1
|
Domingo Muñoz I, Van Hoey O, Parisi A, Bassler N, Grzanka L, De Saint-Hubert M, Vaniqui A, Olko P, Sądel M, Stolarczyk L, Vestergaard A, Jäkel O, Gardenali Yukihara E, Brage Christensen J. Assessment of fluence- and dose-averaged linear energy transfer with passive luminescence detectors in clinical proton beams. Phys Med Biol 2024; 69:135004. [PMID: 38774985 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad4e8e] [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: 12/15/2023] [Accepted: 05/21/2024] [Indexed: 06/22/2024]
Abstract
Objective.This work investigates the use of passive luminescence detectors to determine different types of averaged linear energy transfer (LET-) for the energies relevant to proton therapy. The experimental results are compared to reference values obtained from Monte Carlo simulations.Approach.Optically stimulated luminescence detectors (OSLDs), fluorescent nuclear track detectors (FNTDs), and two different groups of thermoluminescence detectors (TLDs) were irradiated at four different radiation qualities. For each irradiation, the fluence- (LET-f) and dose-averaged LET (LET-d) were determined. For both quantities, two sub-types of averages were calculated, either considering the contributions from primary and secondary protons or from all protons and heavier, charged particles. Both simulated and experimental data were used in combination with a phenomenological model to estimate the relative biological effectiveness (RBE).Main results.All types ofLET-could be assessed with the luminescence detectors. The experimental determination ofLET-fis in agreement with reference data obtained from simulations across all measurement techniques and types of averaging. On the other hand,LET-dcan present challenges as a radiation quality metric to describe the detector response in mixed particle fields. However, excluding secondaries heavier than protons from theLET-dcalculation, as their contribution to the luminescence is suppressed by ionization quenching, leads to equal accuracy betweenLET-fandLET-d. Assessment of RBE through the experimentally determinedLET-dvalues agrees with independently acquired reference values, indicating that the investigated detectors can determineLET-with sufficient accuracy for proton therapy.Significance.OSLDs, TLDs, and FNTDs can be used to determineLET-and RBE in proton therapy. With the capability to determine dose through ionization quenching corrections derived fromLET-, OSLDs and TLDs can simultaneously ascertain dose,LET-, and RBE. This makes passive detectors appealing for measurements in phantoms to facilitate validation of clinical treatment plans or experiments related to proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iván Domingo Muñoz
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Alessio Parisi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, United States of America
| | - Niels Bassler
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Leszek Grzanka
- Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences (IFJ PAN), Kraków, Poland
| | | | - Ana Vaniqui
- Belgian Nuclear Research Center (SCK CEN), Mol, Belgium
| | - Paweł Olko
- Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences (IFJ PAN), Kraków, Poland
| | - Michał Sądel
- Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences (IFJ PAN), Kraków, Poland
| | - Liliana Stolarczyk
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Anne Vestergaard
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Oliver Jäkel
- Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Jeppe Brage Christensen
- Department of Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI), Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Stokkevåg CH, Journy N, Vogelius IR, Howell RM, Hodgson D, Bentzen SM. Radiation Therapy Technology Advances and Mitigation of Subsequent Neoplasms in Childhood Cancer Survivors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 119:681-696. [PMID: 38430101 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.01.206] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2023] [Revised: 12/17/2023] [Accepted: 01/13/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE In this Pediatric Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic (PENTEC) vision paper, challenges and opportunities in the assessment of subsequent neoplasms (SNs) from radiation therapy (RT) are presented and discussed in the context of technology advancement. METHODS AND MATERIALS The paper discusses the current knowledge of SN risks associated with historic, contemporary, and future RT technologies. Opportunities for research and SN mitigation strategies in pediatric patients with cancer are reviewed. RESULTS Present experience with radiation carcinogenesis is from populations exposed during widely different scenarios. Knowledge gaps exist within clinical cohorts and follow-up; dose-response and volume effects; dose-rate and fractionation effects; radiation quality and proton/particle therapy; age considerations; susceptibility of specific tissues; and risks related to genetic predisposition. The biological mechanisms associated with local and patient-level risks are largely unknown. CONCLUSIONS Future cancer care is expected to involve several available RT technologies, necessitating evidence and strategies to assess the performance of competing treatments. It is essential to maximize the utilization of existing follow-up while planning for prospective data collection, including standardized registration of individual treatment information with linkage across patient databases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Camilla H Stokkevåg
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
| | - Neige Journy
- French National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM) Unit 1018, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, Paris Saclay University, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Ivan R Vogelius
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Centre for Cancer and Organ Diseases and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Rebecca M Howell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - David Hodgson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Søren M Bentzen
