1
|
A novel optimization algorithm for enabling dynamically collimated proton arc therapy. Sci Rep 2022; 12:21731. [PMID: 36526670 PMCID: PMC9758145 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-25774-2] [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: 05/12/2022] [Accepted: 12/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
The advent of energy-specific collimation in pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy has led to an improved lateral dose conformity for a variety of treatment sites, resulting in better healthy tissue sparing. Arc PBS delivery has also been proposed to enhance high-dose conformity about the intended target, reduce skin toxicity, and improve plan robustness. The goal of this work was to determine if the combination of proton arc and energy-specific collimation can generate better dose distributions as a logical next step to maximize the dosimetric advantages of proton therapy. Plans were optimized using a novel DyNamically collimated proton Arc (DNA) genetic optimization algorithm that was designed specifically for the application of proton arc therapy. A treatment planning comparison study was performed by generating an uncollimated two-field intensity modulated proton therapy and partial arc treatments and then replanning these treatments using energy-specific collimation as delivered by a dynamic collimation system, which is a novel collimation technology for PBS. As such, we refer to this novel treatment paradigm as Dynamically Collimated Proton Arc Therapy (DC-PAT). Arc deliveries achieved a superior target conformity and improved organ at risk (OAR) sparing relative to their two-field counterparts at the cost of an increase to the low-dose, high-volume region of the healthy brain. The incorporation of DC-PAT using the DNA optimizer was shown to further improve the tumor dose conformity. When compared to the uncollimated proton arc treatments, the mean dose to the 10mm of surrounding healthy tissue was reduced by 11.4% with the addition of collimation without meaningfully affecting the maximum skin dose (less than 1% change) relative to a multi-field treatment. In this case study, DC-PAT could better spare specific OARs while maintaining better target coverage compared to uncollimated proton arc treatments. While this work presents a proof-of-concept integration of two emerging technologies, the results are promising and suggest that the addition of these two techniques can lead to superior treatment plans warranting further development.
Collapse
|
2
|
Smith BR, M S NPN, M S TJG, M S KAP, Hill PM, Yu J, Gutiérrez AN, Md BGA, Hyer DE. The dosimetric enhancement of GRID profiles using an external collimator in pencil beam scanning proton therapy. Med Phys 2022; 49:2684-2698. [PMID: 35120278 PMCID: PMC9007854 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15523] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2021] [Revised: 11/22/2021] [Accepted: 01/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The radiobiological benefits afforded by spatially fractionated (GRID) radiation therapy pairs well with the dosimetric advantages of proton therapy. Inspired by the emergence of energy-layer specific collimators in pencil beam scanning (PBS), this work investigates how the spot spacing and collimation can be optimized to maximize the therapeutic gains of a GRID treatment while demonstrating the integration of a dynamic collimation system (DCS) within a commercial beam line to deliver GRID treatments and experimentally benchmark Monte Carlo calculation methods. METHODS GRID profiles were experimentally benchmarked using a clinical DCS prototype that was mounted to the nozzle of the IBA Dedicated Nozzle system. Integral depth dose (IDD) curves and lateral profiles were measured for uncollimated and GRID-collimated beamlets. A library of collimated GRID dose distributions were simulated by placing beamlets within a specified uniform grid and weighting the beamlets to achieve a volume-averaged tumor cell survival equivalent to an open field delivery. The healthy tissue sparing afforded by the GRID distribution was then estimated across a range of spot spacings and collimation widths, which were later optimized based on the radiosensitivity of the tumor cell line and the nominal spot size of the PBS system. This was accomplished by using validated models of the IBA Universal and Dedicated nozzles. RESULTS Excellent agreement was observed between the measured and simulated profiles. The IDDs matched above 98.7% when analyzed using a 1%/1 mm gamma criteria with some minor deviation observed near the Bragg peak for higher beamlet energies. Lateral profile distributions predicted using Monte Carlo methods agreed well with the measured profiles; a gamma passing rate of 95% or higher was observed for all in-depth profiles examined using a 3%/2 mm criteria. Additional collimation was shown to improve PBS GRID treatments by sharpening the lateral penumbra of the beamlets but creates a tradeoff between enhancing the valley-to-peak ratio of the GRID delivery and the dose-volume effect. The optimal collimation width and spot spacing changed as a function of the tumor cell radiosensitivity, dose, and spot size. In general, a spot spacing below 2.0 cm with a collimation less than 1.0 cm provided a superior dose distribution among the specific cases studied. CONCLUSIONS The ability to customize a GRID dose distribution using different collimation sizes and spot spacings is a useful advantage, especially to maximize the overall therapeutic benefit. In this regard, the capabilities of the DCS, and perhaps alternative dynamic collimators, can be used to enhance GRID treatments. Physical dose models calculated using Monte Carlo methods were experimentally benchmarked in water and were found to accurately predict the respective dose distributions of uncollimated and DCS-collimated GRID profiles. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Blake R Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, 52242 Iowa
| | - Nicholas P Nelson M S
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53705
| | | | | | - Patrick M Hill
- Department of Human Oncology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792
| | - Jen Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N. Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176
