SU-E-T-621: Planning Methodologies for Cancer of the Anal Canal: Comparing IMRT, Rapid Arc, and Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Beam

Authors


Abstract

Purpose:

To evaluate planning methods for anal canal cancer and compare the results of 9-field Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT), Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (Varian, RapidArc), and Proton Pencil Beam Scanning (PBS).

Methods:

We generated plans with IMRT, RapidArc (RA) and PBS for twenty patients for both initial phase including nodes and cone down phase of treatment using Eclipe (Varian). We evaluated the advantage of each technique for each phase. RA plans used 2 to 4 arcs and various collimator orientations. PBS used two posterior oblique fields. We evaluated the plans comparing dose volume histogram (DVH), locations of hot spots, and PTV dose conformity.

Results:

Due to complex shape of target, for RA plans, multiple arcs (>2) are required to achieve optimal PTV conformity. When the PTV exceeds 15 cm in the superior-inferior direction, limitations of deliverability start to dominate. The PTV should be divided into a superior and an inferior structure. The optimization is performed with fixed jaws for each structure and collimator set to 90 degrees for the inferior PTV. Proton PBS plans show little advantage in small bowel sparing when treating the nodes. However, PBS plan reduces volumetric dose to the bladder at the cost of higher doses to the perineal skin. IMRT plans provide good target conformity, but they generate hot spots outside of the target volume.

Conclusion:

When using one planning technique for entire course of treatment, Multiple arc (>2) RA plans are better as compared to IMRT and PBS plans. When combining techniques, RA for the initial phase in combination with PBS for the cone down phase results in the most optimal plans.

Ancillary