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Penfold SN, Santos AMC, Penfold M, Shierlaw E, Crain R. Single high-energy arc proton therapy with Bragg peak boost (SHARP). J Med Radiat Sci 2024; 71 Suppl 2:27-36. [PMID: 38400611 PMCID: PMC11011576 DOI: 10.1002/jmrs.769] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2023] [Accepted: 02/02/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Because of the co-location of critical organs at risk, base of skull tumours require steep dose gradients to achieve the prescribed dosimetric criteria. When available, proton beam therapy (PBT) is often considered a desirable modality for these cases, but in many instances, compromises in target coverage are still required to achieve critical organ at risk (OAR) tolerance doses. A number of techniques have been proposed to further improve the penumbra of PBT. In the current study, we propose a novel, collimator-free treatment planning technique that combines high-energy shoot-through proton beams with conventional Bragg peak spot placement. The small spot size of the high-energy pencil beams provides a sharp penumbra at the target boundary, and the Bragg peak spots provide a higher linear energy transfer (LET) boost to the target centre. METHODS Three base of skull chordoma patients were retrospectively planned with three different PBT treatment planning techniques: (1) conventional intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT); (2) high-energy proton arc therapy (HE-PAT); and (3) the novel technique combining HE-PAT and IMPT, referred to as single high-energy arc with Bragg peak boost (SHARP). The Monaco 6 treatment planning system was used. RESULTS SHARP was found to improve the PBT penumbra in the plane perpendicular to the HE-PAT beams. Minimal penumbra differences were observed in the plane of the HE-PAT beams. SHARP reduced dose-averaged LET to surrounding organs at risk. CONCLUSION A novel PBT treatment planning technique was successfully implemented. Initial results indicate the potential for SHARP to improve the penumbra of PBT treatments for base of skull tumours.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Scott N. Penfold
- Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy and ResearchAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
- Department of PhysicsUniversity of AdelaideAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
| | - Alexandre M. C. Santos
- Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy and ResearchAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
- Department of PhysicsUniversity of AdelaideAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
- Radiation OncologyCentral Adelaide Local Health NetworkAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
| | - Melanie Penfold
- Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy and ResearchAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
| | - Emma Shierlaw
- Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy and ResearchAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
- Radiation OncologyCentral Adelaide Local Health NetworkAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
| | - Rosanna Crain
- Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy and ResearchAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
- Radiation OncologyCentral Adelaide Local Health NetworkAdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wase V, Wuyckens S, Lee JA, Saint-Guillain M. The proton arc therapy treatment planning problem is NP-Hard. Comput Biol Med 2024; 171:108139. [PMID: 38394800 DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2024.108139] [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: 10/27/2023] [Revised: 01/12/2024] [Accepted: 02/12/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024]
Abstract
Proton arc therapy (PAT) is an advanced radiotherapy technique using charged particles in which the radiation device rotates continuously around the patient while irradiating the tumor. Compared to conventional, fixed-angle beam delivery mode, proton arc therapy has the potential to further improve the quality of cancer treatment by delivering accurate radiation dose to tumors while minimizing damage to surrounding healthy tissues. However, the computational complexity of treatment planning in PAT raises challenges as to its effective implementation. In this paper, we demonstrate that designing a PAT plan through algorithmic methods is a NP-hard problem (in fact, NP-complete), where the problem size is determined by the number of discrete irradiation angles from which the radiation can be delivered. This finding highlights the inherent complexity of PAT treatment planning and emphasizes the need for efficient algorithms and heuristics to address the challenges associated with optimizing the delivery of radiation doses in this context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Viktor Wase
- RaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
| | - Sophie Wuyckens
- UCLouvain, Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium
| | - John A Lee
- UCLouvain, Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Liu G, Zhao L, Li X, Zhang S, Dai S, Lu X, Ding X. A Novel Ultrahigh-Dose-Rate Proton Therapy Technology: Spot-Scanning Proton Arc Therapy + FLASH (SPLASH). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:730-737. [PMID: 37196836 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.05.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2022] [Revised: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 05/08/2023] [Indexed: 05/19/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To take full advantage of FLASH dose rate (40 Gy/s) and high-dose conformity, we introduce a novel optimization and delivery technique, the spot-scanning proton arc therapy (SPArc) + FLASH (SPLASH). METHODS AND MATERIALS SPLASH framework was implemented in an open-source proton planning platform (MatRad, Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center). It optimizes with the clinical dose-volume constraint based on dose distribution and the dose-average dose rate by minimizing the monitor unit constraint on spot weight and accelerator beam current sequentially, enabling the first dynamic arc therapy with voxel-based FLASH dose rate. This new optimization framework minimizes the overall cost function value combined with plan quality and voxel-based dose-rate constraints. Three representative cases (brain, liver, and prostate cancer) were used for testing purposes. Dose-volume histogram, dose-rate-volume histogram, and dose-rate map were compared among intensity modulated proton radiation therapy (IMPT), SPArc, and SPLASH. RESULTS SPLASH/SPArc could offer superior plan quality over IMPT in terms of dose conformity. The dose-rate-volume histogram results indicated SPLASH could significantly improve V40 Gy/s in the target and region of interest for all tested cases compared with SPArc and IMPT. The optimal beam current per spot is simultaneously generated, which is within the existing proton machine specifications in the research version (<200 nA). CONCLUSIONS SPLASH offers the first voxel-based ultradose-rate and high-dose conformity treatment using proton beam therapy. Such a technique has the potential to fit the needs of a broad range of disease sites and simplify clinical workflow without applying a patient-specific ridge filter, which has never before been demonstrated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gang Liu
- Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430023 China.
| | - Lewei Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Xiaoqiang Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Sheng Zhang
- Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430023 China.
