Dosimetric advantages of proton therapy over conventional radiotherapy with photons in young patients and adults with low-grade glioma.

Background and purpose: Low-grade glioma (LGG) is a very common brain tumor in pediatric patients typically associated with a very good prognosis. This prognosis makes it imperative that the risk of long-term treatment-related side effects be kept at an absolute minimum. Proton therapy (PRT) provides a radiation technique that has the potential to further reduce the genesis of radiogenic impairment. Materials and methods: We retrospectively assessed 74 patients with LGG who underwent PRT. Conventional three-dimensional photon and PRT plans were generated after contouring structures of neurogenesis, crucial neuronal structures, and areas susceptible to secondary malignancies. Target volume coverage was evaluated using the homogeneity index (HI) and inhomogeneity coefficient (IC). Results were compared using the Wilcoxon-signed rank test, with p < 0.05 being statistically significant. Results: Target volume coverage was comparable for the photon and proton plans. Overall, we could show an essential reduction in maximal, mean, and integral doses in critical neurologic structures, areas of neurogenesis, and structures of neurocognitive function. The study indicated specifically how contralaterally located structures could be spared with PRT. Conclusion: PRT is a highly conformal radiation technique offering superior dosimetric advantages over conventional radiotherapy by allowing significant dose reduction for organs at risk (OAR) that are essential for neurologic function, neurocognition, and quality of life, thus demonstrating the potential of this technique for minimizing long-term sequelae

Radiotherapy plus concomitant temozolomide in primary gliosarcoma.

Clinical guidelines for gliosarcoma (GSM) are poorly defined and GSM patients are usually treated in accordance with existing guidelines for glioblastoma (GBM), with maximal surgical resection followed by chemoradiation with temozolomide (TMZ). However, it is not clear yet if GSM patients profit from TMZ therapy and if O6-methylguanine–DNA–methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation is crucial. We retrospectively evaluated 37 patients with histologically proven, primary GSM who had received radiation therapy since the temozolomide era (post-2005). Twenty-five patients (67.6 %) received combined chemoradiation with temozolomide, and 12 cases (32.4 %) received radiation therapy alone. Molecular markers were determined retrospectively. Survival and correlations were calculated using log-rank, univariate, and multivariate Cox proportional hazards-ratio analyses. All cases were isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) wildtype, MGMT promoter methylation could be observed in 33.3 % of the assessable cases (10/30) and TERT promoter mutation was seen in a high frequency of 86.7 % (26/30). The influence of TMZ therapy on overall survival (OS) was significantly improved compared with cases in which radiation therapy alone was performed (13.9 vs. 9.9 months; p = 0.045), independently of MGMT promoter methylation. The positive effect of TMZ on OS was confirmed in this study’s multivariate analyses (p = 0.04), after adjusting our results for potential confounders. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that concomitant TMZ together with radiation therapy increases GSM-patient survival independent of MGMT promoter methylation. Thus, GSM can be treated in accordance to GBM guidelines. MGMT promoter methylation was infrequent and TERT promoter mutation common without influencing the survival rates. The mechanisms of TMZ effects in GSM are still not fully understood and merit further clinical and molecular-genetic and -biological evaluation

Dosimetric comparison of proton radiation therapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy, and three-dimension conformal radiotherapy based on intracranial tumor location.

(1) Background: Selecting patients that will benefit the most from proton radiotherapy (PRT) is of major importance. This study sought to assess dose reductions to numerous organs-at-risk (OARs) with PRT, as compared to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), as a function of tumor location. (2) Materials/Methods: Patients with intracranial neoplasms (all treated with PRT) were stratified into five location-based groups (frontal, suprasellar, temporal, parietal, posterior cranial fossa; n = 10 per group). Each patient was re-planned for 3DCRT and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using similar methodology, including the originally planned target and organ-at-risk (OAR) dose constraints. (3) Results: In parietal tumors, PRT showed the most pronounced dose reductions. PRT lowered doses to nearly every OAR, most notably the optical system and several contralateral structures (subventricular zone, thalamus, hippocampus). For frontal lobe cases, the greatest relative dose reductions in mean dose (D-mean) with PRT were to the infratentorial normal brain, contralateral hippocampus, brainstem, pituitary gland and contralateral optic nerve. For suprasellar lesions, PRT afforded the greatest relative D-mean reductions to the infratentorial brain, supratentorial brain, and the whole brain. Similar results could be observed in temporal and posterior cranial fossa disease. (4) Conclusions: The effectiveness and degree of PRT dose-sparing to various OARs depends on intracranial tumor location. These data will help to refine selection of patients receiving PRT, cost-effectiveness, and future clinical toxicity assessment

