International journal of particle therapy · 2026
Robust Four-Field and Arc LET-Optimized Proton Prostate Cancer Treatment Plans With Urethral Sparing.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vieceli Michael, Park Jiyeon, Saki Mo, Grewal Hardev, Mendenhall Nancy P, Johnson Perry, Artz Mark
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To create LET-optimized pencil beam scanning proton prostate cancer treatment plans with clinically acceptable range robustness and urethral sparing.
METHODS: Two-beam, four-beam, and arc LET-optimized treatment plans were created for a prostate cancer patient with varying levels of robustness to evaluate LETd and several performance metrics. Urethral sparing was incorporated by de-escalating the physical dose to the urethra while maintaining high LETd to prevent underdosing the periurethral prostate by merit of its lower α / β . Four-beam and arc plans were created with a targeted robustness level for 12 patients along with reference SFO plans, and statistical comparisons were performed on clinical target volume prostate and seminal vesicles minus urethra (CTV PSV-U) mean LETd, target volume and organs at risk (OAR) relative biological effectiveness (RBE)-doses, minimum average RBE-doses, target-to-OAR dose ratios (TODRs), and OAR volumes receiving at least 80% of the CTV PSV D95 dose (V80%).
RESULTS: A tradeoff between robustness and high LETd was demonstrated. Statistically significant differences in LETd were found, with 2.5 keV/µm in SFO plans, 3.3 keV/µm in arc plans, and 3.5 keV/µm in four-beam plans. Statistically significant increases in CTV PSV-U D95 RBE-dose resulted in 6.3%-8.1% increases in four-beam plans over SFO. High LETd in the periurethral prostate prevented underdosage with urethral sparing. V80%s were statistically decreased in four-beam and most arc comparisons relative to SFO. While increased TODRs were demonstrated in a test patient, lack of statistical significance (or superiority in SFO over arc in the case of the rectum) in the 12 patient cohort occurred due to some patients already having low OAR RBE-doses in SFO plans, which could be addressed with additional optimization objectives at lower doses.
CONCLUSION: LET-optimized treatment plans were created with high LETd and clinically acceptable robustness with the potential to increase the therapeutic ratio and implemented urethral sparing without underdosing the periurethral prostate.
METHODS: Two-beam, four-beam, and arc LET-optimized treatment plans were created for a prostate cancer patient with varying levels of robustness to evaluate LETd and several performance metrics. Urethral sparing was incorporated by de-escalating the physical dose to the urethra while maintaining high LETd to prevent underdosing the periurethral prostate by merit of its lower α / β . Four-beam and arc plans were created with a targeted robustness level for 12 patients along with reference SFO plans, and statistical comparisons were performed on clinical target volume prostate and seminal vesicles minus urethra (CTV PSV-U) mean LETd, target volume and organs at risk (OAR) relative biological effectiveness (RBE)-doses, minimum average RBE-doses, target-to-OAR dose ratios (TODRs), and OAR volumes receiving at least 80% of the CTV PSV D95 dose (V80%).
RESULTS: A tradeoff between robustness and high LETd was demonstrated. Statistically significant differences in LETd were found, with 2.5 keV/µm in SFO plans, 3.3 keV/µm in arc plans, and 3.5 keV/µm in four-beam plans. Statistically significant increases in CTV PSV-U D95 RBE-dose resulted in 6.3%-8.1% increases in four-beam plans over SFO. High LETd in the periurethral prostate prevented underdosage with urethral sparing. V80%s were statistically decreased in four-beam and most arc comparisons relative to SFO. While increased TODRs were demonstrated in a test patient, lack of statistical significance (or superiority in SFO over arc in the case of the rectum) in the 12 patient cohort occurred due to some patients already having low OAR RBE-doses in SFO plans, which could be addressed with additional optimization objectives at lower doses.
CONCLUSION: LET-optimized treatment plans were created with high LETd and clinically acceptable robustness with the potential to increase the therapeutic ratio and implemented urethral sparing without underdosing the periurethral prostate.