| | - Shuyang Dai
- School of Mathematics and Statistics, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072 China
| | - Xiliang Lu
- School of Mathematics and Statistics, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072 China
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Henjum H, Tjelta J, Fjæra LF, Pilskog S, Stokkevåg CH, Lyngholm E, Handeland AH, Ytre-Hauge KS. Influence of beam pruning techniques on LET and RBE in proton arc therapy. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1155310. [PMID: 37731633 PMCID: PMC10508957 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1155310] [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: 01/31/2023] [Accepted: 08/15/2023] [Indexed: 09/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Proton arc therapy (PAT) is an emerging treatment modality that holds promise to improve target volume coverage and reduce linear energy transfer (LET) in organs at risk. We aimed to investigate if pruning the highest energy layers in each beam direction could increase the LET in the target and reduce LET in tissue and organs at risk (OAR) surrounding the target volume, thus reducing the relative biological effectiveness (RBE)-weighted dose and sparing healthy tissue. Methods PAT plans for a germinoma, an ependymoma and a rhabdomyosarcoma patient were created in the Eclipse treatment planning system with a prescribed dose of 54 Gy(RBE) using a constant RBE of 1.1 (RBE1.1). The PAT plans was pruned for high energy spots, creating several PAT plans with different amounts of pruning while maintaining tumor coverage, denoted PX-PAT plans, where X represents the amount of pruning. All plans were recalculated in the FLUKA Monte Carlo software, and the LET, physical dose, and variable RBE-weighted dose from the phenomenological Rørvik (ROR) model and an LET weighted dose (LWD) model were evaluated. Results and discussion For the germinoma case, all plans but the P6-PAT reduced the mean RBE-weighted dose to the surrounding healthy tissue compared to the PAT plan. The LET was increasingly higher within the PTV for each pruning iteration, where the mean LET from the P6-PAT plan was 1.5 keV / μm higher than for the PAT plan, while the P4- and P5-PAT plans provided an increase of 0.4 and 0.7 keV / μm , respectively. The other plans increased the LET by a smaller margin compared to the PAT plan. Likewise, the LET values to the healthy tissue were reduced for each degree of pruning. Similar results were found for the ependymoma and the rhabdomyosarcoma case. We demonstrated a PAT pruning technique that can increase both LET and RBE in the target volume and at the same time decreased values in healthy tissue, without affecting the target volume dose coverage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helge Henjum
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Johannes Tjelta
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Lars Fredrik Fjæra
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Sara Pilskog
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Camilla H. Stokkevåg
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Erlend Lyngholm
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Andreas H. Handeland
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Oncology and Medical Physics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
McIntyre M, Wilson P, Gorayski P, Bezak E. A Systematic Review of LET-Guided Treatment Plan Optimisation in Proton Therapy: Identifying the Current State and Future Needs. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:4268. [PMID: 37686544 PMCID: PMC10486456 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174268] [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: 07/31/2023] [Revised: 08/16/2023] [Accepted: 08/17/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
The well-known clinical benefits of proton therapy are achieved through higher target-conformality and normal tissue sparing than conventional radiotherapy. However, there is an increased sensitivity to uncertainties in patient motion/setup, proton range and radiobiological effect. Although recent efforts have mitigated some uncertainties, radiobiological effect remains unresolved due to a lack of clinical data for relevant endpoints. Therefore, RBE optimisations may be currently unsuitable for clinical treatment planning. LET optimisation is a novel method that substitutes RBE with LET, shifting LET hotspots outside critical structures. This review outlines the current status of LET optimisation in proton therapy, highlighting knowledge gaps and possible future research. Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a search of the MEDLINE® and Scopus databases was performed in July 2023, identifying 70 relevant articles. Generally, LET optimisation methods achieved their treatment objectives; however, clinical benefit is patient-dependent. Inconsistencies in the reported data suggest further testing is required to identify therapeutically favourable methods. We discuss the methods which are suitable for near-future clinical deployment, with fast computation times and compatibility with existing treatment protocols. Although there is some clinical evidence of a correlation between high LET and adverse effects, further developments are needed to inform future patient selection protocols for widespread application of LET optimisation in proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa McIntyre
- Allied Health & Human Performance Academic Unit, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
| | - Puthenparampil Wilson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
- UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
| | - Peter Gorayski
- Allied Health & Human Performance Academic Unit, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
- Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy and Research, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
| | - Eva Bezak
- Allied Health & Human Performance Academic Unit, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
- Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Boopathi E, Den RB, Thangavel C. Innate Immune System in the Context of Radiation Therapy for Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3972. [PMID: 37568788 PMCID: PMC10417569 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15153972] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2023] [Revised: 07/24/2023] [Accepted: 07/27/2023] [Indexed: 08/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Radiation therapy (RT) remains an integral component of modern oncology care, with most cancer patients receiving radiation as a part of their treatment plan. The main goal of ionizing RT is to control the local tumor burden by inducing DNA damage and apoptosis within the tumor cells. The advancement in RT, including intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), stereotactic body RT (SBRT), image-guided RT, and proton therapy, have increased the efficacy of RT, equipping clinicians with techniques to ensure precise and safe administration of radiation doses to tumor cells. In this review, we present the technological advancement in various types of RT methods and highlight their clinical utility and associated limitations. This review provides insights into how RT modulates innate immune signaling and the key players involved in modulating innate immune responses, which have not been well documented earlier. Apoptosis of cancer cells following RT triggers immune systems that contribute to the eradication of tumors through innate and adoptive immunity. The innate immune system consists of various cell types, including macrophages, dendritic cells, and natural killer cells, which serve as key mediators of innate immunity in response to RT. This review will concentrate on the significance of the innate myeloid and lymphoid lineages in anti-tumorigenic processes triggered by RT. Furthermore, we will explore essential strategies to enhance RT efficacy. This review can serve as a platform for researchers to comprehend the clinical application and limitations of various RT methods and provides insights into how RT modulates innate immune signaling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ettickan Boopathi
