The impact of proton LET/RBE modeling and robustness analysis on base-of-skull and pediatric craniopharyngioma proton plans relative to VMAT
Creators: name: A. Gutierrez
name: V. Rompokos
name: K. Li
name: C. Gillies
name: D. D’Souza
name: F. Solda
name: N. Fersht
name: Y.-C. Chang
name: G. Royle
name: R. A. Amos
name: T. Underwood
Publisher: name: Taylor & Francis
Year: 2019
Subjects: subject: Space Science
subject: Medicine
subject: 59999 Environmental Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Earth and related environmental sciences
subject: FOS: Earth and related environmental sciences
subject: 39999 Chemical Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Chemical sciences
subject: FOS: Chemical sciences
subject: 69999 Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: 80699 Information Systems not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Computer and information sciences
subject: FOS: Computer and information sciences
subject: Cancer

description: <b>Purpose:</b> Pediatric craniopharyngioma, adult base-of-skull sarcoma and chordoma cases are all regarded as priority candidates for proton therapy. In this study, a dosimetric comparison between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) was first performed. We then investigated the impact of physical and biological uncertainties. We assessed whether IMPT plans remained dosimetrically superior when such uncertainty estimates were considered, especially with regards to sparing organs at risk (OARs). <b>Methodology:</b> We studied 10 cases: four chondrosarcoma, two chordoma and four pediatric craniopharyngioma. VMAT and IMPT plans were created according to modality-specific protocols. For IMPT, we considered (i) variable RBE modeling using the McNamara model for different values of (<i>α</i>/<i>β</i>)<i><sub>x</sub></i>, and (ii) robustness analysis with ±3 mm set-up and 3.5% range uncertainties. <b>Results:</b> When comparing the VMAT and IMPT plans, the dosimetric advantages of IMPT were clear: IMPT led to reduced integral dose and, typically, improved CTV coverage given our OAR constraints. When physical robustness analysis was performed for IMPT, some uncertainty scenarios worsened the CTV coverage but not usually beyond that achieved by VMAT. Certain scenarios caused OAR constraints to be exceeded, particularly for the brainstem and optical chiasm. However, variable RBE modeling predicted even more substantial hotspots, especially for low values of (<i>α</i>/<i>β</i>)<i><sub>x</sub></i>. Variable RBE modeling often prompted dose constraints to be exceeded for critical structures. <b>Conclusion:</b> For base-of-skull and pediatric craniopharyngioma cases, both physical and biological robustness analyses should be considered for IMPT: these analyses can substantially affect the sparing of OARs and comparisons against VMAT. All proton RBE modeling is subject to high levels of uncertainty, but the clinical community should remain cognizant possible RBE effects. Careful clinical and imaging follow-up, plus further research on end-of-range RBE mitigation strategies such as LET optimization, should be prioritized for these cohorts of proton patients.