1
|
Missimer JH, Emert F, Lomax AJ, Weber DC. Automatic lung segmentation of magnetic resonance images: A new approach applied to healthy volunteers undergoing enhanced Deep-Inspiration-Breath-Hold for motion-mitigated 4D proton therapy of lung tumors. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2024; 29:100531. [PMID: 38292650 PMCID: PMC10825631 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100531] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Revised: 12/20/2023] [Accepted: 12/30/2023] [Indexed: 02/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Respiratory suppression techniques represent an effective motion mitigation strategy for 4D-irradiation of lung tumors with protons. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based study applied and analyzed methods for this purpose, including enhanced Deep-Inspiration-Breath-Hold (eDIBH). Twenty-one healthy volunteers (41-58 years) underwent thoracic MR scans in four imaging sessions containing two eDIBH-guided MRIs per session to simulate motion-dependent irradiation conditions. The automated MRI segmentation algorithm presented here was critical in determining the lung volumes (LVs) achieved during eDIBH. Materials and methods The study included 168 MRIs acquired under eDIBH conditions. The lung segmentation algorithm consisted of four analysis steps: (i) image preprocessing, (ii) MRI histogram analysis with thresholding, (iii) automatic segmentation, (iv) 3D-clustering. To validate the algorithm, 46 eDIBH-MRIs were manually contoured. Sørensen-Dice similarity coefficients (DSCs) and relative deviations of LVs were determined as similarity measures. Assessment of intrasessional and intersessional LV variations and their differences provided estimates of statistical and systematic errors. Results Lung segmentation time for 100 2D-MRI planes was ∼ 10 s. Compared to manual lung contouring, the median DSC was 0.94 with a lower 95 % confidence level (CL) of 0.92. The relative volume deviations yielded a median value of 0.059 and 95 % CLs of -0.013 and 0.13. Artifact-based volume errors, mainly of the trachea, were estimated. Estimated statistical and systematic errors ranged between 6 and 8 %. Conclusions The presented analytical algorithm is fast, precise, and readily available. The results are comparable to time-consuming, manual segmentations and other automatic segmentation approaches. Post-processing to remove image artifacts is under development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John H. Missimer
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - Frank Emert
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - Antony J. Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
- Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Damien C. Weber
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Knäusl B, Lebbink F, Fossati P, Engwall E, Georg D, Stock M. Patient Breathing Motion and Delivery Specifics Influencing the Robustness of a Proton Pancreas Irradiation. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15092550. [PMID: 37174016 PMCID: PMC10177445 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15092550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Revised: 04/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/28/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Motion compensation strategies in particle therapy depend on the anatomy, motion amplitude and underlying beam delivery technology. This retrospective study on pancreas patients with small moving tumours analysed existing treatment concepts and serves as a basis for future treatment strategies for patients with larger motion amplitudes as well as the transition towards carbon ion treatments. The dose distributions of 17 hypofractionated proton treatment plans were analysed using 4D dose tracking (4DDT). The recalculation of clinical treatment plans employing robust optimisation for mitigating different organ fillings was performed on phased-based 4D computed tomography (4DCT) data considering the accelerator (pulsed scanned pencil beams delivered by a synchrotron) and the breathing-time structure. The analysis confirmed the robustness of the included treatment plans concerning the interplay of beam and organ motion. The median deterioration of D50% (ΔD50%) for the clinical target volume (CTV) and the planning target volume (PTV) was below 2%, while the only outlier was observed for ΔD98% with -35.1%. The average gamma pass rate over all treatment plans (2%/ 2 mm) was 88.8% ± 8.3, while treatment plans for motion amplitudes larger than 1 mm performed worse. For organs at risk (OARs), the median ΔD2% was below 3%, but for single patients, essential changes, e.g., up to 160% for the stomach were observed. The hypofractionated proton treatment for pancreas patients based on robust treatment plan optimisation and 2 to 4 horizontal and vertical beams showed to be robust against intra-fractional movements up to 3.7 mm. It could be demonstrated that the patient's orientation did not influence the motion sensitivity. The identified outliers showed the need for continuous 4DDT calculations in clinical practice to identify patient cases with more significant deviations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barbara Knäusl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Franciska Lebbink
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Piero Fossati
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Division Medical Physics, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | | | - Dietmar Georg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | - Markus Stock
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Division Medical Physics, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zhang Y, Trnkova P, Toshito T, Heijmen B, Richter C, Aznar M, Albertini F, Bolsi A, Daartz J, Bertholet J, Knopf A. A survey of practice patterns for real-time intrafractional motion-management in particle therapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 26:100439. [PMID: 37124167 PMCID: PMC10133874 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100439] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2023] [Revised: 04/05/2023] [Accepted: 04/06/2023] [Indexed: 05/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Organ motion compromises accurate particle therapy delivery. This study reports on the practice patterns for real-time intrafractional motion-management in particle therapy to evaluate current clinical practice and wishes and barriers to implementation. Materials and methods An institutional questionnaire was distributed to particle therapy centres worldwide (7/2020-6/2021) asking which type(s) of real-time respiratory motion management (RRMM) methods were used, for which treatment sites, and what were the wishes and barriers to implementation. This was followed by a three-round DELPHI consensus analysis (10/2022) to define recommendations on required actions and future vision. With 70 responses from 17 countries, response rate was 100% for Europe (23/23 centres), 96% for Japan (22/23) and 53% for USA (20/38). Results Of the 68 clinically operational centres, 85% used RRMM, with 41% using both rescanning and active methods. Sixty-four percent used active-RRMM for at least one treatment site, mostly with gating guided by an external marker. Forty-eight percent of active-RRMM users wished to expand or change their RRMM technique. The main barriers were technical limitations and limited resources. From the DELPHI analysis, optimisation of rescanning parameters, improvement of motion models, and pre-treatment 4D evaluation were unanimously considered clinically important future focus. 4D dose calculation was identified as the top requirement for future commercial treatment planning software. Conclusion A majority of particle therapy centres have implemented RRMM. Still, further development and clinical integration were desired by most centres. Joint industry, clinical and research efforts are needed to translate innovation into efficient workflows for broad-scale implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ye Zhang
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - Petra Trnkova
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Toshiyuki Toshito
- Nagoya Proton Therapy Center, Nagoya City University West Medical Center, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Ben Heijmen
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus University Medical Center (Erasmus MC), Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Christian Richter
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Marianne Aznar
- Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, United Kingdom
| | | | - Alexandra Bolsi
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland
| | - Juliane Daartz
- F. Burr Proton Therapy, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Jenny Bertholet
- Division of Medical Radiation Physics and Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Antje Knopf
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland
- Institute for Medical Engineering and Medical Informatics, School of Life Science FHNW, Muttenz, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Chen Z, Dominello MM, Joiner MC, Burmeister JW. Proton versus photon radiation therapy: A clinical review. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1133909. [PMID: 37064131 PMCID: PMC10091462 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1133909] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2022] [Accepted: 03/13/2023] [Indexed: 03/31/2023] Open
Abstract
While proton radiation therapy offers substantially better dose distribution characteristics than photon radiation therapy in certain clinical applications, data demonstrating a quantifiable clinical advantage is still needed for many treatment sites. Unfortunately, the number of patients treated with proton radiation therapy is still comparatively small, in some part due to the lack of evidence of clear benefits over lower-cost photon-based treatments. This review is designed to present the comparative clinical outcomes between proton and photon therapies, and to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of proton radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhe Chen
- School of Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, United States
- *Correspondence: Zhe Chen,
| | - Michael M. Dominello
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, United States
| | - Michael C. Joiner
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, United States
| | - Jay W. Burmeister
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, United States
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
van Kesteren Z, Veldman JK, Parkes MJ, Stevens MF, Balasupramaniam P, van den Aardweg JG, van Tienhoven G, Bel A, van Dijk IWEM. Quantifying the reduction of respiratory motion by mechanical ventilation with MRI for radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol 2022; 17:99. [PMID: 35597956 PMCID: PMC9123684 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02068-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2022] [Accepted: 05/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Due to respiratory motion, accurate radiotherapy delivery to thoracic and abdominal tumors is challenging. We aimed to quantify the ability of mechanical ventilation to reduce respiratory motion, by measuring diaphragm motion magnitudes in the same volunteers during free breathing (FB), mechanically regularized breathing (RB) at 22 breaths per minute (brpm), variation in mean diaphragm position across multiple deep inspiration breath-holds (DIBH) and diaphragm drift during single prolonged breath-holds (PBH) in two MRI sessions. Methods In two sessions, MRIs were acquired from fifteen healthy volunteers who were trained to be mechanically ventilated non-invasively We measured diaphragm motion amplitudes during FB and RB, the inter-quartile range (IQR) of the variation in average diaphragm position from one measurement over five consecutive DIBHs, and diaphragm cranial drift velocities during single PBHs from inhalation (PIBH) and exhalation (PEBH) breath-holds. Results RB significantly reduced the respiratory motion amplitude by 39%, from median (range) 20.9 (10.6–41.9) mm during FB to 12.8 (6.2–23.8) mm. The median IQR for variation in average diaphragm position over multiple DIBHs was 4.2 (1.0–23.6) mm. During single PIBHs with a median duration of 7.1 (2.0–11.1) minutes, the median diaphragm cranial drift velocity was 3.0 (0.4–6.5) mm/minute. For PEBH, the median duration was 5.8 (1.8–10.2) minutes with 4.4 (1.8–15.1) mm/minute diaphragm drift velocity. Conclusions Regularized breathing at a frequency of 22 brpm resulted in significantly smaller diaphragm motion amplitudes compared to free breathing. This would enable smaller treatment volumes in radiotherapy. Furthermore, prolonged breath-holding from inhalation and exhalation with median durations of six to seven minutes are feasible. Trial registration Medical Ethics Committee protocol NL.64693.018.18.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Z van Kesteren
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - J K Veldman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M J Parkes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M F Stevens
- Department of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P Balasupramaniam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J G van den Aardweg
- Department of Pulmonology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G van Tienhoven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A Bel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I W E M van Dijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Amstutz F, Fabiano S, Marc L, Weber DC, Lomax AJ, Unkelbach J, Zhang Y. Combined proton-photon therapy for non-small cell lung cancer. Med Phys 2022; 49:5374-5386. [PMID: 35561077 PMCID: PMC9544482 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15715] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2021] [Revised: 04/18/2022] [Accepted: 05/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still a challenging indication for conventional photon radiotherapy. Proton therapy has the potential to improve outcomes, but proton treatment slots remain a limited resource despite an increasing number of proton therapy facilities. This work investigates the potential benefits of optimally combined proton-photon therapy delivered using a fixed horizontal proton beam line in combination with a photon Linac, which could increase accessibility to proton therapy for such a patient cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS A treatment planning study has been conducted on a patient cohort of seven advanced NSCLC patients. Each patient had a planning CT and multiple repeated CTs from three different days and for different breath-holds on each day. Treatment plans for combined proton-photon therapy (CPPT) were calculated for individual patients by optimizing the combined cumulative dose on the initial planning CT only (non-adapted) as well as on each daily CT respectively (adapted). The impact of inter-fractional changes and/or breath-hold variability was then assessed on the repeat breath-hold CTs. Results were compared to plans for IMRT or IMPT alone, as well as against combined treatments assuming a proton gantry. Plan quality was assessed in terms of dosimetric, robustness and NTCP metrics. RESULTS Combined treatment plans improved plan quality compared to IMRT treatments, especially in regard to reductions of low and medium doses to organs at risk (OARs), which translated into lower NTCP estimates for three side effects. For most patients, combined treatments achieved results close to IMPT-only plans. Inter-fractional changes impact mainly the target coverage of combined and IMPT treatments, while OARs doses were less affected by these changes. With plan adaptation however, target coverage of combined treatments remained high even when taking variability between breath-holds into account. CONCLUSIONS Optimally combined proton-photon plans improve treatment plan quality compared to IMRT only, potentially reducing the risk of toxicity while also allowing to potentially increase accessibility to proton therapy for NSCLC patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florian Amstutz
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland.,Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Silvia Fabiano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Louise Marc
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Damien C Weber
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Antony J Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland.,Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Jan Unkelbach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Ye Zhang
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Pakela JM, Knopf A, Dong L, Rucinski A, Zou W. Management of Motion and Anatomical Variations in Charged Particle Therapy: Past, Present, and Into the Future. Front Oncol 2022; 12:806153. [PMID: 35356213 PMCID: PMC8959592 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.806153] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2021] [Accepted: 02/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