- Center for Translational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA
| | - Robert B. Den
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA;
| | - Chellappagounder Thangavel
- Center for Translational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Cao W, Li Y, Zhang X, Poenisch F, Yepes P, Sahoo N, Grosshans D, McGovern S, Gunn GB, Frank SJ, Zhu XR. Intensity modulated proton arc therapy via geometry-based energy selection for ependymoma. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2023:e13954. [PMID: 36913484 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13954] [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: 10/20/2022] [Revised: 02/06/2023] [Accepted: 02/14/2023] [Indexed: 03/14/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We developed and tested a novel method of creating intensity modulated proton arc therapy (IMPAT) plans that uses computing resources similar to those for regular intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans and may offer a dosimetric benefit for patients with ependymoma or similar tumor geometries. METHODS Our IMPAT planning method consists of a geometry-based energy selection step with major scanning spot contributions as inputs computed using ray-tracing and single-Gaussian approximation of lateral spot profiles. Based on the geometric relation of scanning spots and dose voxels, our energy selection module selects a minimum set of energy layers at each gantry angle such that each target voxel is covered by sufficient scanning spots as specified by the planner, with dose contributions above the specified threshold. Finally, IMPAT plans are generated by robustly optimizing scanning spots of the selected energy layers using a commercial proton treatment planning system (TPS). The IMPAT plan quality was assessed for four ependymoma patients. Reference three-field IMPT plans were created with similar planning objective functions and compared with the IMPAT plans. RESULTS In all plans, the prescribed dose covered 95% of the clinical target volume (CTV) while maintaining similar maximum doses for the brainstem. While IMPAT and IMPT achieved comparable plan robustness, the IMPAT plans achieved better homogeneity and conformity than the IMPT plans. The IMPAT plans also exhibited higher relative biological effectiveness (RBE) enhancement than did the corresponding reference IMPT plans for the CTV in all four patients and brainstem in three of them. CONCLUSIONS The proposed method demonstrated potential as an efficient technique for IMPAT planning and may offer a dosimetric benefit for patients with ependymoma or tumors in close proximity to critical organs. IMPAT plans created using this method had elevated RBE enhancement associated with increased linear energy transfer (LET) in both targets and abutting critical organs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wenhua Cao
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Yupeng Li
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Xiaodong Zhang
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Falk Poenisch
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Pablo Yepes
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.,Department of Physics and Astronomy, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Narayan Sahoo
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - David Grosshans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Susan McGovern
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - G Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Xiaorong R Zhu
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
de Jong BA, Battinelli C, Free J, Wagenaar D, Engwall E, Janssens G, Langendijk JA, Korevaar EW, Both S. Spot scanning proton arc therapy reduces toxicity in oropharyngeal cancer patients. Med Phys 2023; 50:1305-1317. [PMID: 36373893 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16098] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2021] [Revised: 07/28/2022] [Accepted: 10/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proton arc technology has recently shown dosimetric gains for various treatment indications. The increased number of beams and energy layers (ELs) in proton arc plans, increases the degrees of freedom in plan optimization and thereby flexibility to spare dose in organs at risk (OARs). A relationship exists between dosimetric plan quality, delivery efficiency, the number of ELs -and beams in a proton arc plan. PURPOSE This work aims to investigate the effect of the number of beams and ELs in a proton arc plan, on toxicity and delivery time for oropharyngeal cancer patients (OPC) selected for intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) based on the Dutch model-based approach. METHODS The EL reduction algorithm iteratively selects ELs from beams equidistantly spaced over a 360° arc. The beams in the final plan may contain multiple ELs, making them suited for static delivery on the studied treatment machine. The produced plans can therefore be called "step and shoot" proton arc plans. The number of beams and ELs were varied to determine the relationship with the planning cost function value, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and delivery time. Proton arc plans with robust target coverage and optimal energy layer reduction (ELR) settings to reduce NTCP, were generated for 10 OPC patients. Proton arc plans were compared to clinical volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and IMPT plans in terms of integral dose, OAR dose, NTCP for xerostomia and dysphagia and delivery time. Furthermore, dose-weighted average linear energy transfer (LETd ) distributions were compared between the IMPT and proton arc plans. A dry run delivery of a plan containing 20 beams and 360 ELs was performed to evaluate delivery time and accuracy. RESULTS We found 360 ELs distributed over 30 beams generated proton arc plans with near minimal expected plan toxicity. Relative to corresponding IMPT and VMAT plans, an average reduction of 21 ± 3% and 58 ± 10% in integral dose was observed. D m e a n $_{mean}$ was reduced most in the pharyngeal constrictor muscle (PCM) medius structure, with on average 9.0 ± 4.2 Gy(RBE) (p = 0.0002) compared to the clinical IMPT plans. The average NTCP for grade≥2 and grade≥3 xerostomia at 6 months after treatment significantly decreased with 4.7 ± 1.8% (p = 0.002) and 1.7 ± 0.8% (p = 0.002), respectively, while the average NTCP for grade≥2 and grade≥3 dysphagia decreased with 4.4 ± 2.9% (p = 0.002) and 0.9 ± 0.4% (p = 0.002), respectively, increasing the benefit of protons relative to VMAT. For a "step and shoot" proton arc delivery with auto beam sequencing the estimated delivery time is 11 min, similar to the delivery time of a 6-field IMPT treatment. Gamma analysis between the planned and delivered dose distribution resulted in a 99.99% pass rate using 1mm/1% dose difference/distance to agreement criteria. CONCLUSIONS "Step and shoot" proton arc demonstrates potential to further reduce toxicity compared to IMPT and VMAT in OPC treatment. By employing 360 ELs and 30 beams in the proposed ELR method, delivery time can reach clinically acceptable levels without compromising plan toxicity when automatic beam sequencing is available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bas A de Jong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jeffrey Free
