FLASH Radiotherapy Using Single-Energy Proton PBS Transmission Beams for Hypofractionation Liver Cancer: Dose and Dose Rate Quantification

Feasibility and constraints of Bragg peak FLASH proton therapy treatment planning

Introduction

FLASH proton therapy (FLASH-PT) requires ultra-high dose rate (≥ 40 Gy/s) protons to be delivered in a short timescale whilst conforming to a patient-specific target. This study investigates the feasibility and constraints of Bragg peak FLASH-PT treatment planning, and compares the in silico results produced to plans for intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT).

Materials and method

Bragg peak FLASH-PT and IMPT treatment plans were generated for bone (n=3), brain (n=3), and lung (n=4) targets using the MIROpt research treatment planning system and the Conformal FLASH library developed by Applications SA from the open-source version of UCLouvain. FLASH-PT beams were simulated using monoenergetic spot-scanned protons traversing through a conformal energy modulator, a range shifter, and an aperture. A dose rate constraint of ≥ 40 Gy/s was included in each FLASH-PT plan optimisation.

Results

Space limitations in the FLASH-PT adapted beam nozzle imposed a maximum target width constraint, excluding 4 cases from the study. FLASH-PT plans did not satisfy the imposed target dose constraints (D95% ≥ 95% and D2%≤ 105%) but achieved clinically acceptable doses to organs at risk (OARs). IMPT plans adhered to all target and OAR dose constraints. FLASH-PT plans showed a reduction in both target homogeneity (p < 0.001) and dose conformity (non-significant) compared to IMPT.

Conclusion

Without accounting for a sparing effect, IMPT plans were superior in target coverage, dose conformity, target homogeneity, and OAR sparing compared to FLASH-PT. Further research is warranted in treatment planning optimisation and beam delivery for clinical implementation of Bragg peak FLASH-PT.

Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Bragg Peak Conformal FLASH in Prostate Cancer Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

Bragg peak FLASH radiotherapy (RT) uses a distal tracking method to eliminate exit doses and can achieve superior OAR sparing. This study explores the application of this novel method in stereotactic body radiotherapy prostate FLASH-RT. An in-house platform was developed to enable intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) planning using a single-energy Bragg peak distal tracking method. The patients involved in the study were previously treated with proton stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using the pencil beam scanning (PBS) technique to 40 Gy in five fractions. FLASH plans were optimized using a four-beam arrangement to generate a dose distribution similar to the conventional opposing beams. All of the beams had a small angle of two degrees from the lateral direction to increase the dosimetry quality. Dose metrics were compared between the conventional PBS and the Bragg peak FLASH plans. The dose rate histogram (DRVH) and FLASH metrics of 40 Gy/s coverage (V40Gy/s) were investigated for the Bragg peak plans. There was no significant difference between the clinical and Bragg peak plans in rectum, bladder, femur heads, large bowel, and penile bulb dose metrics, except for Dmax. For the CTV, the FLASH plans resulted in a higher Dmax than the clinical plans (116.9% vs. 103.3%). For the rectum, the V40Gy/s reached 94% and 93% for 1 Gy dose thresholds in composite and single-field evaluations, respectively. Additionally, the FLASH ratio reached close to 100% after the application of the 5 Gy threshold in composite dose rate assessment. In conclusion, the Bragg peak distal tracking method can yield comparable plan quality in most OARs while preserving sufficient FLASH dose rate coverage, demonstrating that the ultra-high dose technique can be applied in prostate FLASH SBRT.

Extension of matRad with a modified microdosimetric kinetic model for carbon ion treatment planning: Comparison with Monte Carlo calculation

BACKGROUND

Treatment planning is essential for in silico particle therapy studies. matRad is an open-source research treatment planning system (TPS) based on the local effect model, which is a type of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) model.

PURPOSE

This study aims to implement a microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM) in matRad and develop an automation algorithm for Monte Carlo (MC) dose recalculation using the TOPAS code. In addition, we provide the developed MKM extension as open-source tool for users.

METHODS

Carbon beam data were generated using TOPAS MC pencil beam irradiation. We parameterized the TOPAS MC beam data with a double-Gaussian fit and modeled the integral depth doses and lateral spot profiles in the range of 100-430 MeV/u. To implement the MKM, the specific energy data table for Z = 1-6 and integrated depth-specific energy data were acquired based on the Kiefer-Chatterjee track structure and TOPAS MC simulation, respectively. Generic data were integrated into matRad, and treatment planning was performed based on these data. The optimized plan parameters were automatically converted into MC simulation input. Finally, the matRad TPS and TOPAS MC simulations were compared using the RBE-weighted dose calculation results. A comparison was made for three geometries: homogeneous water phantom, inhomogeneous phantom, and patient.

