skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-F-T-598: Robotic Radiosurgery System Versus Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy for Definitive Intracranial Treatments

Abstract

Purpose: To characterize the dose distributions of Cyberknife and intensity-modulated-proton-therapy (IMPT). Methods: A total of 20 patients previously treated with Cyberknife were selected. The original planning-target-volume (PTV) was used in the ‘IMPT-ideal’ plan assuming a comparable image-guidance with Cyberknife. A 3mm expansion was made to create the proton-PTV for the ‘IMPT-3mm’ plan representing the current proton-therapy where a margin of 3mm is used to account for the inferior image-guidance. The proton range uncertainty was taken-care in beam-design by adding the proximal- and distal-margins (3%water-equivalent-depth+1mm) for both proton plans. The IMPT plans were generated to meet the same target coverage as the Cyberknife-plans. The plan quality of IMPT-ideal and IMPT-3mm were compared to the Cyberknife-plan. To characterize plan quality, we defined the ratio(R) of volumes encompassed by the selected isodose surfaces for Cyberknife and IMPT plans (VCK/VIMPT). Comparisons were made for both Cyberknife versus IMPT-ideal and Cyberknife versusIMPT-3mm to further discuss the impact of setup error margins used in proton therapy and the correlation with target size and location. Results: IMPT-ideal plans yield comparable plan quality as CK plans and slightly better OAR sparing while the IMPT-3mm plan results in a higher dose to the OARs, especially for centralized tumors. Comparingmore » to the IMPT-ideal plans, a slightly larger 80% (Ravg=1.05) dose cloud and significantly larger 50% (Ravg=1.3) and 20% (Ravg=1.60) dose clouds are seen in CK plans. However, the 3mm expansion results in a larger high and medium dose clouds in IMPT-3mm plans (Ravg=0.65 for 80%-isodose; Ravg=0.93 for 50%-isodose). The trend increases with the size of the target and the distance from the brainstem to the center of target. Conclusion: Cyberknife is more preferable for treating centralized targets and proton therapy is advantageous for the large and peripheral targets. Advanced image guidance would improve the efficacy of proton therapy for intracranial treatments.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22649169
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; DESIGN; PLANNING; PRODUCTIVITY; PROTON BEAMS; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIOTHERAPY; WATER

Citation Formats

Lin, M, Pompos, A, Gu, X, Yan, Y, Abdulrahman, R, Timmerman, R, and Jiang, S. SU-F-T-598: Robotic Radiosurgery System Versus Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy for Definitive Intracranial Treatments. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956783.
Lin, M, Pompos, A, Gu, X, Yan, Y, Abdulrahman, R, Timmerman, R, & Jiang, S. SU-F-T-598: Robotic Radiosurgery System Versus Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy for Definitive Intracranial Treatments. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956783.
Lin, M, Pompos, A, Gu, X, Yan, Y, Abdulrahman, R, Timmerman, R, and Jiang, S. 2016. "SU-F-T-598: Robotic Radiosurgery System Versus Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy for Definitive Intracranial Treatments". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956783.
@article{osti_22649169,
title = {SU-F-T-598: Robotic Radiosurgery System Versus Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy for Definitive Intracranial Treatments},
author = {Lin, M and Pompos, A and Gu, X and Yan, Y and Abdulrahman, R and Timmerman, R and Jiang, S},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To characterize the dose distributions of Cyberknife and intensity-modulated-proton-therapy (IMPT). Methods: A total of 20 patients previously treated with Cyberknife were selected. The original planning-target-volume (PTV) was used in the ‘IMPT-ideal’ plan assuming a comparable image-guidance with Cyberknife. A 3mm expansion was made to create the proton-PTV for the ‘IMPT-3mm’ plan representing the current proton-therapy where a margin of 3mm is used to account for the inferior image-guidance. The proton range uncertainty was taken-care in beam-design by adding the proximal- and distal-margins (3%water-equivalent-depth+1mm) for both proton plans. The IMPT plans were generated to meet the same target coverage as the Cyberknife-plans. The plan quality of IMPT-ideal and IMPT-3mm were compared to the Cyberknife-plan. To characterize plan quality, we defined the ratio(R) of volumes encompassed by the selected isodose surfaces for Cyberknife and IMPT plans (VCK/VIMPT). Comparisons were made for both Cyberknife versus IMPT-ideal and Cyberknife versusIMPT-3mm to further discuss the impact of setup error margins used in proton therapy and the correlation with target size and location. Results: IMPT-ideal plans yield comparable plan quality as CK plans and slightly better OAR sparing while the IMPT-3mm plan results in a higher dose to the OARs, especially for centralized tumors. Comparing to the IMPT-ideal plans, a slightly larger 80% (Ravg=1.05) dose cloud and significantly larger 50% (Ravg=1.3) and 20% (Ravg=1.60) dose clouds are seen in CK plans. However, the 3mm expansion results in a larger high and medium dose clouds in IMPT-3mm plans (Ravg=0.65 for 80%-isodose; Ravg=0.93 for 50%-isodose). The trend increases with the size of the target and the distance from the brainstem to the center of target. Conclusion: Cyberknife is more preferable for treating centralized targets and proton therapy is advantageous for the large and peripheral targets. Advanced image guidance would improve the efficacy of proton therapy for intracranial treatments.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956783},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: To evaluate mass density effects of CT conversion table and its variation in current treatment planning system of spot scanning proton beam using an IROC proton lung phantom for this study. Methods: A proton lung phantom study was acquired to Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Houston (IROC) Quality Assurance Center. Inside the lung phantom, GAF Chromic films and couples of thermal luminescent dosimeter (TLD) capsules embedded in specified PTV and adjacent structures to monitor delivered dosage and 3D dose distribution profiles. Various material such as cork (Lung), blue water (heart), Techron HPV (ribs) and organic material of balsa woodmore » and cork as dosimetry inserts within phantom of solid water (soft tissue). Relative stopping power (RLSP) values were provided. Our treatment planning system (TPS) doesn’t require SP instead relative density was converted relative to water. However lung phantom was irradiated by planning with density override and the results were compared with IROC measurements. The second attempt was conducted without density override and compared with IROC’s. Results: The higher passing rate of imaging and measurement results of the lung phantom irradiation met the criteria by IROC without density override. The film at coronal plane was found to be shift due to inclined cylinder insertion. The converted CT density worked as expected to correlate relative stopping power. Conclusion: The proton lung phantom provided by IROC is a useful tool to qualify our commissioned proton pencil beam delivery with TPS within reliable confidence. The relative mass stopping power ratios of materials were converted from the relative physical density relative to water and the results were satisfied.« less
  • Purpose: To illustrate patient QA results for the first 10 patients treated at Scripps Proton Center by comparing point dose measurement using an ion chamber and in-house developed secondary MU program, and the measurement of 2D dose distribution using an ion chamber array. Methods: At the time of writing, 10 patient plans were approved for treatment using Varian ProBeam pencil beam scanning system and Eclipse treatment planning software. We used the IBA CC04 0.04 cm3 ion chamber and PTW Unidos E electrometer for point dose measurement in a small water tank (Sun Nuclear 1D scanner). We developed independent MU checkmore » software based on measured pencil beam dose profiles for various energies. We used PTW Octavius 729 XDR array to evaluate 2D planar dose distribution. The 3D gamma at 3%/3 mm local dose was used to compare a 3D calculated dose plan with a 2D measured dose distribution using PTW Verisoft software. All fields were exported to a verification phantom plan and delivered at 0 degrees for simplicity. Results: Comparisons between the CC04 ion chamber measurement and calculated dose agree well within 1%. The PTW Octavius 729 XDR array exhibited some dose rate dependence in high dose rate pencil beam delivery. Nevertheless, the results, used as a relative measurement, passed the gamma criteria of 3%/3mm for greater than 90% of area in all patient fields. Visual inspection showed good agreement between ion chamber dose profile and the calculated plan. The in-house secondary check for MU agreed very well with the plan dose and measurement. The results will be updated with more patients treated. Conclusion: The initial patient specific QA results are encouraging for a new pencil beam scanning only proton therapy system.« less
