1
|
Vidal M, Gérard A, Floquet V, Forthomme J, Christensen JB, Almhagen E, Grusell E, Heymans V, Rossomme S, Dumas S, Trimaud R, Hérault J. Beam monitor chamber calibration of a synchro-cyclotron high dose rate per pulse pulsed scanned proton beam. Phys Med Biol 2024; 69:085016. [PMID: 38252970 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad2123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2022] [Accepted: 01/22/2024] [Indexed: 01/24/2024]
Abstract
Objective. Ionization chambers, mostly used for beam calibration and for reference dosimetry, can show high recombination effects in pulsed high dose rate proton beams. The aims of this paper are: first, to characterize the linearity response of newly designed asymmetrical beam monitor chambers (ABMC) in a 100-226 MeV pulsed high dose rate per pulse scanned proton beam; and secondly, to calibrate the ABMC with a PPC05 (IBA Dosimetry) plane parallel ionization chamber and compare to calibration with a home-made Faraday cup (FC).Approach. The ABMC response linearity was evaluated with both the FC and a PTW 60019 microDiamond detector. Regarding ionometry-based ABMC calibration, recombination factors were evaluated theoretically, then numerically, and finally experimentally measured in water for a plane parallel ionization chamber PPC05 (IBA Dosimetry) throughkssaturation curves. Finally, ABMC calibration was also achieved with FC and compared to the ionometry method for 7 energies.Main results. Linearity measurements showed that recombination losses in the new ABMC design were well taken into account for the whole range of the machine dose rates. The two-voltage-method was not suitable for recombination correction, but Jaffé's plots analysis was needed, emphasizing the current IAEA TRS-398 reference protocol limitations. Concerning ABMC calibration, FC based absorbed dose estimation and PPC05-based absorbed dose estimation differ by less than 6.3% for the investigated energies.Significance.So far, no update on reference dosimetry protocols is available to estimate the absorbed dose in ionization chambers for clinical high dose rate per pulse pulsed scanned proton beams. This work proposes a validation of the new ABMC design, a method to take into account the recombination effect for ionometry-based ABMC calibration and a comparison with FC dose estimation in this type of proton beams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marie Vidal
- Institut Méditerranéen de Protonthérapie-Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Fédération Claude Lalanne, Nice, France
| | - Anaïs Gérard
- Institut Méditerranéen de Protonthérapie-Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Fédération Claude Lalanne, Nice, France
| | - Vincent Floquet
- Institut Méditerranéen de Protonthérapie-Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Fédération Claude Lalanne, Nice, France
| | | | - Jeppe Brage Christensen
- DTU Health Tech, Technical University of Denmark, Roskilde, Denmark
- Department of Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institute, PSI Villigen, Switzerland
| | - Erik Almhagen
- Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Medical Radiation Science-Skandion Clinics Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Erik Grusell
- Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Medical Radiation Science-Skandion Clinics Uppsala, Sweden
| | | | | | - Serge Dumas
- Institut Méditerranéen de Protonthérapie-Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Fédération Claude Lalanne, Nice, France
| | - Richard Trimaud
- Institut Méditerranéen de Protonthérapie-Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Fédération Claude Lalanne, Nice, France
| | - Joël Hérault
- Institut Méditerranéen de Protonthérapie-Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Fédération Claude Lalanne, Nice, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lourenço A, Lee N, Charlwood F, Lambert J, Vera-Sánchez JA, Hussein M, Shipley D, Romano F, Lowe M, Clarke M, Lorentini S, Mazal A, Pettingell J, Palmans H, Thomas R. A portable primary-standard level graphite calorimeter for absolute dosimetry in clinical pencil beam scanning proton beams. Phys Med Biol 2023; 68:175005. [PMID: 37414003 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ace50f] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 07/06/2023] [Indexed: 07/08/2023]
Abstract
