1
|
Mein S, Wuyckens S, Li X, Both S, Carabe A, Vera MC, Engwall E, Francesco F, Graeff C, Gu W, Hong L, Inaniwa T, Janssens G, de Jong B, Li T, Liang X, Liu G, Lomax A, Mackie T, Mairani A, Mazal A, Nesteruk KP, Paganetti H, Pérez Moreno JM, Schreuder N, Soukup M, Tanaka S, Tessonnier T, Volz L, Zhao L, Ding X. Particle arc therapy: Status and potential. Radiother Oncol 2024; 199:110434. [PMID: 39009306 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110434] [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: 12/09/2023] [Revised: 06/23/2024] [Accepted: 07/10/2024] [Indexed: 07/17/2024]
Abstract
There is a rising interest in developing and utilizing arc delivery techniques with charged particle beams, e.g., proton, carbon or other ions, for clinical implementation. In this work, perspectives from the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) 2022 physics workshop on particle arc therapy are reported. This outlook provides an outline and prospective vision for the path forward to clinically deliverable proton, carbon, and other ion arc treatments. Through the collaboration among industry, academic, and clinical research and development, the scientific landscape and outlook for particle arc therapy are presented here to help our community understand the physics, radiobiology, and clinical principles. The work is presented in three main sections: (i) treatment planning, (ii) treatment delivery, and (iii) clinical outlook.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stewart Mein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Sophie Wuyckens
- UCLouvain, Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Xiaoqiang Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health, William Beaumont University Hospital, Proton Therapy Center, Royal Oak, MI, USA
| | - Stefan Both
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Macarena Chocan Vera
- UCLouvain, Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium
| | | | | | - Christian Graeff
- GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung, Darmstadt, Germany; Technische Universität Darmstadt, Institut für Physik Kondensierter Materie, Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Wenbo Gu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Liu Hong
- Ion Beam Applications SA, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
| | - Taku Inaniwa
- Department of Accelerator and Medical Physics, Institute for Quantum Medical Science, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan; Department of Medical Physics and Engineering, Graduate School of Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
| | | | - Bas de Jong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Taoran Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Xiaoying Liang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Gang Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health, William Beaumont University Hospital, Proton Therapy Center, Royal Oak, MI, USA; Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Antony Lomax
- Centre for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland; ETH, Department of Physics, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Mackie
- Department of Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Andrea Mairani
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany; National Centre of Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), Medical Physics, Pavia, Italy
| | | | - Konrad P Nesteruk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | | | | | | | - Sodai Tanaka
- Department of Accelerator and Medical Physics, Institute for Quantum Medical Science, National Institutes for Quantum Science and Technology, Chiba, Japan
| | | | - Lennart Volz
- GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung, Darmstadt, Germany; Technische Universität Darmstadt, Institut für Physik Kondensierter Materie, Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Lewei Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health, William Beaumont University Hospital, Proton Therapy Center, Royal Oak, MI, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Shi W, Tanzhu G, Chen L, Ning J, Wang H, Xiao G, Peng H, Jing D, Liang H, Nie J, Yi M, Zhou R. Radiotherapy in Preclinical Models of Brain Metastases: A Review and Recommendations for Future Studies. Int J Biol Sci 2024; 20:765-783. [PMID: 38169621 PMCID: PMC10758094 DOI: 10.7150/ijbs.91295] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2023] [Accepted: 12/14/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Brain metastases (BMs) frequently occur in primary tumors such as lung cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma, and are associated with notably short natural survival. In addition to surgical interventions, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy, radiotherapy (RT) is a crucial treatment for BM and encompasses whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Validating the efficacy and safety of treatment regimens through preclinical models is imperative for successful translation to clinical application. This not only advances fundamental research but also forms the theoretical foundation for clinical study. This review, grounded in animal models of brain metastases (AM-BM), explores the theoretical underpinnings and practical applications of radiotherapy in combination with chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and emerging technologies such as nanomaterials and oxygen-containing microbubbles. Initially, we provided a concise overview of the establishment of AM-BMs. Subsequently, we summarize key RT parameters (RT mode, dose, fraction, dose rate) and their corresponding effects in AM-BMs. Finally, we present a comprehensive analysis of the current research status and future directions for combination therapy based on RT. In summary, there is presently no standardized regimen for AM-BM treatment involving RT. Further research is essential to deepen our understanding of the relationships between various parameters and their respective effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wen Shi
