Journal of Medical Physics
 Home | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscription | Login  The official journal of AMPI, IOMP and AFOMP      
 Users online: 1603  Home  EMail this page Print this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size 
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 47  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 331-335

Dosimetric effects of the supine and prone positions in proton therapy for prostate cancer

1 Department of Radiation Physics and Technology, Southern Tohoku Proton Therapy Center; Department of Radiological Sciences, School of Health Sciences, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan
2 Department of Radiation Physics and Technology, Southern Tohoku Proton Therapy Center, Fukushima, Japan
3 Department of Radiation Oncology, Southern Tohoku Proton Therapy Center, Fukushima, Japan

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Takahiro Kato
Department of Radiation Physics and Technology, Southern Tohoku Proton Therapy Center, 172 Yatsuyamada 7 Chome, Koriyama, Fukushima 963-8563
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jmp.jmp_85_22

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: To quantitatively evaluate how much the doses to organs at risk are affected in the prone position compared to the supine position in the proton therapy (PT) for prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: Fifteen consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer underwent treatment planning computed tomography scans in both the supine and prone positions. The clinical target volume (CTV) consisted of the prostate gland plus the seminal vesicles. The PT plans were designed using the standard lateral opposed fields with passively scattered proton beams for both treatment positions. The prescribed dose for each plan was set to 78 Gy (Relative biological effectiveness)/39 fractions to 50% of the planning target volume. Dose-volume metrics of the rectum and bladder in the two treatment positions were analyzed. Results: It was confirmed that all the parameters of D05, D10, D20, D30, Dmean, and V90 examined in the rectum were significantly reduced in the prone position. There was no significant difference between the two positions in the bladder dose except for Dmean. The distance between the CTV and the rectum tended to increase with the patient in the prone position; at the prostate level, however, the maximum change was approximately 5 mm, and there was significant variation between cases. Conclusions: We confirmed that the rectal doses were significantly lower in the prone compared with the supine position in PT. Although uncertain, the prone position could be an effective method to reduce the rectal dose in PT.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded69    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal