Plan robustness evaluation strategies in whole-pelvic proton therapy for high-risk prostate cancer patients within a randomised clinical trial

Abstract

Background

Inter-fractional anatomical changes challenge robust delivery of whole-pelvic proton therapy for high-risk prostate cancer. Pre-treatment robust evaluation (PRE) takes uncertainties in isocenter shifts and distal beam edge in treatment plans into account. Using weekly control computed tomography scans (cCTs), the aim of this study was to evaluate the PRE strategy by comparing to an off-line during-treatment robust evaluation (DRE) while also assessing plan robustness with respect to protocol planning constraints.

Material and methods

Treatment plans and cCTs from ten patients included in the pilot phase of the PROstate PROTON Trial 1 were analysed. Treatment planning followed protocol guidelines with 78 Gy to the primary clinical target volume (CTVp) and 56 Gy to the elective target (CTVe) in 39 fractions. Recalculations of the treatment plans were performed for a total of 64 cCTs and dose/volume measures corresponding to clinical constraints were evaluated for this DRE against the simulated scenario interval from the PRE.

Results

Of the 64 cCTs, 59 showed DRE CTVp measures within the robustness range from the PRE; this was also the case for 39 of the cCTs for the CTVe measures. However, DRE CTVe coverage was still within constraints for 57 of the 64 cCTs. DRE dose/volume measures for CTVp fulfilled target coverage constraints in 59 of 64 cCTs. All DRE measures for the rectum, bladder, and bowel were inside the PRE range in 63, 39, and 31 cCTs, respectively.

Conclusion

The PRE strategy predicted the DRE scenarios for CTVp and rectum. CTVe, bladder, and bowel showed more complex anatomical variations than simulated by the PRE isocenter shift. Both original and recalculated nominal treatment plans showed robust treatment delivery in terms of target coverage.

Keywords:

• Prostate cancer
• proton therapy
• clinical trial
• robust evaluation

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The participants of this study did not give written consent for their data to be shared publicly, so due to the sensitive nature of the research supporting data is not available.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Kræftens Bekæmpelse; Danish Comprehensive Cancer Center.