- Department of Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
| | - Guilong Tanzhu
- Department of Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
| | - Liu Chen
- Department of Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
| | - Jiaoyang Ning
- Department of Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
| | - Hongji Wang
- Department of Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
| | - Gang Xiao
- Department of Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
| | - Haiqin Peng
- Department of Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
| | - Di Jing
- Department of Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
| | - Huadong Liang
- Department of Technology, Hunan SJA Laboratory Animal Co., Ltd., Changsha, Hunan Province, China
| | - Jing Nie
- Department of Technology, Hunan SJA Laboratory Animal Co., Ltd., Changsha, Hunan Province, China
| | - Min Yi
- Department of Technology, Hunan SJA Laboratory Animal Co., Ltd., Changsha, Hunan Province, China
| | - Rongrong Zhou
- Department of Oncology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
- Xiangya Lung Cancer Center, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
- National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Disorders, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410008, Hunan Province, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Liu G, Zhao L, Liu P, Dao R, Qian Y, Cong X, Janssens G, Li X, Ding X. The first investigation of spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) delivery time and accuracy with different delivery tolerance window settings. Phys Med Biol 2023; 68:215003. [PMID: 37774715 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/acfec5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2023] [Accepted: 09/29/2023] [Indexed: 10/01/2023]
Abstract
Objective. To investigate the impact of various delivery tolerance window settings on the treatment delivery time and dosimetric accuracy of spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy.Approach. SPArc plans were generated for three representative disease sites (brain, lung, and liver cancer) with an angle sampling frequency of 2.5°. An in-house dynamic arc controller was used to simulate the arc treatment delivery with various tolerance windows (±0.25, ±0.5, ±1, and ±1.25°). The controller generates virtual logfiles during the arc delivery simulation, such as gantry speed, acceleration and deceleration, spot position, and delivery sequence, similar to machine logfiles. The virtual logfile was then imported to the treatment planning system to reconstruct the delivered dose distribution and compare it to the initial SPArc nominal plan. A three-dimensional gamma index was used to quantitatively assess delivery accuracy. Total treatment delivery time and relative lost time (dynamic arc delivery time-fix beam delivery time)/fix beam delivery time) were reported.Main Results. The 3D gamma passing rate (GPR) was greater than 99% for all cases when using 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm criteria and the GPR (1%/1 mm criteria) degraded as the tolerance window opens. The total delivery time for dynamic arc delivery increased with the decreasing delivery tolerance window length. The average delivery time and the relative lost time (%) were 630 ± 212 s (253% ± 68%), 322 ± 101 s (81% ± 31%), 225 ± 60 s (27% ± 16%), 196 ± 41 s (11% ± 6%), 187 ± 29 s (6% ± 1%) for tolerance windows ±0.25, ±0.5, ±1, and ±1.25° respectively.Significance. The study quantitatively analyzed the dynamic SPArc delivery time and accuracy with different delivery tolerance window settings, which offer a critical reference in the future SPArc plan optimization and delivery controller design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gang Liu
- Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, People's Republic of China
- Hubei Key Laboratory of Precision Radiation Oncology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Radiation Oncology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, People's Republic of China
| | - Lewei Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health Beaumont University, Royal Oak, MI,48073, United States of America
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, CA, United States of America
| | - Peilin Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health Beaumont University, Royal Oak, MI,48073, United States of America
| | - Riao Dao
- School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan,430072, People's Republic of China
| | - Yujia Qian
- School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan,430072, People's Republic of China
| | - Xiaoda Cong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health Beaumont University, Royal Oak, MI,48073, United States of America
| | | | - Xiaoqiang Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health Beaumont University, Royal Oak, MI,48073, United States of America