| | - Alonso N Gutiérrez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, 8900 N. Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176
| | - Bryan G Allen Md
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, 52242 Iowa
| | - Daniel E Hyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, 52242 Iowa
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Geoghegan T, Patwardhan K, Nelson N, Hill P, Flynn R, Smith B, Hyer D. Mechanical Characterization and Validation of the Dynamic Collimation System Prototype for Proton Radiotherapy. J Med Device 2022; 16:021013. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4053722] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2021] [Revised: 01/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Radiation therapy is integral to cancer treatments for more than half of patients. Pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy is the latest radiation therapy technology that uses a beam of protons that are magnetically steered and delivered to the tumor. One of the limiting factors of PBS accuracy is the beam cross-sectional size, similar to how a painter is only as accurate as the size of their brush allows. To address this, collimators can be used to shape the beam along the tumor edge to minimize the dose spread outside of the tumor. Under development is a dynamic collimation system (DCS) that uses two pairs of nickel trimmers that collimate the beam at the tumor periphery, limiting dose from spilling into healthy tissue. Herein, we establish the dosimetric and mechanical acceptance criteria for the DCS based on a functioning prototype and Monte Carlo methods, characterize the mechanical accuracy of the prototype, and validate that the acceptance criteria are met. From Monte Carlo simulations, we found that the trimmers must be positioned within ±0.5mm and ±1.0° for the dose distributions to pass our gamma analysis. We characterized the trimmer positioners at jerk values up to 400 m/s3 and validated their accuracy to 50 µm. We measured and validated the rotational trimmer accuracy to ±0.5° with a FARO® ScanArm. Lastly, we calculated time penalties associated with the DCS and found that the additional time required to treat one field using the DCS varied from 25-52 seconds.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theodore Geoghegan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics, 200 Hawkins Dr., Iowa City, IA 52242
| | - Kaustubh Patwardhan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics, 200 Hawkins Dr., Iowa City, IA 52242
| | - Nicholas Nelson
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1111 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53705 USA
| | - Patrick Hill
- Department of Human Oncology, School of Medicine & Public Health, University of Wisconsin - Madison, 600 Highland Avenue, K4/B82, Madison, WI 53792
| | - Ryan Flynn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics, 200 Hawkins Dr., Iowa City, IA 52242
| | - Blake Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics, 200 Hawkins Dr., Iowa City, IA 52242
| | - Daniel Hyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics, 200 Hawkins Dr., Iowa City, IA 52242
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hyer DE, Bennett LC, Geoghegan TJ, Bues M, Smith BR. Innovations and the Use of Collimators in the Delivery of Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:73-83. [PMID: 34285937 PMCID: PMC8270095 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00039.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2020] [Accepted: 10/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose The development of collimating technologies has become a recent focus in pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy to improve the target conformity and healthy tissue sparing through field-specific or energy-layer–specific collimation. Given the growing popularity of collimators for low-energy treatments, the purpose of this work was to summarize the recent literature that has focused on the efficacy of collimators for PBS and highlight the development of clinical and preclinical collimators. Materials and Methods The collimators presented in this work were organized into 3 categories: per-field apertures, multileaf collimators (MLCs), and sliding-bar collimators. For each case, the system design and planning methodologies are summarized and intercompared from their existing literature. Energy-specific collimation is still a new paradigm in PBS and the 2 specific collimators tailored toward PBS are presented including the dynamic collimation system (DCS) and the Mevion Adaptive Aperture. Results Collimation during PBS can improve the target conformity and associated healthy tissue and critical structure avoidance. Between energy-specific collimators and static apertures, static apertures have the poorest dose conformity owing to collimating only the largest projection of a target in the beam's eye view but still provide an improvement over uncollimated treatments. While an external collimator increases secondary neutron production, the benefit of collimating the primary beam appears to outweigh the risk. The greatest benefit has been observed for low- energy treatment sites. Conclusion The consensus from current literature supports the use of external collimators in PBS under certain conditions, namely low-energy treatments or where the nominal spot size is large. While many recent studies paint a supportive picture, it is also important to understand the limitations of collimation in PBS that are specific to each collimator type. The emergence and paradigm of energy-specific collimation holds many promises for PBS proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel E Hyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | - Laura C Bennett
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | | | - Martin Bues