RESULTS

The RBE-weighted dose (DRBE ) distribution agreed with TOPAS MC within 1.8% for all target sizes for the homogeneous phantom. For the inhomogeneous phantom, the relative difference in the range of 80% of the prescription dose in the distal fall-off region (R80) between the matRad TPS and TOPAS MC was 0.6% (1.1 mm). DRBE between the TPS and the MC was within 4.0%. In the patient case, the difference in the dose-volume histogram parameters for the target volume between the TPS and the MC was less than 2.7%. The relative difference in R80 was 0.7% (1.2 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

The MKM was successfully implemented in matRad TPS, and the RBE-weighted dose was comparable to that of TOPAS MC. The MKM-implemented matRad was released as an open-source tool. Further investigations with MC simulations can be conducted using this tool, providing a good option for carbon ion research.

Transformative Technology for FLASH Radiation Therapy

The general concept of radiation therapy used in conventional cancer treatment is to increase the therapeutic index by creating a physical dose differential between tumors and normal tissues through precision dose targeting, image guidance, and radiation beams that deliver a radiation dose with high conformality, e.g., protons and ions. However, the treatment and cure are still limited by normal tissue radiation toxicity, with the corresponding side effects. A fundamentally different paradigm for increasing the therapeutic index of radiation therapy has emerged recently, supported by preclinical research, and based on the FLASH radiation effect. FLASH radiation therapy (FLASH-RT) is an ultra-high-dose-rate delivery of a therapeutic radiation dose within a fraction of a second. Experimental studies have shown that normal tissues seem to be universally spared at these high dose rates, whereas tumors are not. While dose delivery conditions to achieve a FLASH effect are not yet fully characterized, it is currently estimated that doses delivered in less than 200 ms produce normal-tissue-sparing effects, yet effectively kill tumor cells. Despite a great opportunity, there are many technical challenges for the accelerator community to create the required dose rates with novel compact accelerators to ensure the safe delivery of FLASH radiation beams.

An Integrated Physical Optimization Framework for Proton Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy FLASH Treatment Planning Allows Dose, Dose Rate, and Linear Energy Transfer Optimization Using Patient-Specific Ridge Filters

PURPOSE

Patient-specific ridge filters provide a passive means to modulate proton energy to obtain a conformal dose. Here we describe a new framework for optimization of filter design and spot maps to meet the unique demands of ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) radiation therapy. We demonstrate an integrated physical optimization Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) (IPO-IMPT) approach for optimization of dose, dose-averaged dose rate (DADR), and dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LET_d).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We developed an inverse planning software to design patient-specific ridge filters that spread the Bragg peak from a fixed-energy, 250-MeV beam to a proximal beam-specific planning target volume. The software defines patient-specific ridge filter pin shapes and uses a Monte Carlo calculation engine, based on Geant4, to provide dose and LET influence matrices. Plan optimization, using matRAD, accommodates the IPO-IMPT objective function considering dose, dose rate, and LET simultaneously with minimum monitor unit constraints. The framework enables design of both regularly spaced and sparse-optimized ridge filters, from which some pins are omitted to allow faster delivery and selective LET optimization. To demonstrate the framework, we designed ridge filters for 3 example patients with lung cancer and optimized the plans using IPO-IMPT.

RESULTS

The IPO-IMPT framework selectively spared the organs at risk by reducing LET and increasing dose rate, relative to IMPT planning. Sparse-optimized ridge filters were superior to regularly spaced ridge filters in dose rate. Depending on which parameter is prioritized, volume distributions and histograms for dose, DADR, and LET_d, using evaluation structures specific to heart, lung, and esophagus, show high levels of FLASH dose-rate coverage and/or reduced LET_d, while maintaining dose coverage within the beam specific planning target volume.

CONCLUSIONS

This proof-of-concept study demonstrates the feasibility of using an IPO-IMPT framework to accomplish proton FLASH stereotactic body proton therapy, accounting for dose, DADR, and LET_d simultaneously.