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Dirk Wagenaar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Erik Engwall
- Research and Development, RaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Guillaume Janssens
- Research and Development, Ion Beam Applications SA, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
| | - Johannes A Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Erik W Korevaar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Stefan Both
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Wuyckens S, Zhao L, Saint-Guillain M, Janssens G, Sterpin E, Souris K, Ding X, Lee JA. Bi-criteria Pareto optimization to balance irradiation time and dosimetric objectives in proton arc therapy. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67. [PMID: 36541505 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aca5e9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2022] [Accepted: 11/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
Objective. Proton arc therapy (PAT) is a new delivery technique that exploits the continuous rotation of the gantry to distribute the therapeutic dose over many angular windows instead of using a few static fields, as in conventional (intensity-modulated) proton therapy. Although coming along with many potential clinical and dosimetric benefits, PAT has also raised a new optimization challenge. In addition to the dosimetric goals, the beam delivery time (BDT) needs to be considered in the objective function. Considering this bi-objective formulation, the task of finding a good compromise with appropriate weighting factors can turn out to be cumbersome.Approach. We have computed Pareto-optimal plans for three disease sites: a brain, a lung, and a liver, following a method of iteratively choosing weight vectors to approximate the Pareto front with few points. Mixed-integer programming (MIP) was selected to state the bi-criteria PAT problem and to find Pareto optimal points with a suited solver.Main results. The trade-offs between plan quality and beam irradiation time (staticBDT) are investigated by inspecting three plans from the Pareto front. The latter are carefully picked to demonstrate significant differences in dose distribution and delivery time depending on their location on the frontier. The results were benchmarked against IMPT and SPArc plans showing the strength of degrees of freedom coming along with MIP optimization.Significance. This paper presents for the first time the application of bi-criteria optimization to the PAT problem, which eventually permits the planners to select the best treatment strategy according to the patient conditions and clinical resources available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie Wuyckens
- UCLouvain, Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Lewei Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, MI, United States of America
| | | | | | - Edmond Sterpin
- UCLouvain, Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium.,KULeuven, Department of Oncology, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kevin Souris
- UCLouvain, Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium.,Ion Beam Applications SA, Louvain-La-Neuve, Belgium
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, MI, United States of America
| | - John A Lee
- UCLouvain, Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Yi B, Mossahebi S, Modiri A, Nichols EM, Guerrero M, Lamichhane N, Mohindra P. Proton Arc Therapy vs Interstitial HDR Brachytherapy in Gynecologic Cancer with Parametrial/pelvic Side Wall Extension. Int J Part Ther 2022; 9:31-39. [PMID: 36060416 PMCID: PMC9415748 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-22-00013.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2022] [Accepted: 05/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To investigate whether volumetric-modulated proton arc therapy (VPAT) plans generate comparable doses to organs at risk (OARs) compared with interstitial high–dose-rate (iHDR) brachytherapy for patients with gynecologic cancer with disease extension to parametrial/pelvic side wall, who are not eligible for the aggressive procedure. Materials and Methods VPAT delivers proton arc beams by modulated energies at the beam nozzle while maintaining the same incident energy to the gantry during the arc rotation. Plans of 10 patients previously treated with iHDR brachytherapy for high-risk clinical treatment volumes (HRCTV; 31.8–110.6 cm3; lateral dimensions, 4.2–5.6 cm) were selected and compared with VPAT plans. VPAT plans for each patient were designed using a 152- to 245-MeV range of energy-modulated proton beams. Results HRCTV coverage of the VPAT plans was comparable to that of the iHDR plans, with V150% showing no statistical differences. On average, the V100% and V90% of VPAT plans were higher than those of the iHDR plans, 95.0% vs 91.9% (P = .02) and 98.6% vs 97.5% (P = .02), respectively. D100 was also 17% higher for the VPAT plans (P = .03). On average, the D2cm3 of bladder, rectum, and small bowels in the VPAT plans were considerably lower than those in iHDR plans (by 17.4%, 35.2%, and 65.6%, respectively; P < .05 for all OARs). Conclusion VPAT–generated plans were dosimetrically superior to those with HDR brachytherapy with interstitial needles for locally advanced gynecologic cancer with parametrial/pelvic side wall disease extension. Dosimetrically, VPAT provides a noninvasive alternative to iHDR brachytherapy with a superior dosimetric profile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- ByongYong Yi
- 1 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, MD, USA
- 2 Proton Treatment Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Sina Mossahebi
- 1 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, MD, USA
- 2 Proton Treatment Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Arezoo Modiri
- 1 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, MD, USA
| | - Elizabeth M. Nichols
- 1 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, MD, USA
- 2 Proton Treatment Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Mariana Guerrero
- 1 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, MD, USA
| | - Narottam Lamichhane
- 1 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, MD, USA
| | - Pranshu Mohindra
- 1 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, MD, USA
