We assessed the effect of beam size on plan robustness for intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) of head and neck cancer (HNC) and compared the plan quality including robustness with that of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). IMPT plans were generated for six HNC patients using six beam sizes (air-sigma 3-17 mm at isocenter for a 70-230 MeV) and two optimization methods for planning target volume-based non-robust optimization (NRO) and clinical target volume (CTV)-based robust optimization (RO). Worst-case dosimetric parameters and plan robustness for CTV and organs-at-risk (OARs) were assessed under different scenarios, assuming a ± 1-5 mm setup error and a ± 3% range error. Statistical comparisons of NRO-IMPT, RO-IMPT and IMRT plans were performed. In regard to CTV-D99%, RO-IMPT with smaller beam size was more robust than RO-IMPT with larger beam sizes, whereas NRO-IMPT showed the opposite (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the robustness of the CTV-D99% and CTV-D95% between RO-IMPT and IMRT. The worst-case CTV coverage of IMRT (±5 mm/3%) for all patients was 96.0% ± 1.4% (D99%) and 97.9% ± 0.3% (D95%). For four out of six patients, the worst-case CTV-D95% for RO-IMPT (±1-5 mm/3%) were higher than those for IMRT. Compared with IMRT, RO-IMPT with smaller beam sizes achieved lower worst-case doses to OARs. In HNC treatment, utilizing smaller beam sizes in RO-IMPT improves plan robustness compared to larger beam sizes, achieving comparable target robustness and lower worst-case OARs doses compared to IMRT.
Keywords: beam size; head and neck cancer; intensity-modulated proton therapy; robust optimization; robustness.
© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Japanese Radiation Research Society and Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology.