for brain, head-and-neck, thorax, and prostate, respectively. Systematically lower increases in RBE are predicted by repair-misrepair-fixation, with a few cases (eg, femur) in which the RBE is less than 1.1 for all plans. Conclusions: The variable-RBE models predict increased doses to various OARs, suggesting that strategies to reduce high-dose linear energy transfer in critical structures should be developed to minimize possible toxicity associated with IMPT.en_US
dc.identifier.citationYepes, Pablo, Adair, Antony, Frank, Steven J., et al.. "Fixed- versus Variable-RBE Computations for Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy." <i>Advances in Radiation Oncology,</i> 4, no. 1 (2019) Elsevier: 156-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2018.08.020.en_US
dc.identifier.digital1-s2-0-S2452109418301647-mainen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2018.08.020en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1911/111885en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.rightsThis is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND licenseen_US
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_US
dc.titleFixed- versus Variable-RBE Computations for Intensity Modulated Proton Therapyen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.dcmiTexten_US
dc.type.publicationpublisher versionen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
1-s2-0-S2452109418301647-main.pdf
Size:
3.61 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Collections
Faculty Publications