SU-E-T-27: A Dosimetric Evaluation of Boney Anatomy Versus Fiducial Marker Alignment for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer Using Scanned Beam Proton Therapy

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (6Part12) ◽  
pp. 3336-3337
Author(s):  
D Freund ◽  
X Ding ◽  
J Zhang ◽  
L Rosen ◽  
H Wu
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Proton Therapy ◽  
Fiducial Marker ◽  
Beam Proton

scholarly journals Feasibility of transrectal and transperineal fiducial marker placement for prostate cancer before proton therapy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kengo Ohta ◽  
Hiroyuki Ogino ◽  
Hiromitsu Iwata ◽  
Shingo Hashimoto ◽  
Yukiko Hattori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Proton Therapy ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Clinical Success Rate ◽  
Fiducial Marker ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Migration Rates ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Lower Pain

Abstract Background To compare the feasibility of transrectal and transperineal fiducial marker placement for prostate cancer before proton therapy. Materials and Methods From 2013 to 2015, the first 40 prostate cancer patients that were scheduled for proton therapy underwent transrectal fiducial marker placement, and the next 40 patients underwent transperineal fiducial marker placement (the first series). Technical and clinical success and pain scores were evaluated. In the second series (n = 280), the transrectal or transperineal approach was selected depending on the presence/absence of comorbidities, such as blood coagulation abnormalities. Seven patients refused to undergo the procedure. Thus, the total number of patients across both series was 353 (262 and 91 underwent the transrectal and transperineal approach, respectively). Technical and clinical success, complications, marker migration and the distance between the two markers were evaluated. Results In the first series, the technical and clinical success rates were 100% in both groups. The transrectal group exhibited lower pain scores than the transperineal group. The overall technical success rates of the transrectal and transperineal groups were 100% (262/262) and 99% (90/91), respectively (P > 0.05). The overall clinical success rate was 100% in both groups, and there were no major complications in either group. The migration rates of the two groups did not differ significantly. The mean distance between the two markers was 25.6 ± 7.1 mm (mean ± standard deviation) in the transrectal group and 31.9 ± 5.2 mm in the transperineal group (P < 0.05). Conclusion Both the transrectal and transperineal fiducial marker placement methods are feasible and safe.

scholarly journals Preliminary analysis of prostate positional displacement using hydrogel spacer during the course of proton therapy for prostate cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroki Sato ◽  
Takahiro Kato ◽  
Tomoaki Motoyanagi ◽  
Kimihiro Takemasa ◽  
Yuki Narita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Proton Therapy ◽  
Rectal Dose ◽  
Prostate Motion ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Risk Prostate Cancer ◽  
Bony Anatomy ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Planning Ct ◽  
Anterior Posterior

Abstract In recent years, a novel technique has been employed to maintain a distance between the prostate and the rectum by transperineally injecting a hydrogel spacer (HS). However, the effect of HS on the prostate positional displacement is poorly understood, despite its stability with HS in place. In this study, we investigated the effect of HS insertion on the interfraction prostate motion during the course of proton therapy (PT) for Japanese prostate cancer patients. The study population consisted of 22 cases of intermediate-risk prostate cancer with 11 cases with HS insertion and 11 cases without HS insertion. The irradiation position and preparation were similar for both groups. To test for reproducibility, regular confirmation computed tomography (RCCT) was done four times during the treatment period, and five times overall [including treatment planning CT (TPCT)] in each patient. Considering the prostate position of the TPCT as the reference, the change in the center of gravity of the prostate relative to the bony anatomy in the RCCTs of each patient was determined in the left–right (LR), superior–inferior (SI) and anterior–posterior (AP) directions. As a result, no significant difference was observed across the groups in the LR and SI directions. Conversely, a significant difference was observed in the AP direction (P < 0.05). The proportion of the 3D vector length ≤5 mm was 95% in the inserted group, but 55% in the non-inserted group. Therefore, HS is not only effective in reducing rectal dose, but may also contribute to the positional reproducibility of the prostate.

Anatomically robust proton therapy using multiple planning computed tomography scans for locally advanced prostate cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 598-604
Author(s):  
Kia Busch ◽  
Benjamin Dahl ◽  
Stine E. Petersen ◽  
Heidi S. Rønde ◽  
Lise Bentzen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Proton Therapy ◽  
Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer ◽  
Computed Tomography Scans

scholarly journals OC-0557: Implementation and validation of an analytical model for prompt gamma imaging in scanned beam proton therapy

2015 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. S271-S272
Author(s):  
E. Sterpin ◽  
G. Janssens ◽  
J. Smeets ◽  
F. Vander Stappen ◽  
D. Prieels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Analytical Model ◽  
Proton Therapy ◽  
Prompt Gamma ◽  
Gamma Imaging ◽  
Beam Proton ◽  
Prompt Gamma Imaging

Does Race Influence Quality of Life, Toxicity, or Early Relapse Following Proton Therapy in Men With Prostate Cancer?

2012 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. S650
Author(s):  
C.M. Bryant ◽  
B. Hoppe ◽  
R.C. Nichols ◽  
R. Henderson ◽  
W.M. Mendenhall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Proton Therapy ◽  
Early Relapse
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document