Evaluation of fixed- versus variable-modulation treatment modes for charged-particle irradiation of the...

The clinical usefulness of variable-modulation dose delivery of neon ion and proton beams over fixed-modulation beams is evaluated for several patients with tumors in the gastrointestinal tract by comparing dose distributions, dose volume histograms, and predictions of normal tissue complication probabilities calculated with the two methods. Both techniques provide excellent coverage of the target volume with neon ion and proton beams. The advantage of variable modulation is that less dose is delivered proximal to the target volume. For tumors in the gastrointestinal tract, this implies that less dose is given to the liver, gut, kidneys, and lungs. For the ten patients considered in this study, variable-modulation reduced the total integral dose by an average of 17% for neon ion beams and by 18% for protons as compared to fixed-modulation. If the tumor volume is excluded, the reduction in the integral dose to normal tissues ranged from 15% to 32% for neon ions and from 18% to 34% for proton beams. These gains are larger than those anticipated on the basis of an analytic study by Goitein and Chen [Med. Phys. 10, 831-840 (1983)], which predicted integral dose reductions of the order of 10% for protons and 14% for neon ions. They are also larger than those reported in a similar study by Urie and Goitein [Med. Phys. 16, 593-601 (1989)] for proton irradiation of skull-base tumors. This is probably because the tumors in the GI tract considered in this study were more irregularly shaped than Goitein and Chen's analytic model assumes. The results of this study also suggest that due to increased sparing of normal tissues, the number of different portal directions required to achieve a satisfactory treatment plan will be reduced for variable-modulation beam delivery systems. This implies that variable-modulation treatment plans will be easier to execute than current fixed-modulation plans.