Proton Beam Therapy and Photon-Based Magnetic Resonance Image-Guided Radiation Therapy: The Next Frontiers of Radiation Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) has increasingly been utilized in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) due to technological advances with positive clinical outcomes. Innovations in EBRT include improved image guidance, motion management, treatment planning, and highly conformal techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Moreover, proton beam therapy (PBT) and magnetic resonance image-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) have expanded the capabilities of EBRT. PBT offers the advantage of minimizing low- and moderate-dose radiation to the surrounding normal tissue, thereby preserving uninvolved liver and allowing for dose escalation. MRgRT provides the advantage of improved soft tissue delineation compared to computerized tomography (CT) guidance. Additionally, MRgRT with online adaptive therapy is particularly useful for addressing motion not otherwise managed and reducing high-dose radiation to the normal tissue such as the stomach and bowel. PBT and online adaptive MRgRT are emerging technological advancements in EBRT that may provide a significant clinical benefit for patients with HCC.

Proton FLASH Radiotherapy for the Treatment of Symptomatic Bone Metastases: The FAST-01 Nonrandomized Trial

Importance

To our knowledge, there have been no clinical trials of ultra-high-dose-rate radiotherapy delivered at more than 40 Gy/sec, known as FLASH therapy, nor first-in-human use of proton FLASH.

Objectives

To assess the clinical workflow feasibility and treatment-related toxic effects of FLASH and pain relief at the treatment sites.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In the FAST-01 nonrandomized trial, participants treated at Cincinnati Children's/UC Health Proton Therapy Center underwent palliative FLASH radiotherapy to extremity bone metastases. Patients 18 years and older with 1 to 3 painful extremity bone metastases and life expectancies of 2 months or more were eligible. Patients were excluded if they had foot, hand, and wrist metastases; metastases locally treated in the 2 weeks prior; metal implants in the treatment field; known enhanced tissue radiosensitivity; and implanted devices at risk of malfunction with radiotherapy. One of 11 patients who consented was excluded based on eligibility. The end points were evaluated at 3 months posttreatment, and patients were followed up through death or loss to follow-up for toxic effects and pain assessments. Of the 10 included patients, 2 died after the 2-month follow-up but before the 3-month follow-up; 8 participants completed the 3-month evaluation. Data were collected from November 3, 2020, to January 28, 2022, and analyzed from January 28, 2022, to September 1, 2022.

Interventions

Bone metastases were treated on a FLASH-enabled (≥40 Gy/sec) proton radiotherapy system using a single-transmission proton beam. This is consistent with standard of care using the same prescription (8 Gy in a single fraction) but on a conventional-dose-rate (approximately 0.03 Gy/sec) photon radiotherapy system.

Main Outcome and Measures

Main outcomes included patient time on the treatment couch, device-related treatment delays, adverse events related to FLASH, patient-reported pain scores, and analgesic use.

Results

A total of 10 patients (age range, 27-81 years [median age, 63 years]; 5 [50%] male) underwent FLASH radiotherapy at 12 metastatic sites. There were no FLASH-related technical issues or delays. The average (range) time on the treatment couch was 18.9 (11-33) minutes per patient and 15.8 (11-22) minutes per treatment site. Median (range) follow-up was 4.8 (2.3-13.0) months. Adverse events were mild and consistent with conventional radiotherapy. Transient pain flares occurred in 4 of the 12 treated sites (33%). In 8 of the 12 sites (67%) patients reported pain relief, and in 6 of the 12 sites (50%) patients reported a complete response (no pain).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this nonrandomized trial, clinical workflow metrics, treatment efficacy, and safety data demonstrated that ultra-high-dose-rate proton FLASH radiotherapy was clinically feasible. The treatment efficacy and the profile of adverse events were comparable with those of standard-of-care radiotherapy. These findings support the further exploration of FLASH radiotherapy in patients with cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04592887.

Dose and dose rate objectives in Bragg peak and shoot-through beam orientation optimization for FLASH proton therapy

PURPOSE

The combined use of Bragg peak (BP) and shoot-through (ST) beams has previously been shown to increase the normal tissue volume receiving FLASH dose rates while maintaining dose conformality compared to conventional intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) methods. However, the fixed beam optimization method has not considered the effects of beam orientation on the dose and dose rates. To maximize the proton FLASH effect, here, we incorporate dose rate objectives into our beam orientation optimization framework.