Sequential proton boost after standard chemoradiation for high-grade glioma.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively assess the feasibility and safety of a sequential proton boost following conventional chemoradiation in high-grade glioma (HGG). METHOD AND MATERIALS: Sixty-six consecutive patients with HGG were treated with 50.0 Gy photons (50.0-50.4 Gy) in 2.0 Gy (1.8-2.0 Gy) fractions, followed by a proton boost with 10 Gy equivalent (Gy(RBE)) in 2.0 Gy(RBE) fractions. Patients were matched one to one with 66 patients with HGG undergoing conventional radiation therapy (RT) with 60.0 Gy photons (59.4-60.0 Gy) in 2.0 Gy fractions (1.8-2.0 Gy). Matching criteria were age, WHO grade, Karnofsky's performance status, PTV size, temozolomide therapy (each p > 0.1). The study assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), acute treatment-related toxicity (CTCAE v.4.03) and pseudoprogression (RANO criteria). RESULTS: Median PFS and OS were similar in both treatment groups (bimodality RT, PFS: 8.8 months [2-32 months], OS 19.1 months [4-41 months]; photon-only RT, PFS: 7.2 months [2-39 months], 20.9 months [3-53 months]; p = 0.430 and p = 0.125). The median PTV of the proton boost was significantly smaller than the photon plan PTVs (each p < 0.001). Acute toxicity was mild. Toxicity ≥grade 2 was observed in 6 patients (9%) receiving bimodality RT and 9 patients (14%) receiving photon-only RT. Two types of severe adverse events (CTCAE grade 3) occurred solely in the photon-only group: severe increase in intracranial pressure (5%); and generalized seizures (3%). Pseudoprogression was rare, occurring on average 6 weeks after radiotherapy, and was balanced in both treatment groups (n = 4 each; 8%). CONCLUSION: Delivering a proton boost to significantly smaller target volumes when compared to photon-only plans, yielded comparable progression and survival rates at lower CTCAE grade 3 acute toxicity rates. Pseudoprogression occurred rarely and evenly distributed in both treatment groups. Thus, bimodality RT was at least equivalent regarding outcome and potentially superior with respect to toxicity in patients with HGG. SUMMARY: Treating patients with HGG with 50.0 Gy photons in 2.0 Gy fractions, followed by a proton boost with 10 Gy(RBE) in 2.0 Gy(RBE) fractions, is safe and feasible. Severe radiation-induced acute toxicity and pseudoprogression were rare in both treatment groups. Therefore, in this clinical setting, combined proton radiotherapy might be beneficial in terms of further risk reduction for treatment-related side effects. Interestingly, treatment volume reduction using a proton boost led to comparable survival and progression rates with decreased severe treatment-related toxicity compared to conventional photon radiotherapy

Intensity-modulated proton therapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, and 3D conformal radiotherapy in anaplastic astrocytoma and glioblastoma : A dosimetric comparison.

Purpose: The prognosis for high-grade glioma (HGG) patients is poor; thus, treatment-related side effects need to be minimized to conserve quality of life and functionality. Advanced techniques such as proton radiation therapy (PRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) may potentially further reduce the frequency and severity of radiogenic impairment. Materials and methods: We retrospectively assessed 12 HGG patients who had undergone postoperative intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). VMAT and 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) plans were generated and optimized for comparison after contouring crucial neuronal structures important for neurogenesis and neurocognitive function. Integral dose (ID), homogeneity index (HI), and inhomogeneity coefficient (IC) were calculated from dose statistics. Toxicity data were evaluated. Results: Target volume coverage was comparable for all three modalities. Compared to 3D-CRT and VMAT, PRT showed statistically significant reductions (p < 0.05) in mean dose to whole brain (−20.2 %, −22.7 %); supratentorial (−14.2 %, −20,8 %) and infratentorial (−91.0 %, −77.0 %) regions; brainstem (−67.6 %, −28.1 %); pituitary gland (−52.9 %, −52.5 %); contralateral hippocampus (−98.9 %, −98.7 %); and contralateral subventricular zone (−62.7 %, −66.7 %, respectively). Fatigue (91.7 %), radiation dermatitis (75.0 %), focal alopecia (100.0 %), nausea (41.7 %), cephalgia (58.3 %), and transient cerebral edema (16.7 %) were the most common acute toxicities. Conclusion: Essential dose reduction while maintaining equal target volume coverage was observed using PRT, particularly in contralaterally located critical neuronal structures, areas of neurogenesis, and structures of neurocognitive functions. These findings were supported by preliminary clinical results confirming the safety and feasibility of PRT in HGG