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health Beaumont University, Royal Oak, MI,48073, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gaito S, Marvaso G, Ortiz R, Crellin A, Aznar MC, Indelicato DJ, Pan S, Whitfield G, Alongi F, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Burnet N, Li MP, Rothwell B, Smith E, Colaco RJ. Proton Beam Therapy in the Oligometastatic/Oligorecurrent Setting: Is There a Role? A Literature Review. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15092489. [PMID: 37173955 PMCID: PMC10177340 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15092489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Revised: 04/21/2023] [Accepted: 04/25/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with conventional photon radiotherapy (XRT) are well-established treatment options for selected patients with oligometastatic/oligorecurrent disease. The use of PBT for SABR-SRS is attractive given the property of a lack of exit dose. The aim of this review is to evaluate the role and current utilisation of PBT in the oligometastatic/oligorecurrent setting. METHODS Using Medline and Embase, a comprehensive literature review was conducted following the PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes) criteria, which returned 83 records. After screening, 16 records were deemed to be relevant and included in the review. RESULTS Six of the sixteen records analysed originated in Japan, six in the USA, and four in Europe. The focus was oligometastatic disease in 12, oligorecurrence in 3, and both in 1. Most of the studies analysed (12/16) were retrospective cohorts or case reports, two were phase II clinical trials, one was a literature review, and one study discussed the pros and cons of PBT in these settings. The studies presented in this review included a total of 925 patients. The metastatic sites analysed in these articles were the liver (4/16), lungs (3/16), thoracic lymph nodes (2/16), bone (2/16), brain (1/16), pelvis (1/16), and various sites in 2/16. CONCLUSIONS PBT could represent an option for the treatment of oligometastatic/oligorecurrent disease in patients with a low metastatic burden. Nevertheless, due to its limited availability, PBT has traditionally been funded for selected tumour indications that are defined as curable. The availability of new systemic therapies has widened this definition. This, together with the exponential growth of PBT capacity worldwide, will potentially redefine its commissioning to include selected patients with oligometastatic/oligorecurrent disease. To date, PBT has been used with encouraging results for the treatment of liver metastases. However, PBT could be an option in those cases in which the reduced radiation exposure to normal tissues leads to a clinically significant reduction in treatment-related toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simona Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20126 Milan, Italy
| | - Ramon Ortiz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94720, USA
| | - Adrian Crellin
- National Lead Proton Beam Therapy NHSe, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - Marianne C Aznar
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Daniel J Indelicato
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32206, USA
| | - Shermaine Pan
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Gillian Whitfield
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Filippo Alongi
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore don Calabria, 37024 Verona, Italy
- Division of Radiology and Radiotherapy, University of Brescia, 25121 Brescia, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20126 Milan, Italy
| | - Neil Burnet
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Michelle P Li
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - Bethany Rothwell
- Division of Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Ed Smith
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Rovel J Colaco
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Rong Y, Ding X, Daly ME. Hypofractionation and SABR: 25 years of evolution in medical physics and a glimpse of the future. Med Phys 2023. [PMID: 36756953 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16270] [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: 12/13/2022] [Revised: 12/13/2022] [Accepted: 01/30/2023] [Indexed: 02/10/2023] Open
Abstract
As we were invited to write an article for celebrating the 50th Anniversary of Medical Physics journal, on something historically significant, commemorative, and exciting happening in the past decades, the first idea came to our mind is the fascinating radiotherapy paradigm shift from conventional fractionation to hypofractionation and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). It is historically and clinically significant since as we all know this RT treatment revolution not only reduces treatment duration for patients, but also improves tumor control and cancer treatment outcomes. It is also commemorative and exciting for us medical physicists since the technology development in medical physics has been the main driver for the success of this treatment regimen which requires high precision and accuracy throughout the entire treatment planning and delivery. This article provides an overview of the technological development and clinical trials evolvement in the past 25 years for hypofractionation and SABR, with an outlook to the future improvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yi Rong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health, William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
| | - Megan E Daly