METHODS

From our previously developed group-sparsity dose objectives, we add upper and lower dose rate terms using a surrogate dose-averaged dose rate definition and solve using the fast-iterative shrinking threshold algorithm. We compare the dosimetry for three head-and-neck cases between four techniques: (1) spread-out BP IMPT (BP), (2) dose rate optimization using BP beams only (BP-DR), (3) dose rate optimization using ST beams only (ST-DR), and (4) dose rate optimization using combined BP and ST (BPST-DR), with the goal of sparing organs at risk without loss of tumor coverage and maintaining high dose rate within a 10 mm region of interest (ROI) surrounding the clinical target volume (CTV).

RESULTS

For BP, BP-DR, ST-DR, and BPST-DR, CTV homogeneity index and Dmax were found to be on average 0.886, 0.867, 0.687, and 0.936 and 107%, 109%, 135%, and 101% of prescription, respectively. Although ST-DR plans were not able to meet dosimetric standards, BPST-DR was able to match or improve either maximum or mean dose in the right submandibular gland, left and right parotids, constrictors, larynx, and spinal cord compared to BP plans. Volume of ROIs receiving greater than 40 Gy/s ( V γ 0 ) ${V_{\gamma 0}})$ was 51.0%, 91.4%, 95.5%, and 92.1% on average.

CONCLUSIONS

The dose rate techniques, particularly BPST-DR, were able to significantly increase dose rate without compromising physical dose compared with BP. Our algorithm efficiently selects beams that are optimal for both dose and dose rate.

The role transition of radiotherapy for the treatment of liver cancer in the COVID-19 era

The uncontrollable COVID-19 crises in the SARS-CoV-2 high-prevalence areas have greatly disrupted the routine treatment of liver cancer and triggered a role transformation of radiotherapy for liver cancer. The weight of radiotherapy in the treatment algorithm for liver cancer has been enlarged by the COVID-19 pandemic, which is helpful for the optimal risk-benefit profile.

Dose rate and dose robustness for proton transmission FLASH-RT treatment in lung cancer

Purposes

To evaluate the plan quality and robustness of both dose and dose rate of proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) transmission FLASH delivery in lung cancer treatment.

Methods and materials

An in-house FLASH planning platform was used to optimize 10 lung cancer patients previously consecutively treated with proton stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to receive 3 and 5 transmission beams (Trx-3fds and Trx-5fds, respectively) to 34 Gy in a single fraction. Perturbation scenarios (n=12) for setup and range uncertainties (5 mm and 3.5%) were introduced, and dose-volume histogram and dose-rate-volume histogram bands were generated. Conventional proton SBRT clinical plans were used as a reference. RTOG 0915 dose metrics and 40 Gy/s dose rate coverage (V_40Gy/s) were used to assess the dose and dose rate robustness.

Results

Trx-5fds yields a comparable iCTV D_2% of 105.3%, whereas Trx-3fds resulted in inferior D_2% of 111.9% to the clinical SBRT plans with D_2% of 105.6% (p<0.05). Both Trx-5fds and Trx-3fds plans had slightly worse dose metrics to organs at risk than SBRT plans. Trx-5fds achieved superior dosimetry robustness for iCTV, esophagus, and spinal cord doses than both Trx-3fds and conventional SBRT plans. There was no significant difference in dose rate robustness for V_40Gy/s coverage between Trx-3fds and Trx-5fds. Dose rate distribution has similar distributions to the dose when perturbation exists.

Conclusion

Transmission plans yield overall modestly inferior plan quality compared to the conventional proton SBRT plans but provide improved robustness and the potential for a toxicity-sparing FLASH effect. By using more beams (5- versus 3-field), both dose and dose rate robustness for transmission plans can be achieved.

Advanced pencil beam scanning Bragg peak FLASH-RT delivery technique can enhance lung cancer planning treatment outcomes compared to conventional multiple-energy proton PBS techniques

PURPOSE

To investigate the dosimetric characteristics between an advanced proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) Bragg peak FLASH technique and conventional PBS planning technique in lung tumors. To evaluate the "FLASHness" of single-field in a multiple-field delivery scheme for a hypofractionation regimen and move a step forward to clinical application.