Objective. To report the use of a portable primary standard level graphite calorimeter for direct dose determination in clinical pencil beam scanning proton beams, which forms part of the recommendations of the proposed Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine (IPEM) Code of Practice (CoP) for proton therapy dosimetry.Approach. The primary standard proton calorimeter (PSPC) was developed at the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) and measurements were performed at four clinical proton therapy facilities that use pencil beam scanning for beam delivery. Correction factors for the presence of impurities and vacuum gaps were calculated and applied, as well as dose conversion factors to obtain dose to water. Measurements were performed in the middle of 10 × 10 × 10 cm3homogeneous dose volumes, centred at 10.0, 15.0 and 25.0 g·cm-2depth in water. The absorbed dose to water determined with the calorimeter was compared to the dose obtained using PTW Roos-type ionisation chambers calibrated in terms of absorbed dose to water in60Co applying the recommendations in the IAEA TRS-398 CoP.Main results.The relative dose difference between the two protocols varied between 0.4% and 2.1% depending on the facility. The reported overall uncertainty in the determination of absorbed dose to water using the calorimeter is 0.9% (k= 1), which corresponds to a significant reduction of uncertainty in comparison with the TRS-398 CoP (currently with an uncertainty equal or larger than 2.0% (k= 1) for proton beams).Significance. The establishment of a purpose-built primary standard and associated CoP will considerably reduce the uncertainty of the absorbed dose to water determination and ensure improved accuracy and consistency in the dose delivered to patients treated with proton therapy and bring proton reference dosimetry uncertainty in line with megavoltage photon radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Lourenço
- Medical Radiation Science Group, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington TW11 0LW, United Kingdom
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom
| | - N Lee
- Medical Radiation Science Group, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington TW11 0LW, United Kingdom
| | - F Charlwood
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M20 4BX, United Kingdom
| | - J Lambert
- Rutherford Cancer Centre South Wales, Newport NP10 8FZ, United Kingdom
| | - J A Vera-Sánchez
- Centro de Protonterapia Quirónsalud, E-28223 Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid, Spain
| | - M Hussein
- Medical Radiation Science Group, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington TW11 0LW, United Kingdom
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom
| | - D Shipley
- Medical Radiation Science Group, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington TW11 0LW, United Kingdom
| | - F Romano
- Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Catania, Via S Sofia 64, I-95123, Catania, Italy
| | - M Lowe
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M20 4BX, United Kingdom
| | - M Clarke
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M20 4BX, United Kingdom
| | - S Lorentini
- Protontherapy Department, Azienda Provinciale per i Servizi Sanitari (APSS), Trento, Italy
| | - A Mazal
- Centro de Protonterapia Quirónsalud, E-28223 Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid, Spain
| | - J Pettingell
- Rutherford Cancer Centre North East, Bedlington NE22 7FD, United Kingdom
| | - H Palmans
- Medical Radiation Science Group, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington TW11 0LW, United Kingdom
- Medical Physics Group, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - R Thomas
- Medical Radiation Science Group, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington TW11 0LW, United Kingdom
- University of Surrey, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Science, Guildford GU2 7XH, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Absolute dosimetry for FLASH proton pencil beam scanning radiotherapy. Sci Rep 2023; 13:2054. [PMID: 36739297 PMCID: PMC9899251 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-28192-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2022] [Accepted: 01/13/2023] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
A paradigm shift is occurring in clinical oncology exploiting the recent discovery that short pulses of ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) radiation-FLASH radiotherapy-can significantly spare healthy tissues whilst still being at least as effective in curing cancer as radiotherapy at conventional dose rates. These properties promise reduced post-treatment complications, whilst improving patient access to proton beam radiotherapy and reducing costs. However, accurate dosimetry at UHDR is extremely complicated. This work presents measurements performed with a primary-standard proton calorimeter and derivation of the required correction factors needed to determine absolute dose for FLASH proton beam radiotherapy with an uncertainty of 0.9% (1[Formula: see text]), in line with that of conventional treatments. The establishment of a primary standard for FLASH proton radiotherapy improves accuracy and consistency of the dose delivered and is crucial for the safe implementation of clinical trials, and beyond, for this new treatment modality.
Collapse
|
4
|
Ion recombination correction factors and detector comparison in a very-high dose rate proton scanning beam. Phys Med 2023; 106:102518. [PMID: 36638707 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2022.102518] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2022] [Revised: 12/09/2022] [Accepted: 12/27/2022] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Accurate dosimetry is paramount to study the FLASH biological effect since dose and dose rate are critical dosimetric parameters governing its underlying mechanisms. With the goal of assessing the suitability of standard clinical dosimeters in a very-high dose rate (VHDR) experimental setup, we evaluated the ion collection efficiency of several commercially available air-vented ionization chambers (IC) in conventional and VHDR proton irradiation conditions. METHODS A cyclotron at the Orsay Proton Therapy Center was used to deliver VHDR pencil beam scanning irradiation. Ion recombination correction factors (ks) were determined for several detectors (Advanced Markus, PPC05, Nano Razor, CC01) at the entrance of the plateau and at the Bragg peak, using the Niatel model, the Two-voltage method and Boag's analytical formula for continuous beams. RESULTS Mean dose rates ranged from 4 Gy/s to 385 Gy/s, and instantaneous dose rates up to 1000 Gy/s were obtained with the experimental set-up. Recombination correction factors below 2 % were obtained for all chambers, except for the Nano Razor, at VHDRs with variations among detectors, while ks values were significantly smaller (0.8 %) for conventional dose rates. CONCLUSIONS While the collection efficiency of the probed ICs in scanned VHDR proton therapy is comparable to those in the conventional regime with recombination coefficiens smaller than 1 % for mean dose rates up to 177 Gy/s, the reduction in collection efficiency for higher dose rates cannot be ignored when measuring the absorbed dose in pre-clinical proton scanned FLASH experiments and clinical trials.
Collapse
|
5
|
Palmans H, Lourenço A, Medin J, Vatnitsky S, Andreo P. Current best estimates of beam quality correction factors for reference dosimetry of clinical proton beams. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac9172] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2022] [Accepted: 09/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Objective. To review the currently available data on beam quality correction factors,
k
Q
,
for ionization chambers in clinical proton beams and derive their current best estimates for the updated recommendations of the IAEA TRS-398 Code of Practice. Approach. The reviewed data come from 20 publications from which
k
Q
values can be derived either directly from calorimeter measurements, indirectly from comparison with other chambers or from Monte Carlo calculated overall chamber factors,
f
Q
.
For cylindrical ionization chambers, a distinction is made between data obtained in the centre of a spread-out Bragg peak and those obtained in the plateau region of single-energy fields. For the latter, the effect of depth dose gradients has to be considered. To this end an empirical model for previously published displacement correction factors for single-layer scanned beams was established, while for unmodulated scattered beams experimental data were used. From all the data, chamber factors,
f
Q
,
and chamber perturbation correction factors,
p
Q
,
were then derived and analysed. Main results. The analysis showed that except for the beam quality dependence of the water-to-air mass stopping power ratio and, for cylindrical ionization chambers in unmodulated beams, of the displacement correction factor, there is no remaining beam quality dependence of the chamber perturbation correction factors
p
Q
.
Based on this approach, average values of the beam quality independent part of the perturbation factors were derived to calculate
k
Q
values consistent with the data in the literature. Significance. The resulting data from this analysis are current best estimates of
k
Q
values for modulated scattered beams and single-layer scanned beams used in proton therapy. Based on this, a single set of harmonized values is derived to be recommended in the update of IAEA TRS-398.
Collapse
|
6
|
Lee E, Lourenço AM, Speth J, Lee N, Subiel A, Romano F, Thomas R, Amos RA, Zhang Y, Xiao Z, Mascia A. Ultra-high dose rate pencil beam scanning proton dosimetry using ion chambers and a calorimeter in support of first in-human flash clinical trial. Med Phys 2022; 49:6171-6182. [PMID: 35780318 PMCID: PMC9546035 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15844] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2022] [Revised: 06/20/2022] [Accepted: 06/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To provide ultra-high dose rate pencil beam scanning proton dosimetry comparison of clinically used plane-parallel ion chambers, PTW Advanced Markus and IBA PPC05, with a proton graphite calorimeter in support of first in-human proton FLASH clinical trial. METHODS Absolute dose measurement intercomparison of the plane-parallel plate ion chambers and the proton graphite calorimeter was performed at 5 cm water equivalent depth using rectangular 250 MeV single layer treatment plans designed for the first in-human FLASH clinical trial. The dose rate for each field was designed to remain above 60 Gy/s. The ion recombination effects of the plane-parallel plate ion chambers at various bias voltages were also investigated in the range of dose rates between 5 - 60 Gy/s. Two independent model-based extrapolation methods were used to calculate the ion recombination correction factors ks to compare with the two-voltage technique from most widely used clinical protocols. RESULTS The mean measured dose to water with the proton graphite calorimeter across all the pre-defined fields is 7.702 ± 0.037 Gy. The average ratio over the pre-defined fields of the PTW Advanced Markus chamber dose to the calorimeter reference dose is 1.002 ± 0.007 while the IBA PPC05 chamber shows ∼3% higher reading of 1.033 ± 0.007. The relative difference in the ks values determined from between the linear and quadratic extrapolation methods and the two-voltage technique for the PTW Advanced Markus chamber are not statistically significant and the trends of dose rate dependence are similar. The IBA PPC05 shows a flat response in terms of ion recombination effects based on the ks values calculated using the two-voltage technique. Differences in ks values for the PPC05 between the two-voltage technique and other model-based extrapolation methods are not statistically significant at FLASH dose rates. Some of the ks values for the PPC05 that were extrapolated from the three-voltage linear method and the semi-empirical model were reported less than unity possibly due to the charge multiplication effect, which was negligible compared to the volume recombination effect in FLASH dose rates. CONCLUSIONS The absolute dose measurements of both PTW Advanced Markus and IBA PPC05 chambers are in a good agreement with the NPL graphite calorimeter reference dose considering overall uncertainties. Both ion chambers also demonstrate good reproducibility as well as stability as refence dosimeters in ultra-high dose rate pencil beam scanning proton radiotherapy. The dose rate dependency of the ion recombination effects of both ion chambers in cyclotron generated PBS proton beams is acceptable and therefore, both chambers are suitable to use in clinical practice for the range of dose rates between 5 - 60 Gy/s. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eunsin Lee
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiOhioUSA
- Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical CenterCincinnatiOhioUSA
| | - Ana Mónica Lourenço
- National Physical LaboratoryMedical Science GroupTeddingtonUK
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical EngineeringUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Joseph Speth
- University of Cincinnati Medical CenterCincinnatiOhioUSA
| | - Nigel Lee
- National Physical LaboratoryMedical Science GroupTeddingtonUK
| | - Anna Subiel
- National Physical LaboratoryMedical Science GroupTeddingtonUK
| | - Francesco Romano
- Istituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareSezione di CataniaCataniaItaly
| | - Russell Thomas
- National Physical LaboratoryMedical Science GroupTeddingtonUK
- Faculty of Engineering and Physical ScienceUniversity of SurreyGuildfordSurreyUK
| | - Richard A. Amos
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical EngineeringUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Yongbin Zhang
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiOhioUSA
- Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical CenterCincinnatiOhioUSA
| | - Zhiyan Xiao
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiOhioUSA
- Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical CenterCincinnatiOhioUSA
| | - Anthony Mascia
- Department of Radiation OncologyUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiOhioUSA
- Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical CenterCincinnatiOhioUSA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Mirandola A, Maestri D, Magro G, Mastella E, Molinelli S, Rossi E, Russo S, Vai A, Ciocca M. Determination of ion recombination and polarity effects for the PTW Advanced Markus ionization chamber in synchrotron based scanned proton and carbon ion beams. Phys Med 2022; 96:149-156. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2022.03.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2022] [Accepted: 03/09/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022] Open
|
8
|
Rossomme S, Lorentini S, Vynckier S, Delor A, Vidal M, Lourenço A, Palmans H. Correction of the measured current of a small-gap plane-parallel ionization chamber in proton beams in the presence of charge multiplication. Z Med Phys 2021; 31:192-202. [PMID: 33726960 DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2021.01.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2020] [Revised: 01/25/2021] [Accepted: 01/31/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aims of this work are to study the response of a small-gap plane-parallel ionization chamber in the presence of charge multiplication and suggest an experimental method to determine the product of the recombination correction factor (ks) and the charge multiplication correction factor (kCM) in order to investigate the latter. METHODS Experimental data were acquired in scanned proton beams and in a Cobalt-60 beam. Measurements were carried out using an IBA PPC05 chambers of which the electrode gap is 0.6mm. The study is based on the determination of Jaffé plots by operating the chambers at different voltages. Experimental results are compared to theoretical equations describing initial and volume recombination as well as charge multiplication for continuous and pulsed beams. RESULTS Results obtained in protons and Cobalt-60 