The major aim of radiation therapy is to provide curative or palliative treatment to cancerous malignancies while minimizing damage to healthy tissues. Charged particle radiotherapy utilizing carbon ions or protons is uniquely suited for this task due to its ability to achieve highly conformal dose distributions around the tumor volume. For these treatment modalities, uncertainties in the localization of patient anatomy due to inter- and intra-fractional motion present a heightened risk of undesired dose delivery. A diverse range of mitigation strategies have been developed and clinically implemented in various disease sites to monitor and correct for patient motion, but much work remains. This review provides an overview of current clinical practices for inter and intra-fractional motion management in charged particle therapy, including motion control, current imaging and motion tracking modalities, as well as treatment planning and delivery techniques. We also cover progress to date on emerging technologies including particle-based radiography imaging, novel treatment delivery methods such as tumor tracking and FLASH, and artificial intelligence and discuss their potential impact towards improving or increasing the challenge of motion mitigation in charged particle therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia M Pakela
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Antje Knopf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.,Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Cologne, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Lei Dong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Antoni Rucinski
- Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland
| | - Wei Zou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Pastor-Serrano O, Habraken S, Lathouwers D, Hoogeman M, Schaart D, Perkó Z. How should we model and evaluate breathing interplay effects in IMPT? Phys Med Biol 2021; 66. [PMID: 34757958 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac383f] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2021] [Accepted: 11/10/2021] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Breathing interplay effects in Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) arise from the interaction between target motion and the scanning beam. Assessing the detrimental effect of interplay and the clinical robustness of several mitigation techniques requires statistical evaluation procedures that take into account the variability of breathing during dose delivery. In this study, we present such a statistical method to model intra-fraction respiratory motion based on breathing signals and assess clinical relevant aspects related to the practical evaluation of interplay in IMPT such as how to model irregular breathing, how small breathing changes affect the final dose distribution, and what is the statistical power (number of different scenarios) required for trustworthy quantification of interplay effects. First, two data-driven methodologies to generate artificial patient-specific breathing signals are compared: a simple sinusoidal model, and a precise probabilistic deep learning model generating very realistic samples of patient breathing. Second, we investigate the highly fluctuating relationship between interplay doses and breathing parameters, showing that small changes in breathing period result in large local variations in the dose. Our results indicate that using a limited number of samples to calculate interplay statistics introduces a bigger error than using simple sinusoidal models based on patient parameters or disregarding breathing hysteresis during the evaluation. We illustrate the power of the presented statistical method by analyzing interplay robustness of 4DCT and Internal Target Volume (ITV) treatment plans for a 8 lung cancer patients, showing that, unlike 4DCT plans, even 33 fraction ITV plans systematically fail to fulfill robustness requirements.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oscar Pastor-Serrano
- Delft University of Technology, Department of Radiation Science and Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Steven Habraken
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,HollandPTC, Department of Radiation Oncology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Danny Lathouwers
- Delft University of Technology, Department of Radiation Science and Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Mischa Hoogeman
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,HollandPTC, Department of Radiation Oncology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Dennis Schaart
- Delft University of Technology, Department of Radiation Science and Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.,HollandPTC, Department of Radiation Oncology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Zoltán Perkó
- Delft University of Technology, Department of Radiation Science and Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Winterhalter C, Togno M, Nesteruk KP, Emert F, Psoroulas S, Vidal M, Meer D, Weber DC, Lomax A, Safai S. Faraday cup for commissioning and quality assurance for proton pencil beam scanning beams at conventional and ultra-high dose rates. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66. [PMID: 33906166 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/abfbf2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2020] [Accepted: 04/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Recently, proton therapy treatments delivered with ultra-high dose rates have been of high scientific interest, and the Faraday cup (FC) is a promising dosimetry tool for such experiments. Different institutes use different FC designs, and either a high voltage guard ring, or the combination of an electric and a magnetic field is employed to minimize the effect of secondary electrons. The authors first investigate these different approaches for beam energies of 70, 150, 230 and 250 MeV, magnetic fields between 0 and 24 mT and voltages between -1000 and 1000 V. When applying a magnetic field, the measured signal is independent of the guard ring voltage, indicating that this setting minimizes the effect of secondary electrons on the reading of the FC. Without magnetic field, applying the negative voltage however decreases the signal by an energy dependent factor up to 1.3% for the lowest energy tested and 0.4% for the highest energy, showing an energy dependent response. Next, the study demonstrates the application of the FC up to ultra-high dose rates. FC measurements with cyclotron currents up to 800 nA (dose rates of up to approximately 1000 Gy s-1) show that the FC is indeed dose rate independent. Then, the FC is applied to commission the primary gantry monitor for high dose rates. Finally, short-term reproducibility of the monitor calibration is quantified within single days, showing a standard deviation of 0.1% (one sigma). In conclusion, the FC is a promising, dose rate independent tool for dosimetry up to ultra-high dose rates. Caution is however necessary when using a FC without magnetic field, as a guard ring with high voltage alone can introduce an energy dependent signal offset.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Winterhalter
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland.,Physics Department, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - M Togno
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - K P Nesteruk
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - F Emert
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - S Psoroulas
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - M Vidal
- Institut Mediterraneen de Protontherapie, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France
| | - D Meer
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | - D C Weber
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland.,Radiation Oncology Department of the University Hospital of Bern, Switzerland.,Radiation Oncology Department of the University Hospital of Zürich, Switzerland
| | - A Lomax
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland.,Physics Department, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - S Safai
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Nenoff L, Matter M, Amaya EJ, Josipovic M, Knopf AC, Lomax AJ, Persson GF, Ribeiro CO, Visser S, Walser M, Weber DC, Zhang Y, Albertini F. Dosimetric influence of deformable image registration uncertainties on propagated structures for online daily adaptive proton therapy of lung cancer patients. Radiother Oncol 2021; 159:136-143. [PMID: 33771576 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.03.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2020] [Revised: 03/14/2021] [Accepted: 03/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE A major burden of introducing an online daily adaptive proton therapy (DAPT) workflow is the time and resources needed to correct the daily propagated contours. In this study, we evaluated the dosimetric impact of neglecting the online correction of the propagated contours in a DAPT workflow. MATERIAL AND METHODS For five NSCLC patients with nine repeated deep-inspiration breath-hold CTs, proton therapy plans were optimised on the planning CT to deliver 60 Gy-RBE in 30 fractions. All repeated CTs were registered with six different clinically used deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms to the corresponding planning CT. Structures were propagated rigidly and with each DIR algorithm and reference structures were contoured on each repeated CT. DAPT plans were optimised with the uncorrected, propagated structures (propagated DAPT doses) and on the reference structures (ideal DAPT doses), non-adapted doses were recalculated on all repeated CTs. RESULTS Due to anatomical changes occurring during the therapy, the clinical target volume (CTV) coverage of the non-adapted doses reduces on average by 9.7% (V95) compared to an ideal DAPT doses. For the propagated DAPT doses, the CTV coverage was always restored (average differences in the CTV V95 < 1% compared to the ideal DAPT doses). Hotspots were always reduced with any DAPT approach. CONCLUSION For the patients presented here, a benefit of online DAPT was shown, even if the daily optimisation is based on propagated structures with some residual uncertainties. However, a careful (offline) structure review is necessary and corrections can be included in an offline adaption.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lena Nenoff
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Center for Proton Therapy, Switzerland; Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland.
| | - Michael Matter
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Center for Proton Therapy, Switzerland; Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | - Mirjana Josipovic
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark
| | - Antje-Christin Knopf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Antony John Lomax
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Center for Proton Therapy, Switzerland; Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Gitte F Persson
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Oncology, Herlev-Gentofte Hospital Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Cássia O Ribeiro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Sabine Visser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Marc Walser
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Center for Proton Therapy, Switzerland
| | - Damien Charles Weber
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Center for Proton Therapy, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bern, Switzerland
| | - Ye Zhang
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Center for Proton Therapy, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|