TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical practice in European centres treating paediatric posterior fossa tumours with pencil beam scanning proton therapy
AU - Toussaint, Laura
AU - Matysiak, Witold
AU - Alapetite, Claire
AU - Aristu, Javier
AU - Bannink-Gawryszuk, Agata
AU - Bolle, Stephanie
AU - Bolsi, Alessandra
AU - Calvo, Felipe
AU - Cerron Campoo, Fernando
AU - Charlwood, Frances
AU - Demoor-Goldschmidt, Charlotte
AU - Doyen, Jérôme
AU - Drosik-Rutowicz, Katarzyna
AU - Dutheil, Pauline
AU - Embring, Anna
AU - Engellau, Jacob
AU - Goedgebeur, Anneleen
AU - Goudjil, Farid
AU - Harrabi, Semi
AU - Kopec, Renata
AU - Kristensen, Ingrid
AU - Lægsdmand, Peter
AU - Lütgendorf-Caucig, Carola
AU - Meijers, Arturs
AU - Mirandola, Alfredo
AU - Missohou, Fernand
AU - Montero Feijoo, Marta
AU - Muren, Ludvig P
AU - Ondrova, Barbora
AU - Orlandi, Ester
AU - Pettersson, Erik
AU - Pica, Alessia
AU - Plaude, Sandija
AU - Righetto, Roberto
AU - Rombi, Barbara
AU - Timmermann, Beate
AU - Van Beek, Karen
AU - Vela, Anthony
AU - Vennarini, Sabina
AU - Vestergaard, Anne
AU - Vidal, Marie
AU - Vondracek, Vladimir
AU - Weber, Damien C
AU - Whitfield, Gillian
AU - Zimmerman, Jens
AU - Maduro, John H
AU - Lassen-Ramshad, Yasmin
N1 - Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
PY - 2024/9
Y1 - 2024/9
N2 - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: As no guidelines for pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy (PT) of paediatric posterior fossa (PF) tumours exist to date, this study investigated planning techniques across European PT centres, with special considerations for brainstem and spinal cord sparing.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey and a treatment planning comparison were initiated across nineteen European PBS-PT centres treating paediatric patients. The survey assessed all aspects of the treatment chain, including but not limited to delineations, dose constraints and treatment planning. Each centre planned two PF tumour cases for focal irradiation, according to their own clinical practice but based on common delineations. The prescription dose was 54 Gy(RBE) for Case 1 and 59.4 Gy(RBE) for Case 2. For both cases, planning strategies and relevant dose metrics were compared.RESULTS: Seventeen (89 %) centres answered the survey, and sixteen (80 %) participated in the treatment planning comparison. In the survey, thirteen (68 %) centres reported using the European Particle Therapy Network definition for brainstem delineation. In the treatment planning study, while most centres used three beam directions, their configurations varied widely across centres. Large variations were also seen in brainstem doses, with a brainstem near maximum dose (D2%) ranging from 52.7 Gy(RBE) to 55.7 Gy(RBE) (Case 1), and from 56.8 Gy(RBE) to 60.9 Gy(RBE) (Case 2).CONCLUSION: This study assessed the European PBS-PT planning of paediatric PF tumours. Agreement was achieved in e.g. delineation-practice, while wider variations were observed in planning approach and consequently dose to organs at risk. Collaboration between centres is still ongoing, striving towards common guidelines.
AB - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: As no guidelines for pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy (PT) of paediatric posterior fossa (PF) tumours exist to date, this study investigated planning techniques across European PT centres, with special considerations for brainstem and spinal cord sparing.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey and a treatment planning comparison were initiated across nineteen European PBS-PT centres treating paediatric patients. The survey assessed all aspects of the treatment chain, including but not limited to delineations, dose constraints and treatment planning. Each centre planned two PF tumour cases for focal irradiation, according to their own clinical practice but based on common delineations. The prescription dose was 54 Gy(RBE) for Case 1 and 59.4 Gy(RBE) for Case 2. For both cases, planning strategies and relevant dose metrics were compared.RESULTS: Seventeen (89 %) centres answered the survey, and sixteen (80 %) participated in the treatment planning comparison. In the survey, thirteen (68 %) centres reported using the European Particle Therapy Network definition for brainstem delineation. In the treatment planning study, while most centres used three beam directions, their configurations varied widely across centres. Large variations were also seen in brainstem doses, with a brainstem near maximum dose (D2%) ranging from 52.7 Gy(RBE) to 55.7 Gy(RBE) (Case 1), and from 56.8 Gy(RBE) to 60.9 Gy(RBE) (Case 2).CONCLUSION: This study assessed the European PBS-PT planning of paediatric PF tumours. Agreement was achieved in e.g. delineation-practice, while wider variations were observed in planning approach and consequently dose to organs at risk. Collaboration between centres is still ongoing, striving towards common guidelines.
KW - Humans
KW - Proton Therapy/methods
KW - Infratentorial Neoplasms/radiotherapy
KW - Europe
KW - Child
KW - Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods
KW - Radiotherapy Dosage
KW - Child, Preschool
KW - Male
KW - Female
KW - Organs at Risk/radiation effects
KW - Brain Stem/radiation effects
U2 - 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110414
DO - 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110414
M3 - Article
C2 - 38942120
SN - 0167-8140
VL - 198
JO - Radiotherapy and Oncology
JF - Radiotherapy and Oncology
M1 - 110414
ER -