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Chang S, Liu G, Zhao L, Zheng W, Yan D, Chen P, Li X, Deraniyagala R, Stevens C, Grills I, Chinnaiyan P, Li X, Ding X. Introduce a rotational robust optimization framework for spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy. Phys Med Biol 2022; 68. [PMID: 36546347 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aca874] [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: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 12/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Objective. Proton dosimetric uncertainties resulting from the patient's daily setup errors in rotational directions exist even with advanced image-guided radiotherapy techniques. Thus, we developed a new rotational robust optimization SPArc algorithm (SPArcrot) to mitigate the dosimetric impact of the rotational setup error in Raystation ver. 6.02 (RaySearch Laboratory AB, Stockholm, Sweden).Approach.The initial planning CT was rotated ±5° simulating the worst-case setup error in the roll direction. The SPArcrotuses a multi-CT robust optimization framework by taking into account of such rotational setup errors. Five cases representing different disease sites were evaluated. Both SPArcoriginaland SPArcrotplans were generated using the same translational robust optimized parameters. To quantitatively investigate the mitigation effect from the rotational setup errors, all plans were recalculated using a series of pseudo-CT with rotational setup error (±1°/±2°/±3°/±5°). Dosimetric metrics such as D98% of CTV, and 3D gamma analysis were used to assess the dose distribution changes in the target and OARs.Main results.The magnitudes of dosimetric changes in the targets due to rotational setup error were significantly reduced by the SPArcrotcompared to SPArc in all cases. The uncertainties of the max dose to the OARs, such as brainstem, spinal cord and esophagus were significantly reduced using SPArcrot. The uncertainties of the mean dose to the OARs such as liver and oral cavity, parotid were comparable between the two planning techniques. The gamma passing rate (3%/3 mm) was significantly improved for CTV of all tumor sites through SPArcrot.Significance.Rotational setup error is one of the major issues which could lead to significant dose perturbations. SPArcrotplanning approach can consider such rotational error from patient setup or gantry rotation error by effectively mitigating the dose uncertainties to the target and in the adjunct series OARs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sheng Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Wuhan University, Renmin Hospital, Wuhan, 430060 Hubei Province, People's Republic of China.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Gang Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America.,Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430023, People's Republic of China
| | - Lewei Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Weili Zheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Di Yan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Peter Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Xiangpan Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Wuhan University, Renmin Hospital, Wuhan, 430060 Hubei Province, People's Republic of China
| | - Rohan Deraniyagala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Craig Stevens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Inga Grills
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Prakash Chinnaiyan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Xiaoqiang Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zhao L, Liu G, Li X, Ding X. An evolutionary optimization algorithm for proton arc therapy. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac8411] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2022] [Accepted: 07/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Objective. Proton arc plan normally contains thousands of spot numbers and hundreds of energy layers. A recent study reported that the beam delivery time (BDT) is proportional to the spot numbers. Thus, it is critical to find an optimal plan with a fast delivery speed while maintaining a good plan quality. Thus, we developed a novel evolutionary algorithm to directly search for the optimal spot sparsity solution to balance plan quality and BDT. Approach. The planning platform included a plan quality objective, a generator, and a selector. The generator is based on trust-region-reflective solver. A selector was designed to filter or add the spot according to the expected spot number, based on the user’s input of BDT. The generator and selector are used alternatively to optimize a spot sparsity solution. Three clinical cases’ CT and structure datasets, e.g. brain, lung, and liver cancer, were used for testing purposes. A series of user-defined BDTs from 15 to 250 s were used as direct inputs. The relationship between the plan’s cost function value and BDT was evaluated in these three cases. Main results. The evolutionary algorithm could optimize a proton arc plan based on clinical user input BDT directly. The plan quality remains optimal in the brain, lung, and liver cases until the BDT was shorter than 25 s, 50 s and 100 s, respectively. The plan quality degraded as the input delivery time became too short, indicating that the plan lacked enough spot or degree of freedom. Significance. This is the first proton arc planning framework to directly optimize plan quality with the BDT as an input for the new generation of proton therapy systems. This work paved the roadmap for implementing such new technology in a routine clinic and provided a planning platform to explore the trade-off between the BDT and plan quality.
Collapse
|
8
|
Deraniyagala R, Ding X, Alonso-Basanta M, Li T, Rong Y. It is beneficial to invest resources to implement proton intracranial SRS. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2022; 23:e13701. [PMID: 35713887 PMCID: PMC9278676 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13701] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2022] [Accepted: 06/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Rohan Deraniyagala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
| | - Michelle Alonso-Basanta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Taoran Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Yi Rong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| |
Collapse
|