with the same PPC05 chamber indicate that the charge multiplication effect is independent of the beam quality, while results obtained in different proton beams with two different PPC05 chambers show that the charge multiplication effect is chamber dependent. CONCLUSIONS The approach to be taken when using a small-gap plane-parallel ionization chamber with a high voltage (e.g. 300V or 500V) for reference dosimetry in scanned proton beams depends on which correction factors were applied to the chamber response during its calibration in terms of absorbed dose to water: In both cases, it is recommended to use the ionization chamber at the same operating voltage used during its ND,w-calibration. Another solution consists of operating the PPC05 chamber at a lower voltage (e.g. 50V) with larger ks and smaller kCM and determining the product of both factors with higher accuracy using a linear extrapolation method.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Severine Rossomme
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology, Institute for Experimental and Clinical Research, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
| | - Stefano Lorentini
- Proton Therapy Center of Azienda Provinciale per i Servizi Sanitari (APSS), Trento, Italy
| | - Stefaan Vynckier
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology, Institute for Experimental and Clinical Research, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Antoine Delor
- Cliniques universitaires UCLouvain Saint-Luc, Radiotherapy department, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Marie Vidal
- Institut Méditerranéen de Protonthérapie, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France
| | - Ana Lourenço
- National Physical Laboratory, Medical Radiation Science, Teddington, United Kingdom; University College London, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, London, United Kingdom
| | - Hugo Palmans
- National Physical Laboratory, Medical Radiation Science, Teddington, United Kingdom; MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Medical Physics, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Esplen N, Mendonca MS, Bazalova-Carter M. Physics and biology of ultrahigh dose-rate (FLASH) radiotherapy: a topical review. Phys Med Biol 2020; 65:23TR03. [PMID: 32721941 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/abaa28] [Citation(s) in RCA: 114] [Impact Index Per Article: 28.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Ultrahigh dose-rate radiotherapy (RT), or 'FLASH' therapy, has gained significant momentum following various in vivo studies published since 2014 which have demonstrated a reduction in normal tissue toxicity and similar tumor control for FLASH-RT when compared with conventional dose-rate RT. Subsequent studies have sought to investigate the potential for FLASH normal tissue protection and the literature has been since been inundated with publications on FLASH therapies. Today, FLASH-RT is considered by some as having the potential to 'revolutionize radiotherapy'. FLASH-RT is considered by some as having the potential to 'revolutionize radiotherapy'. The goal of this review article is to present the current state of this intriguing RT technique and to review existing publications on FLASH-RT in terms of its physical and biological aspects. In the physics section, the current landscape of ultrahigh dose-rate radiation delivery and dosimetry is presented. Specifically, electron, photon and proton radiation sources capable of delivering ultrahigh dose-rates along with their beam delivery parameters are thoroughly discussed. Additionally, the benefits and drawbacks of radiation detectors suitable for dosimetry in FLASH-RT are presented. The biology section comprises a summary of pioneering in vitro ultrahigh dose-rate studies performed in the 1960s and early 1970s and continues with a summary of the recent literature investigating normal and tumor tissue responses in electron, photon and proton beams. The section is concluded with possible mechanistic explanations of the FLASH normal-tissue protection effect (FLASH effect). Finally, challenges associated with clinical translation of FLASH-RT and its future prospects are critically discussed; specifically, proposed treatment machines and publications on treatment planning for FLASH-RT are reviewed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nolan Esplen
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Farr JB, Moyers MF, Allgower CE, Bues M, Hsi WC, Jin H, Mihailidis DN, Lu HM, Newhauser WD, Sahoo N, Slopsema R, Yeung D, Zhu XR. Clinical commissioning of intensity-modulated proton therapy systems: Report of AAPM Task Group 185. Med Phys 2020; 48:e1-e30. [PMID: 33078858 DOI: 10.1002/mp.14546] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2020] [Revised: 08/17/2020] [Accepted: 08/18/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy is an expanding radiotherapy modality in the United States and worldwide. With the number of proton therapy centers treating patients increasing, so does the need for consistent, high-quality clinical commissioning practices. Clinical commissioning encompasses the entire proton therapy system's multiple components, including the treatment delivery system, the patient positioning system, and the image-guided radiotherapy components. Also included in the commissioning process are the x-ray computed tomography scanner calibration for proton stopping power, the radiotherapy treatment planning system, and corresponding portions of the treatment management system. This commissioning report focuses exclusively on intensity-modulated scanning systems, presenting details of how to perform the commissioning of the proton therapy and ancillary systems, including the required proton beam measurements, treatment planning system dose modeling, and the equipment needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan B Farr
