Comparison of MR‐guided radiotherapy accumulated doses for central lung tumors with non‐adaptive and online adaptive proton therapy

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundStereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of central lung tumors with photon or proton therapy has a risk of increased toxicity. Treatment planning studies comparing accumulated doses for state‐of‐the‐art treatment techniques, such as MR‐guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), are currently lacking.PurposeWe conducted a comparison of accumulated doses for MRgRT, robustly optimized non‐adaptive IMPT, and online adaptive IMPT for central lung tumors. A special focus was set on analyzing the accumulated doses to the bronchial tree, a parameter linked to high‐grade toxicities.MethodsData of 18 early‐stage central lung tumor patients, treated at a 0.35 T MR‐linac in eight or five fractions, were analyzed. Three gated treatment scenarios were compared: (S1) online adaptive MRgRT, (S2) non‐adaptive IMPT, and (S3) online adaptive IMPT. The treatment plans were recalculated or reoptimized on the daily imaging data acquired during MRgRT, and accumulated over all treatment fractions. Accumulated dose‐volume histogram (DVH) parameters of the gross tumor volume (GTV), lung, heart, and organs‐at‐risk (OARs) within 2 cm of the planning target volume (PTV) were extracted for each scenario and compared in Wilcoxon signed‐rank tests between S1 & S2, and S1 & S3.ResultsThe accumulated GTV D98% was above the prescribed dose for all patients and scenarios. Significant reductions (p < 0.05) of the mean ipsilateral lung dose (S2: –8%; S3: –23%) and mean heart dose (S2: –79%; S3: –83%) were observed for both proton scenarios compared to S1. The bronchial tree D0.1cc was significantly lower for S3 (S1: 48.1 Gy; S3: 39.2 Gy; p = 0.005), but not significantly different for S2 (S2: 45.0 Gy; p = 0.094), compared to S1. The D0.1cc for S2 and S3 compared to S1 was significantly (p < 0.05) smaller for OARs within 1–2 cm of the PTV (S1: 30.2 Gy; S2: 24.6 Gy; S3: 23.1 Gy), but not significantly different for OARs within 1 cm of the PTV.ConclusionsA significant dose sparing potential of non‐adaptive and online adaptive proton therapy compared to MRgRT for OARs in close, but not direct proximity of central lung tumors was identified. The near‐maximum dose to the bronchial tree was not significantly different for MRgRT and non‐adaptive IMPT. Online adaptive IMPT achieved significantly lower doses to the bronchial tree compared to MRgRT.