- 2 Proton Treatment Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Mein S, Kopp B, Tessonnier T, Liermann J, Abdollahi A, Debus J, Haberer T, Mairani A. Spot-scanning hadron arc (SHArc) therapy: A proof of concept using single and multi-ion strategies with helium, carbon, oxygen and neon ions. Med Phys 2022; 49:6082-6097. [PMID: 35717613 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15800] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2022] [Revised: 06/03/2022] [Accepted: 06/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To present particle arc therapy treatments using single and multi-ion therapy optimization strategies with helium (4 He), carbon (12 C), oxygen (16 O) and neon (20 Ne) ion beams. METHODS AND MATERIALS An optimization procedure and workflow were devised for spot-scanning hadron arc therapy (SHArc) treatment planning in the PRECISE (PaRticle thErapy using single and Combined Ion optimization StratEgies) treatment planning system (TPS). Physical and biological beam models were developed for helium, carbon, oxygen and neon ions via FLUKA MC simulation. SHArc treatments were optimized using both single ion (12 C, 16 O, or 20 Ne) and multi-ion therapy (16 O+4 He or 20 Ne+4 He) applying variable relative biological effectiveness (RBE) modeling using a modified microdosimetric kinetic model (mMKM) with (α/β)x values of 2Gy, 5Gy and 3.1Gy respectively, for glioblastoma, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and prostate adenocarcinoma patient cases. Dose, effective dose, linear energy transfer (LET) and RBE were computed with the GPU-accelerated dose engine FRoG and dosimetric/biophysical attributes were evaluated in the context of conventional particle and photon-based therapies (e.g., volumetric modulated arc therapy [VMAT]). RESULTS All SHArc plans met the target optimization goals (3GyRBE) and demonstrated increased target conformity and substantially lower low-dose bath to surrounding normal tissues than VMAT. SHArc plans using a single ion species (12 C, 16 O, or 20 Ne) exhibited favorable LET distributions with the highest-LET components centralized in the target volume, with values ranging from ∼80-170keV/μm, ∼130-220keV/μm and ∼180-350keV/μm, for 12 C, 16 O, or 20 Ne, respectively, exceeding mean target LET of conventional particle therapy (12 C:∼60, 16 O:∼78 20 Ne:∼100 keV/μm). Multi-ion therapy with SHArc delivery (SHArcMIT ) provided a similar level of target LET enhancement as SHArc compared to conventional planning, however, with additional benefits of homogenous physical dose and RBE distributions. CONCLUSION Here, we demonstrate that arc delivery of light and heavy ion beams, using either a single ion species (12 C, 16 O, or 20 Ne) or combining two ions in a single fraction (16 O+4 He or 20 Ne+4 He), affords enhanced physical and biological distributions (e.g., LET) compared with conventional delivery with photons or particle beams. SHArc marks the first single and multi-ion arc therapy treatment optimization approach using light and heavy ions. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stewart Mein
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Benedikt Kopp
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Thomas Tessonnier
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Jakob Liermann
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Amir Abdollahi
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Thomas Haberer
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Andrea Mairani
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.,National Centre of Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), Medical Physics, Pavia, 27100, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Biological Dose Optimization for Particle Arc Therapy using Helium and Carbon Ions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 114:334-348. [PMID: 35490991 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.04.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2021] [Revised: 04/11/2022] [Accepted: 04/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To present biological dose optimization for particle arc therapy using helium and carbon ions. METHODS Treatment plan planning and optimization procedures were developed for spot-scanning hadron arc (SHArc) delivery using the RayStation TPS and a GPU-accelerated dose engine (†TPS-XXX). The SHArc optimization algorithm is applicable for charged particle beams and determines angle-dependencies for spot/energy selection with three main initiatives: i) achieve standard clinical optimization goals and constraints for target and OARs, ii) target dose robustness and iii) increasing LET in the target volume. Three patient cases previously treated at the †INSTITUTION-XXX were selected for evaluation of conventional versus arc delivery for the two clinical particle beams (helium [4He] and carbon [12C] ions): glioblastoma, prostate-adenocarcinoma and skull-base chordoma. Biological dose and dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd) distributions for SHArc were evaluated against conventional planning techniques (VMAT and IMPT2F) applying the modified microdosimetric kinetic model (mMKM) for considering bio-effect with (α/β)x=2Gy. Clinical viability and deliverability were assessed via evaluation of plan quality, robustness and irradiation time. RESULTS For all investigated patient cases, SHArc treatment optimizations met planning goals and constraints for target coverage and OARs, exhibiting acceptable target coverage and reduced normal tissue volumes with effective dose >10GyRBE compared to conventional 2F planning. For carbon ions, LETd was increased in the target volume from ∼40-60keV/µm to ∼80-140keV/µm for SHArc compared to conventional treatments. Favorable LETd distributions were possible with the SHArc approach, with maximum LETd in CTV/GTV and potential reductions of high-LET regions in normal tissues and OARs. Compared to VMAT, SHArc affords substantial reductions in normal tissue dose (40-70%). CONCLUSION SHArc therapy offers potential treatment benefits such as increased normal tissue sparing from higher doses >10GyRBE, enhanced target LETd, and potential reduction in high-LET components in OARs. Findings justify further development of robust SHArc treatment planning towards potential clinical translation.
Collapse
|
15
|
Engwall E, Battinelli C, Wase V, Marthin O, Glimelius L, Bokrantz R, Andersson B, Fredriksson A. Fast robust optimization of proton PBS arc therapy plans using early energy layer selection and spot assignment. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac55a6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2021] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Objective. Proton pencil-beam scanning arcs (PBS arcs) have gained much attention during the past years, due to its potential for increased clinical benefit compared to conventional proton therapy. Previous studies on PBS arcs have primarily been focused on plan quality, and lately efforts have been made to reduce the delivery time. However, the methods presented so far suffer from slow optimization processes. Approach. We present a new method for fast robust optimization of PBS arc plans. The new method assigns a single energy layer per discretized direction prior to spot weight optimization and reduces the number of initial spots considerably compared to conventional methods. We used the new method for three prostate cancer patients with a prescribed dose to the CTV of 77 GyRBE in 35 fractions. For each of the patients, four plans were created: 2-beam IMPT (2IMPT), 1-beam PBS arc (1Arc), 1-beam PBS arc without focus on reducing upward energy jumps (1Arc_unseq) and two-beam PBS arc (2Arc). Main results. All PBS arc plans show a reduced integral dose compared to their respective 2IMPT plans. In the nominal case, the average CTV D98 and D2 metrics over the three patients were best for the 2Arc, followed by 2IMPT (
D
98
¯
/
D
2
¯
:
7523/7986 cGyRBE (2IMPT), 7478/7984 cGy (1Arc), 7486/7951 cGy (1Arc_unseq), 7531/7951 cGyRBE (2Arc)). The average robust target coverage in terms of V95 of the voxelwise minimum dose distribution (evaluated over 42 scenarios) was: 98.0% (2IMPT), 88.6% (1Arc), 92.5% (1Arc_unseq), 97.3% (2Arc). The optimization time, including spot selection and spot dose computation, is longest for the 2Arc plan, but is below 6 min for all patients. The maximum estimated delivery time for all types of arc plans is just above 5 min Significance. The ability for efficient treatment planning constitutes an important step towards clinical introduction of proton PBS arcs.
Collapse
|
16
|
Yap J, De Franco A, Sheehy S. Future Developments in Charged Particle Therapy: Improving Beam Delivery for Efficiency and Efficacy. Front Oncol 2021; 11:780025. [PMID: 34956897 PMCID: PMC8697351 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.780025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/16/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
The physical and clinical benefits of charged particle therapy (CPT) are well recognized. However, the availability of CPT and complete exploitation of dosimetric advantages are still limited by high facility costs and technological challenges. There are extensive ongoing efforts to improve upon these, which will lead to greater accessibility, superior delivery, and therefore better treatment outcomes. Yet, the issue of cost remains a primary hurdle as utility of CPT is largely driven by the affordability, complexity and performance of current technology. Modern delivery techniques are necessary but limited by extended treatment times. Several of these aspects can be addressed by developments in the beam delivery system (BDS) which determines the overall shaping and timing capabilities enabling high quality treatments. The energy layer switching time (ELST) is a limiting constraint of the BDS and a determinant of the beam delivery time (BDT), along with the accelerator and other factors. This review evaluates the delivery process in detail, presenting the limitations and developments for the BDS and related accelerator technology, toward decreasing the BDT. As extended BDT impacts motion and has dosimetric implications for treatment, we discuss avenues to minimize the ELST and overview the clinical benefits and feasibility of a large energy acceptance BDS. These developments support the possibility of advanced modalities and faster delivery for a greater range of treatment indications which could also further reduce costs. Further work to realize methodologies such as volumetric rescanning, FLASH, arc, multi-ion and online image guided therapies are discussed. In this review we examine how increased treatment efficiency and efficacy could be achieved with improvements in beam delivery and how this could lead to faster and higher quality treatments for the future of CPT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacinta Yap
- School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Andrea De Franco
- IFMIF Accelerator Development Group, Rokkasho Fusion Institute, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, Aomori, Japan
| | - Suzie Sheehy
- School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Molinelli S, Magro G, Mairani A, Allajbej A, Mirandola A, Chalaszczyk A, Imparato S, Ciocca M, Fiore MR, Orlandi E. How LEM-based RBE and dose-averaged LET affected clinical outcomes of sacral chordoma patients treated with carbon ion radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2021; 163:209-214. [PMID: 34506829 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2021] [Revised: 08/26/2021] [Accepted: 08/27/2021] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE To understand the role of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) and dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd) distributions in the treatment of sacral chordoma (SC) patients with carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT). MATERIAL/METHODS Clinical plans of 50 SC patients consecutively treated before August 2018 with a local effect model-based optimization were recalculated with the modified microdosimetric kinetic RBE model (mMKM). Twenty-six patients were classified as progressive disease and the relapse volume was contoured on the corresponding follow-up diagnostic sequence. The remaining 24 patients populated the control group. Target prescription dose (DRBE|50%), near-to-minimum- (DRBE|95%) and near-to-maximum- (DRBE|2%) doses were compared between the two cohorts in both RBE systems. LETd distribution was evaluated for in-field relapsed cases with respect to the control group. RESULTS Target DMKM|50% and DMKM|95% were respectively 10% and 18% lower than what we aimed at. Dosimetric evaluators showed no significant difference, in neither of the RBE frameworks, between relapsed and control sets. Half of the relapse volumes were located in a well-covered high dose region. On average, over these cases, median target LETd was significantly lower than the control cohort mean value (27 vs 30 keV/μm). Most notably, the volume receiving dose from high-LET particles (>50 keV/μm) lay substantially below recently reported data in the literature. CONCLUSION A combined multi model RBE- and LET-based optimization could play a key role in the enhancement of the therapeutic ratio of CIRT for large radioresistant tumors such as sacral chordomas.
Collapse
|
18
|
Vidal M, Moignier C, Patriarca A, Sotiropoulos M, Schneider T, De Marzi L. Future technological developments in proton therapy - A predicted technological breakthrough. Cancer Radiother 2021; 25:554-564. [PMID: 34272182 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2021.06.017] [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: 06/07/2021] [Accepted: 06/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
In the current spectrum of cancer treatments, despite high costs, a lack of robust evidence based on clinical outcomes or technical and radiobiological uncertainties, particle therapy and in particular proton therapy (PT) is rapidly growing. Despite proton therapy being more than fifty years old (first proposed by Wilson in 1946) and more than 220,000 patients having been treated with in 2020, many technological challenges remain and numerous new technical developments that must be integrated into existing systems. This article presents an overview of on-going technical developments and innovations that we felt were most important today, as well as those that have the potential to significantly shape the future of proton therapy. Indeed, efforts have been done continuously to improve the efficiency of a PT system, in terms of cost, technology and delivery technics, and a number of different developments pursued in the accelerator field will first be presented. Significant developments are also underway in terms of transport and spatial resolution achievable with pencil beam scanning, or conformation of the dose to the target: we will therefore discuss beam focusing and collimation issues which are important parameters for the development of these techniques, as well as proton arc therapy. State of the art and alternative approaches to adaptive PT and the future of adaptive PT will finally be reviewed. Through these overviews, we will finally see how advances in these different areas will allow the potential for robust dose shaping in proton therapy to be maximised, probably foreshadowing a future era of maturity for the PT technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Vidal
- Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Fédération Claude Lalanne, 227, avenue de la Lanterne, 06200 Nice, France
| | - C Moignier
- Centre François Baclesse, Department of Medical Physics, Centre de protonthérapie de Normandie, 14000 Caen, France
| | - A Patriarca
- Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Radiation oncology department, Centre de protonthérapie d'Orsay, Campus universitaire, bâtiment 101, 91898 Orsay, France
| | - M Sotiropoulos
- Institut Curie, Université PSL, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation radiobiologie et cancer, 91400 Orsay, France
| | - T Schneider
- Institut Curie, Université PSL, CNRS UMR3347, Inserm U1021, Signalisation radiobiologie et cancer, 91400 Orsay, France
| | - L De Marzi
- Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Radiation oncology department, Centre de protonthérapie d'Orsay, Campus universitaire, bâtiment 101, 91898 Orsay, France; Institut Curie, PSL Research University, University Paris Saclay, Inserm LITO, Campus universitaire, 91898 Orsay, France.