- Department of Medical Physics, Applications of Detectors and Accelerators to Medicine, Meyrin, 1217, Switzerland
| | | | - Chris E Allgower
- Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA
| | - Martin Bues
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, 85259, USA
| | - Wen-Chien Hsi
- University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL, 32206, USA
| | - Hosang Jin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA
| | - Dimitris N Mihailidis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA
| | - Hsiao-Ming Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hefei Ion Medical Center, 1700 Changning Avenue, Gaoxin District, Hefei, Anhui, 230088, China
| | - Wayne D Newhauser
- Department of Physics & Astronomy, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803, USA.,Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center, Baton Rouge, LA, 70809, USA
| | - Narayan Sahoo
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Roelf Slopsema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory Proton Therapy Center, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA
| | - Daniel Yeung
- Saudi Proton Therapy Center, King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Riyadh Province, 11525, Saudi Arabia
| | - X Ronald Zhu
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
De Marzi L, Patriarca A, Scher N, Thariat J, Vidal M. Exploiting the full potential of proton therapy: An update on the specifics and innovations towards spatial or temporal optimisation of dose delivery. Cancer Radiother 2020; 24:691-698. [PMID: 32753235 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2020.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2020] [Revised: 06/07/2020] [Accepted: 06/09/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Prescription and delivery of protons are somewhat different compared to photons and may influence outcomes (tumour control and toxicity). These differences should be taken into account to fully exploit the clinical potential of proton therapy. Innovations in proton therapy treatment are also required to widen the therapeutic window and determine appropriate populations of patients that would benefit from new treatments. Therefore, strategies are now being developed to reduce side effects to critical normal tissues using alternative treatment configurations and new spatial or temporal-driven optimisation approaches. Indeed, spatiotemporal optimisation (based on flash, proton minibeam radiation therapy or hypofractionated delivery methods) has been gaining some attention in proton therapy as a mean of improving (biological and physical) dose distribution. In this short review, the main differences in planning and delivery between protons and photons, as well as some of the latest developments and methodological issues (in silico modelling) related to providing scientific evidence for these new techniques will be discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L De Marzi
- Institut Curie, centre de protonthérapie d'Orsay, campus universitaire, bâtiment 101, 91898 Orsay, France; Université PSL (Paris Sciences & Lettres), 60, rue Mazarine, 75006 Paris, France; Université Paris-Saclay, route de l'Orme-aux-Merisiers, RD 128, 91190 Saint-Aubin, France; Inserm U1021, centre universitaire, bâtiment 110, rue Henri-Becquerel, 91405 Orsay cedex, France; CNRS, UMR 3347, centre universitaire, bâtiment 110, rue Henri-Becquerel, 91405 Orsay cedex, France.
| | - A Patriarca
- Institut Curie, centre de protonthérapie d'Orsay, campus universitaire, bâtiment 101, 91898 Orsay, France; Université PSL (Paris Sciences & Lettres), 60, rue Mazarine, 75006 Paris, France
| | - N Scher
- Institut Curie, centre de protonthérapie d'Orsay, campus universitaire, bâtiment 101, 91898 Orsay, France; Université PSL (Paris Sciences & Lettres), 60, rue Mazarine, 75006 Paris, France
| | - J Thariat
- Service de radiothérapie oncologique, centre François-Baclesse, 3, avenue General-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Laboratoire de physique corpusculaire de Caen, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; Institut national de physique nucléaire et physique des particules (IN2P3), 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; EnsiCaen, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; CNRS, UMR6534, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; Unicaen, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France; Normandie Université, 6, boulevard du Maréchal-Juin, 14050 Caen cedex, France
| | - M Vidal
- Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, 33, avenue Valombrose, 06000 Nice, France
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Christensen JB, Almhagen E, Stolarczyk L, Liszka M, Hernandez GG, Bassler N, Nørrevang O, Vestergaard A. Mapping initial and general recombination in scanning proton pencil beams. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2020; 65:115003. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab8579] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
|