Magnitude of Residual Internal Anatomy Motion on Heavy Charged Particle Dose Distribution in Respiratory Gated Lung Therapy

Patient Breathing Motion and Delivery Specifics Influencing the Robustness of a Proton Pancreas Irradiation

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 D_50% (ΔD_50%) for the clinical target volume (CTV) and the planning target volume (PTV) was below 2%, while the only outlier was observed for ΔD_98% 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 ΔD_2% 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.

Report of AAPM Task Group 290: Respiratory motion management for particle therapy

Dose uncertainty induced by respiratory motion remains a major concern for treating thoracic and abdominal lesions using particle beams. This Task Group report reviews the impact of tumor motion and dosimetric considerations in particle radiotherapy, current motion‐management techniques, and limitations for different particle‐beam delivery modes (i.e., passive scattering, uniform scanning, and pencil‐beam scanning). Furthermore, the report provides guidance and risk analysis for quality assurance of the motion‐management procedures to ensure consistency and accuracy, and discusses future development and emerging motion‐management strategies. This report supplements previously published AAPM report TG76, and considers aspects of motion management that are crucial to the accurate and safe delivery of particle‐beam therapy. To that end, this report produces general recommendations for commissioning and facility‐specific dosimetric characterization, motion assessment, treatment planning, active and passive motion‐management techniques, image guidance and related decision‐making, monitoring throughout therapy, and recommendations for vendors. Key among these recommendations are that: (1) facilities should perform thorough planning studies (using retrospective data) and develop standard operating procedures that address all aspects of therapy for any treatment site involving respiratory motion; (2) a risk‐based methodology should be adopted for quality management and ongoing process improvement.

The effectiveness of combined gating and re-scanning for treating mobile targets with proton spot scanning. An experimental and simulation-based investigation

Organ motion is one of the major obstacles in radiotherapy and charged particle therapy. Even more so, the theoretical advantages of dose distributions in scanned ion beam therapy may be lost due to the interplay between organ motion and beam scanning. Several techniques for dealing with this problem have been devised. In re-scanning, the target volume is scanned several times to average out the motion effects. In gating and breath-hold, dose is only delivered if the tumour is in a narrow window of position. Experiments have been performed to verify if gating and re-scanning are effective means of motion mitigation. Dose distributions were acquired in a lateral plane of a homogeneous phantom. For a spherical target volume and regular motion gating was sufficient. However, for realistic, irregular motion or a patient target volume, gating did not reduce the interplay effect to an acceptable level. Combining gating with re-scanning recovered the dose distributions. The simplest re-scanning approach, where a treatment plan is duplicated several times and applied in sequence, was not efficient. Simulations of different combinations of gating window sizes and re-scanning schemes revealed that reducing the gating window is the most efficient approach. However, very small gating windows are not robust for irregular motion.