METHODS

Single-energy PBS Bragg peak FLASH treatment plans were optimized based on a novel Bragg peak tracking technique to enable Bragg peaks to stop at the distal edge of the target. Inverse treatment planning using multiple-field optimization (MFO) can achieve sufficient FLASH dose rate and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT)-equivalent dosimetric quality. The dose rate of organs-at-risk (OARs) and the target were calculated under FLASH machine parameters. A group of 10 consecutive lung SBRT patients was optimized to 34 Gy/fraction using a standard treatment of PBS technique with multiple energy layers as references to the Bragg peak plans. The dosimetric quality was compared between Bragg peak FLASH and conventional plans based on RTOG0915 dose metrics. FLASH dose rate ratios (V_40Gy/s) were calculated as a metric of the FLASH-sparing effect.

RESULTS

For higher dose thresholds, the Bragg peak plans achieved greater V_40Gy/s FLASH coverage for all major OARs. The V40Gy/s was close to 100% for all OARs when the dose thresholds were > 5 Gy for full plan and single beam evaluations. The less "FLASHness" region was associated with a low dose distribution, mainly occurring in the PBS field penumbra region. The conventional IMPT treatment plans yielded slightly superior target dose uniformity with a D_2%(%) of 108.02% versus that of Bragg peak 300 MU plans of 111.81% (p < 0.01) and that of Bragg peak 1200 MU plans of 115.95% (p < 0.01). No significant difference in dose metrics was found between Bragg peak and IMPT treatment plans for the spinal cord, esophagus, heart, or lung-GTV (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Hypofractionated lung Bragg peak plans can maintain comparable plan quality to conventional PBS while achieving sufficient FLASH dose rate coverage for major OARs for each field under the multiple-field delivery scheme. The novel Bragg peak FLASH technique has the potential to enhance lung cancer planning treatment outcomes compared to standard PBS treatment techniques.

Use of single-energy proton pencil beam scanning Bragg peak for intensity-modulated proton therapy FLASH treatment planning in liver hypofractionated radiation therapy

PURPOSE

The transmission proton FLASH technique delivers high doses to the normal tissue distal to the target, which is less conformal compared to the Bragg peak technique. To investigate FLASH RT planning using single-energy Bragg peak beams with a similar beam arrangement as clinical intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and to characterize the plan quality, dose sparing of organs-at-risk (OARs), and FLASH dose rate percentage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An in-house platform was developed to enable inverse IMPT-FLASH planning using single-energy Bragg peaks. A universal range shifter and range compensators were utilized to effectively align the Bragg peak to the distal edge of the target. Two different minimum MU settings of 400 and 800 MU/spot (Bragg-400MU and Bragg-800MU) plans were investigated on 10 consecutive hepatocellular carcinoma patients previously treated by IMPT-SBRT to evaluate the FLASH dose and dose rate coverage for OARs. The IMPT-FLASH using single-energy Bragg peaks delivered 50 Gy in 5 fractions with similar or identical beam arrangement to the clinical IMPT-SBRT plans. NRG GI003 dose constraint metrics were used. Three dose rate calculation methods, including average dose rate (ADR), dose threshold dose rate (DTDR), and dose-averaged dose rate (DADR), were all studied.

RESULTS

The novel spot map optimization can fulfill the inverse planning using single-energy Bragg peaks. All the Bragg peak FLASH plans achieved similar results for the liver-GTV D_mean and heart D_0.5cc , compared to SBRT-IMPT. The Bragg-800MU plans resulted in 18.3% higher CTV D_2cc compared with SBRT (p < 0.05), and no significant difference was found between Bragg-400MU and SBRT plans. For the CTV D_max , SBRT plans resulted in 10.3% (p<0.01) less than Bragg-400MU plans and 16.6% (p<0.01) less than Bragg-800MU plans. The Bragg-800MU plans generally achieved higher ADR, DADR, and DTDR dose rates than Bragg-400MU plans, and DADR mostly led to the highest V_40Gy/s compared to other dose rate calculation methods, whereas ADR led to the lowest. The lower dose rate portions in certain OARs are related to the lower dose deposited due to the farther distances from targets, especially in the penumbra of the beams.

CONCLUSION

Single-energy Bragg peak IMPT-FLASH plans eliminate the exit dose in normal tissues, maintaining comparable dose metrics to the conventional IMPT-SBRT plans while achieving a sufficient FLASH dose rate for liver cancers. This study demonstrates the feasibility of and sufficiently high dose rate when applying Bragg peak FLASH treatment for liver cancer hypofractionated FLASH therapy. The advancement of this novel method has the potential to optimize treatment for liver cancer patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.