1
|
Knäusl B, Belotti G, Bertholet J, Daartz J, Flampouri S, Hoogeman M, Knopf AC, Lin H, Moerman A, Paganelli C, Rucinski A, Schulte R, Shimizu S, Stützer K, Zhang X, Zhang Y, Czerska K. A review of the clinical introduction of 4D particle therapy research concepts. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2024; 29:100535. [PMID: 38298885 PMCID: PMC10828898 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100535] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2023] [Revised: 12/12/2023] [Accepted: 01/04/2024] [Indexed: 02/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Many 4D particle therapy research concepts have been recently translated into clinics, however, remaining substantial differences depend on the indication and institute-related aspects. This work aims to summarise current state-of-the-art 4D particle therapy technology and outline a roadmap for future research and developments. Material and methods This review focused on the clinical implementation of 4D approaches for imaging, treatment planning, delivery and evaluation based on the 2021 and 2022 4D Treatment Workshops for Particle Therapy as well as a review of the most recent surveys, guidelines and scientific papers dedicated to this topic. Results Available technological capabilities for motion surveillance and compensation determined the course of each 4D particle treatment. 4D motion management, delivery techniques and strategies including imaging were diverse and depended on many factors. These included aspects of motion amplitude, tumour location, as well as accelerator technology driving the necessity of centre-specific dosimetric validation. Novel methodologies for X-ray based image processing and MRI for real-time tumour tracking and motion management were shown to have a large potential for online and offline adaptation schemes compensating for potential anatomical changes over the treatment course. The latest research developments were dominated by particle imaging, artificial intelligence methods and FLASH adding another level of complexity but also opportunities in the context of 4D treatments. Conclusion This review showed that the rapid technological advances in radiation oncology together with the available intrafractional motion management and adaptive strategies paved the way towards clinical implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barbara Knäusl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Gabriele Belotti
- Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
| | - Jenny Bertholet
- Division of Medical Radiation Physics and Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Juliane Daartz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Mischa Hoogeman
- Department of Medical Physics & Informatics, HollandPTC, Delft, The Netherlands
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Antje C Knopf
- Institut für Medizintechnik und Medizininformatik Hochschule für Life Sciences FHNW, Muttenz, Switzerland
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Astrid Moerman
- Department of Medical Physics & Informatics, HollandPTC, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Chiara Paganelli
- Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
| | - Antoni Rucinski
- Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, PL-31342 Krakow, Poland
| | - Reinhard Schulte
- Division of Biomedical Engineering Sciences, School of Medicine, Loma Linda University
| | - Shing Shimizu
- Department of Carbon Ion Radiotherapy, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
| | - Kristin Stützer
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology – OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Xiaodong Zhang
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ye Zhang
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - Katarzyna Czerska
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Metallic Nanoparticles: A Useful Prompt Gamma Emitter for Range Monitoring in Proton Therapy? RADIATION 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/radiation1040025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
In clinical practice, dose delivery in proton therapy treatment is affected by uncertainties related to the range of the beam in the patient, which requires medical physicists to introduce safety margins on the penetration depth of the beam. Although this ensures an irradiation of the entire clinical target volume with the prescribed dose, these safety margins also lead to the exposure of nearby healthy tissues and a subsequent risk of side effects. Therefore, non-invasive techniques that allow for margin reduction through online monitoring of prompt gammas emitted along the proton tracks in the patient are currently under development. This study provides the proof-of-concept of metal-based nanoparticles, injected into the tumor, as a prompt gamma enhancer, helping in the beam range verification. It identifies the limitations of this application, suggesting a low feasibility in a realistic clinical scenario but opens some avenues for improvement.
Collapse
|
3
|
Freitas H, Magalhaes Martins P, Tessonnier T, Ackermann B, Brons S, Seco J. Dataset for predicting single-spot proton ranges in proton therapy of prostate cancer. Sci Data 2021; 8:252. [PMID: 34588458 PMCID: PMC8481263 DOI: 10.1038/s41597-021-01028-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2020] [Accepted: 08/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
The number of radiotherapy patients treated with protons has increased from less than 60,000 in 2007 to more than 220,000 in 2019. However, the considerable uncertainty in the positioning of the Bragg peak deeper in the patient raised new challenges in the proton therapy of prostate cancer (PCPT). Here, we describe and share a dataset where 43 single-spot anterior beams with defined proton energies were delivered to a prostate phantom with an inserted endorectal balloon (ERB) filled either with water only or with a silicon-water mixture. The nuclear reactions between the protons and the silicon yield a distinct prompt gamma energy line of 1.78 MeV. Such energy peak could be identified by means of prompt gamma spectroscopy (PGS) for the protons hitting the ERB with a three-sigma threshold. The application of a background-suppression technique showed an increased rejection capability for protons hitting the prostate and the ERB with water only. We describe each dataset, document the full processing chain, and provide the scripts for the statistical analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hugo Freitas
- German Cancer Research Center - DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany
- Departamento de Física e Astronomia, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Paulo Magalhaes Martins
- German Cancer Research Center - DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Instituto de Biofísica e Engenharia Biomédica, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
| | - Thomas Tessonnier
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Benjamin Ackermann
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stephan Brons
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Joao Seco
- German Cancer Research Center - DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|