Preliminary result of carbon-ion radiotherapy using the spot scanning method for prostate cancer

Takakusagi, Yosuke; Kato, Hiroyuki; Kano, Kio; Anno, Wataru; Tsuchida, Keisuke; Mizoguchi, Nobutaka; Serizawa, Itsuko; Yoshida, Daisaku; Kamada, Tadashi

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-25749/v1

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, at our institute in 2012, the beam delivery technique used for CIRT was switched from passive 18 to scanning, 19 therefore the patients in the above‐mentioned clinical trial 17 received passive irradiation, whereas those who underwent CIRT after 2013 received scanning irradiation. As of 2020, a CIRT regimen of 51.6 Gy (RBE) in 12 fractions is performed as the standard therapy for localized prostate cancer in Japan 20,21 . However, there are no reports of the clinical outcomes of this regimen based on long‐term follow‐up data, or of a comparison of the clinical outcomes between the passive and scanning irradiation techniques.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long‐term clinical outcomes after 12‐fractionated carbon‐ion radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are no clinical reports of long‐term follow‐up after carbon‐ion radiotherapy (CIRT) using a dose of 51.6 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) in 12 fractions for localized prostate cancer, or of a comparison of clinical outcomes between passive and scanning beam irradiation. A total of 256 patients with localized prostate cancer who received CIRT at a dose of 51.6 Gy (RBE) in 12 fractions using two different beam delivery techniques (passive [n = 45] and scanning [n = 211]), and who were followed for more than 1 year, were analyzed. The biochemical relapse‐free (bRF) rate was defined by the Phoenix definition, and the actuarial toxicity rates were evaluated using the Kaplan‐Meier method. Of the 256 patients, 41 (16.0%), 111 (43.4%), and 104 (40.6%) were classified as low, intermediate, and high risk, respectively, after a median follow‐up of 7.0 (range 1.1‐10.4) years. Androgen deprivation therapy was performed in 212 patients (82.8%). The 5‐year bRF rates of the low‐, intermediate‐, and high‐risk patients were 95.1%, 90.9%, and 91.1%, respectively. The 5‐year rates of grade 2 late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities in all patients were 0.4% and 6.3%, respectively. No grade ≥3 toxicities were observed. There were no significant differences in the rates of bRF or grade 2 toxicities in patients who received passive irradiation versus scanning irradiation. Our long‐term follow‐up results showed that a CIRT regimen of 51.6 Gy (RBE) in 12 fractions for localized prostate cancer yielded a good therapeutic outcome and low toxicity rates irrespective of the beam delivery technique.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long‐term clinical outcomes after 12‐fractionated carbon‐ion radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yosuke et al [9] published the preliminary results of CIRT using spot scanning for treating PCAs. They used a 12fraction protocol.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversion and Validation of Rectal Constraints for Prostate Carcinoma Receiving Hypofractionated Carbon-ion Radiotherapy With a Local Effect Model

Wang¹,

Li²,

Sheng³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The study objective was to convert the microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM) rectum constraints for 16-fraction carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) to local effect model (LEM) constraints for 12-fraction, 8-fraction, and 4-fraction CIRT for prostate carcinoma patients (PCAs).Methods: Two strategies were employed. To understand the fractionation effects, MKM linear-quadric (LQ) strategy first converted MKM rectum constraints for 16-fraction CIRT to 12-fraction, 8-fraction, and 4-fraction CIRT. To examine the differences in the biophysical models, MKM constraints were converted to LEM constraints using an RBE-conversion model. The LEM LQ strategy first converted MKM rectum constraints for 16-fraction CIRT to LEM constraints using the RBE-conversion model. Then, the LEM constraints converted the 16-fraction constraints to the rectum constraints for 12-fraction, 8-fraction, and 4-fraction CIRT using the LQ model. The LEM rectum constraints for 16 and 12-fraction CIRTs were compared to the rectum doses and the clinical follow-ups in 40 patients.Results: The 16-fraction NIRS rectum constraint Dmax < 60.8 Gy(RBE) and CNAO rectum constraint D1cc < 66.00 Gy(RBE) were converted by MKM LQ strategy to LEM constraints 58.01 and 55.97 Gy(RBE) (12fx), 45.47 and 43.97 Gy(RBE) (8fx), and 29.64 and 28.67 Gy(RBE) (4fx) and by LEM LQ strategy to 61.73 and 59.69 Gy(RBE) (12fx), 53.03 and 51.33 Gy(RBE) (8fx), and 40.10 and 38.88 Gy(RBE) (4fx). Differences of 36.13% were found. No late rectum complications were reported.Conclusions: The LEM rectum constraints from MKM LQ strategy were more conservative and can be used as the reference constraints for starting the hypofractionated CIRT.

show abstract

“…2 Among particle therapies, the effectiveness of both proton and carbon ion RT (CIRT) was demonstrated by previous studies. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] Cancer treatment using CIRT was introduced at the National Institute of Radiological Sciences in Chiba, Japan in 1994, following pioneering research for heavy-ion radiotherapy at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Already in 1995, the first clinical trial of CIRT was started for prostate cancer.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interfractional robustness of scanning carbon ion radiotherapy for prostate cancer: An analysis based on dose distribution from daily in‐room CT images

Tsuchida

Minohara

Kusano

et al. 2021

J Applied Clin Med Phys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: We analyzed interfractional robustness of scanning carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) for prostate cancer based on the dose distribution using daily in-room computed tomography (CT) images. Materials and Methods:We analyzed 11 consecutive patients treated with scanning CIRT for localized prostate cancer in our hospital between December 2015 and January 2016. In-room CT images were taken under treatment conditions in every treatment session. The dose distribution on each in-room CT image was recalculated, while retaining the pencil beam arrangement of the initial treatment plan.Then, the dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters including the percentage of the clinical target volume (CTV) with 95% and 90% of the prescribed dose area (V95% of CTV, V90% of CTV) and V80% of rectum were calculated. The acceptance criteria for the CTV and rectum were set at V95% of CTV ≥95%, V90% of CTV ≥98%, and V80% of rectum < 10 ml.Results: V95% of CTV, V90% of CTV, and V80% of rectum for the reproduced plans were 98.8 ± 3.49%, 99.5 ± 2.15%, and 4.39 ± 3.96 ml, respectively. Acceptance of V95% of CTV, V90% of CTV, and V80% of rectum was obtained in 123 (94%), 125 (95%) and 117 sessions (89%), respectively. Acceptance of the mean dose of V95% of CTV, V90% of CTV, and V80% of rectum for each patient was obtained in 10 (91%), 10 (91%), and 11 patients (100%), respectively. Conclusions:We demonstrated acceptable interfractional robustness based on the dose distribution in scanning CIRT for prostate cancer.

show abstract

Preliminary result of carbon-ion radiotherapy using the spot scanning method for prostate cancer

Cited by 4 publications

References 26 publications

Long‐term clinical outcomes after 12‐fractionated carbon‐ion radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer

Long‐term clinical outcomes after 12‐fractionated carbon‐ion radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer

Conversion and Validation of Rectal Constraints for Prostate Carcinoma Receiving Hypofractionated Carbon-ion Radiotherapy With a Local Effect Model

Interfractional robustness of scanning carbon ion radiotherapy for prostate cancer: An analysis based on dose distribution from daily in‐room CT images

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About