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Blake R Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Smith BR, Pankuch M, Hyer DE, Culberson WS. Experimental and Monte Carlo characterization of a dynamic collimation system prototype for pencil beam scanning proton therapy. Med Phys 2021; 47:5343-5356. [PMID: 33411329 DOI: 10.1002/mp.14453] [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: 05/24/2020] [Revised: 08/02/2020] [Accepted: 08/03/2020] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE There has been a growing interest in the development of energy-specific collimators for low-energy pencil beam scanning (PBS) to reduce the lateral penumbra. One particular device that has been the focus of several recent published works is the dynamic collimation system (DCS), which provides energy-specific collimation by intercepting the scanned proton beam as it nears to target edge with a set of orthogonal trimmer blades. While several computational studies have shown that this dynamic collimator can provide additional healthy tissue sparing, there has not been any rigorous experimental work to benchmark the theoretical models used in these initial studies. Therefore, it was the purpose of this work to demonstrate an experimental method that could integrate an experimental prototype with a clinical PBS system and benchmark the Monte Carlo methods that have been used to model the DCS. METHODS An experimental DCS prototype was designed and built in house to actively collimate individual proton beamlets during PBS within a well-characterized experimental setup. Monte Carlo methods were initially used to assess construction tolerances and later benchmarked against measurements, including integral depth dose and lateral asymmetric beamlet profiles. The experimental apparatus and measurement geometry were modeled using MCNP6 benchmarked from measurements performed at the Northwestern Chicago Proton Center. RESULTS Gamma analysis tests were used to evaluate the agreement between the measured and simulated profiles with a strict 1 mm/1% criteria and 5% dose threshold. Excellent agreement was observed between the simulated and measured profiles, which included 1 mm/1% gamma analysis pass rates of at least 100% and 95% for the integral depth dose (IDD) profiles and lateral profiles, respectively. Differences in the relative profile shape were observed experimentally between beamlets collimated on- and off-axis, which was attributed to the partial transmission of the beam through an unfocused collimator. Exposure rates resulting from the activation of the device were monitored with survey meter measurements and were found to agree with Monte Carlo estimates of the exposure rate to within 20%. CONCLUSION A DCS prototype was constructed and integrated into a clinical dose delivery system. While the results of this work are not exhaustive, they demonstrate the effects of beam source divergence, device activation, and beamlet deflection during scanning, which were found to be successfully modeled using Monte Carlo methods and experimentally benchmarked. Excellent agreement was achieved between the simulated and measured lateral spot profiles of collimated beamlets delivered on- and off-axis in PBS. The Monte Carlo models adequately predicted the measured elevated plateau region in the integral depth-dose profiles from the low-energy scatter off the collimators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Blake R Smith
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53705, USA
| | - Mark Pankuch
- Division of Medical Physics, Northwestern Medicine Chicago Proton Center, 4455 Weaver Parkway, Warrenville, IL, 60555, USA
| | - Daniel E Hyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA
| | - Wesley S Culberson
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53705, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Smith BR, Hyer DE, Culberson WS. An investigation into the robustness of dynamically collimated proton therapy treatments. Med Phys 2020; 47:3545-3553. [PMID: 32338770 DOI: 10.1002/mp.14208] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2020] [Revised: 04/13/2020] [Accepted: 04/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the dosimetric robustness of dynamically collimated proton therapy (DCPT) treatment plans delivered using a dynamic collimation system (DCS) with respect to random uncertainties in beam spot and collimator position as well as systematic offsets in the DCS mounting alignment. This work also demonstrates a technique that can increase plan robustness while preserving target conformity. METHODS Variability in beam spot and collimator positioning can result in changes to a beamlet's dose distribution and incident fluence. The robustness of the DCPT treatment plans was evaluated for three intracranial treatment sites by modeling treatment variability as normally distributed random variables with standard deviations reflecting a clinical system. The simulated treatment plans were then recalculated and compared against their nominal, idealized dose distribution among several trials. It was hypothesized that a plan's robustness to these delivery variables could be reduced by restricting a trimmer's placement toward a beamlet's central axis during collimation. RESULTS By introducing a minimum trimmer offset of 1.5 mm, the variation of the planning target volume (PTV) D95% coverage was reduced to within 2% of the prescribed dose. The treatment plans with trimmers that were placed within 0.5 mm of a collimated beamlet's central axis resulted in the greatest healthy tissue sparing but deviations as high as 11.4% to the PTV D95% were observed. The nominal conformity of these treatment plans utilizing the 1.5 mm trimmer offset was also well maintained. For each treatment plan studied, the 90% conformity index remained within 6.25% of the conformity index achieved without a minimum trimmer offset, and the D50% of surrounding healthy tissue increased by no more than 3.1 Gy relative to a plan without a trimmer offset. CONCLUSIONS While DCPT can offer a significant reduction in healthy tissue irradiation, the results from this work indicate that special care must be taken to ensure proper PTV coverage amid uncertainties associated with this new treatment modality. A simple approach utilizing a minimum trimmer offset was able to preserve the majority of the target conformity and healthy tissue sparing the DCS technology affords while minimizing the uncertainties in this treatment approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Blake R Smith
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53705, USA
| | - Daniel E Hyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA
| | - Wesley S Culberson
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53705, USA
| |
Collapse
|