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Mein S, Tessonnier T, Kopp B, Harrabi S, Abdollahi A, Debus J, Haberer T, Mairani A. Spot-Scanning Hadron Arc (SHArc) Therapy: A Study With Light and Heavy Ions. Adv Radiat Oncol 2021; 6:100661. [PMID: 33817410 PMCID: PMC8010580 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2021.100661] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2020] [Revised: 12/29/2020] [Accepted: 01/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the clinical potential of spot-scanning hadron arc (SHArc) therapy with a heavy-ion gantry. METHODS AND MATERIALS A series of in silico studies was conducted via treatment plan optimization in FRoG and the RayStation TPS to compare SHArc therapy against reference plans using conventional techniques with single, parallel-opposed, and 3-field configurations for 3 clinical particle beams (protons [p], helium [4He], and carbon [12C] ions). Tests were performed on water-equivalent cylindrical phantoms for simple targets and clinical-like scenarios with an organ-at-risk in proximity of the target. Effective dose and dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETD) distributions for SHArc were evaluated against conventional planning techniques applying the modified microdosimetric kinetic model for considering bio-effect with (α/β)x = 2 Gy. A model for hypoxia-induced tumor radio-resistance was developed for particle therapy with dependence on oxygen concentration and particle species/energy (Zeff/β)2 to investigate the impact on effective dose. RESULTS SHArc plans exhibited similar target coverage with unique treatment attributes and distributions compared with conventional planning, with carbon ions demonstrating the greatest potential for tumor control and normal tissue sparing among the arc techniques. All SHArc plans exhibited a low-dose bath outside the target volume with a reduced maximum dose in normal tissues compared with single, parallel-opposed, and 3-field configuration plans. Moreover, favorable LETD distributions were made possible using the SHArc approach, with maximum LETD in the r = 5 mm tumor core (~8 keVμm-1, ~30 keVμm-1, and ~150 keVμm-1 for p, 4He, and 12C ions, respectively) and reductions of high-LET regions in normal tissues and organs-at-risk compared with static treatment beam delivery. CONCLUSION SHArc therapy offers potential treatment benefits such as increased normal tissue sparing. Without explicit consideration of oxygen concentration during treatment planning and optimization, SHArc-C may mitigate tumor hypoxia-induced loss of efficacy. Findings justify further development of robust SHArc treatment planning toward potential clinical translation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stewart Mein
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Tessonnier
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Benedikt Kopp
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Heidelberg University, Germany
| | - Semi Harrabi
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Amir Abdollahi
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD) and Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core-Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg University and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Heidelberg University, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Haberer
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Andrea Mairani
- Clinical Cooperation Unit Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- National Centre of Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), Medical Physics, Pavia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Nesteruk KP, Bolsi A, Lomax AJ, Meer D, van de Water S, Schippers JM. A static beam delivery device for fast scanning proton arc-therapy. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66:055018. [PMID: 33498040 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/abe02b] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Arc-therapy is a dose delivery technique regularly applied in photon radiation therapy, and is currently subject of great interest for proton therapy as well. In this technique, proton beams are aimed at a tumor from different continuous ranges of incident directions (so called 'arcs'). This technique can potentially yield a better dose conformity around the tumor and a very low dose in the surrounding healthy tissue. Currently, proton-arc therapy is performed by rotating a proton gantry around the patient, adapting the normally used dose-delivery method to the arc-specific motion of the gantry. Here we present first results from a feasibility study of the conceptual design of a new static fast beam delivery device/system for proton-arc therapy, which could be used instead of a gantry. In this novel concept, the incident angle of proton beams can be set rapidly by only changing field strengths of small magnets. This device eliminates the motion of the heavy gantry and related hardware. Therefore, a reduction of the total treatment time is expected. In the feasibility study presented here, we concentrate on the concept of the beam transport. Based on several simple, but realistic assumptions and approximations, proton tracking calculations were performed in a 3D magnetic field map, to calculate the beam transport in this device and to investigate and address several beam-optics challenges. We propose and simulate corresponding solutions and discuss their outcomes. To enable the implementation of some usually applied techniques in proton therapy, such as pencil beam scanning, energy modulation and beam shaping, we present and discuss our proposals. Here we present the concept of a new idea to perform fast proton arc-scanning and we report on first results of a feasibility study. Based on these results, we propose several options and next steps in the design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K P Nesteruk
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - A Bolsi
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - A J Lomax
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland.,Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - D Meer
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Mazal A, Vera Sanchez JA, Sanchez-Parcerisa D, Udias JM, España S, Sanchez-Tembleque V, Fraile LM, Bragado P, Gutierrez-Uzquiza A, Gordillo N, Garcia G, Castro Novais J, Perez Moreno JM, Mayorga Ortiz L, Ilundain Idoate A, Cremades Sendino M, Ares C, Miralbell R, Schreuder N. Biological and Mechanical Synergies to Deal With Proton Therapy Pitfalls: Minibeams, FLASH, Arcs, and Gantryless Rooms. Front Oncol 2021; 10:613669. [PMID: 33585238 PMCID: PMC7874206 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.613669] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2020] [Accepted: 12/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy has advantages and pitfalls comparing with photon therapy in radiation therapy. Among the limitations of protons in clinical practice we can selectively mention: uncertainties in range, lateral penumbra, deposition of higher LET outside the target, entrance dose, dose in the beam path, dose constraints in critical organs close to the target volume, organ movements and cost. In this review, we combine proposals under study to mitigate those pitfalls by using individually or in combination: (a) biological approaches of beam management in time (very high dose rate “FLASH” irradiations in the order of 100 Gy/s) and (b) modulation in space (a combination of mini-beams of millimetric extent), together with mechanical approaches such as (c) rotational techniques (optimized in partial arcs) and, in an effort to reduce cost, (d) gantry-less delivery systems. In some cases, these proposals are synergic (e.g., FLASH and minibeams), in others they are hardly compatible (mini-beam and rotation). Fixed lines have been used in pioneer centers, or for specific indications (ophthalmic, radiosurgery,…), they logically evolved to isocentric gantries. The present proposals to produce fixed lines are somewhat controversial. Rotational techniques, minibeams and FLASH in proton therapy are making their way, with an increasing degree of complexity in these three approaches, but with a high interest in the basic science and clinical communities. All of them must be proven in clinical applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Daniel Sanchez-Parcerisa
- Grupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.,Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.,Sedecal Molecular Imaging, Madrid, Spain
| | - Jose Manuel Udias
- Grupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.,Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | - Samuel España
- Grupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.,Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | - Victor Sanchez-Tembleque
- Grupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.,Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | - Luis Mario Fraile
- Grupo de Física Nuclear and IPARCOS, U. Complutense Madrid, CEI Moncloa, Madrid, Spain.,Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | - Paloma Bragado
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.,Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. U. Complutense, Madrid, Spain
| | - Alvaro Gutierrez-Uzquiza
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.,Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. U. Complutense, Madrid, Spain
| | - Nuria Gordillo
- Department of Applied Physics, U. Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.,Center for Materials Microanalysis, (CMAM), U. Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Gaston Garcia
- Center for Materials Microanalysis, (CMAM), U. Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Carme Ares
- Centro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Bertolet A, Cortés-Giraldo M, Carabe-Fernandez A. Implementation of the microdosimetric kinetic model using analytical microdosimetry in a treatment planning system for proton therapy. Phys Med 2021; 81:69-76. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.11.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2020] [Revised: 10/17/2020] [Accepted: 11/19/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
|