  • Purpose: Eclipse proton Monte Carlo AcurosPT 13.7 was commissioned and experimentally validated for an IBA dedicated PBS nozzle in water. Topas 1.3 was used to isolate the cause of differences in output and penumbra between simulation and experiment. Methods: The spot profiles were measured in air at five locations using Lynx. PTW-34070 Bragg peak chamber (Freiburg, Germany) was used to collect the relative integral Bragg peak for 15 proton energies from 100 MeV to 225 MeV. The phase space parameters (σx, σθ, ρxθ) number of protons per MU, energy spread and calculated mean energy provided by AcurosPT were identically implementedmore » into Topas. The absolute dose, profiles and field size factors measured using ionization chamber arrays were compared with both AcurosPT and Topas. Results: The beam spot size, σx, and the angular spread, σθ, in air were both energy-dependent: in particular, the spot size in air at isocentre ranged from 2.8 to 5.3 mm, and the angular spread ranged from 2.7 mrad to 6 mrad. The number of protons per MU increased from ∼9E7 at 100 MeV to ∼1.5E8 at 225 MeV. Both AcurosPT and TOPAS agree with experiment within 2 mm penumbra difference or 3% dose difference for scenarios including central axis depth dose and profiles at two depths in multi-spot square fields, from 40 to 200 mm, for all the investigated single-energy and multi-energy beams, indicating clinically acceptable source model and radiation transport algorithm in water. Conclusion: By comparing measured data and TOPAS simulation using the same source model, the AcurosPT 13.7 was validated in water within 2 mm penumbra difference or 3% dose difference. Benchmarks versus an independent Monte Carlo code are recommended to study the agreement in output, filed size factors and penumbra differences. This project is partially supported by the Varian grant under the master agreement between University of Pennsylvania and Varian.« less
  • Purpose: To quantitatively evaluate dosimetric consequence of spot size variations and validate beam-matching criteria for commissioning a pencil beam model for multiple treatment rooms. Methods: A planning study was first conducted by simulating spot size variations to systematically evaluate dosimetric impact of spot size variations in selected cases, which was used to establish the in-air spot size tolerance for beam matching specifications. A beam model in treatment planning system was created using in-air spot profiles acquired in one treatment room. These spot profiles were also acquired from another treatment room for assessing the actual spot size variations between the twomore » treatment rooms. We created twenty five test plans with targets of different sizes at different depths, and performed dose measurement along the entrance, proximal and distal target regions. The absolute doses at those locations were measured using ionization chambers at both treatment rooms, and were compared against the calculated doses by the beam model. Fifteen additional patient plans were also measured and included in our validation. Results: The beam model is relatively insensitive to spot size variations. With an average of less than 15% measured in-air spot size variations between two treatment rooms, the average dose difference was −0.15% with a standard deviation of 0.40% for 55 measurement points within target region; but the differences increased to 1.4%±1.1% in the entrance regions, which are more affected by in-air spot size variations. Overall, our single-room based beam model in the treatment planning system agreed with measurements in both rooms < 0.5% within the target region. For fifteen patient cases, the agreement was within 1%. Conclusion: We have demonstrated that dosimetrically equivalent machines can be established when in-air spot size variations are within 15% between the two treatment rooms.« less
  • Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine whether organ sparing and target coverage can be simultaneously maintained for pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy treatment of thoracic tumors in the presence of motion, stopping power uncertainties and patient setup variations. Methods: Ten consecutive patients that were previously treated with proton therapy to 66.6/1.8 Gy (RBE) using double scattering (DS) were replanned with PBS. Minimum and maximum intensity images from 4DCT were used to introduce flexible smearing in the determination of the beam specific PTV (BSPTV). Datasets from eight 4DCT phases, using ±3% uncertainty in stopping power, and ±3more » mm uncertainty in patient setup in each direction were used to create 8*12*10=960 PBS plans for the evaluation of ten patients. Plans were normalized to provide identical coverage between DS and PBS. Results: The average lung V20, V5, and mean doses were reduced from 29.0%, 35.0%, and 16.4 Gy with DS to 24.6%, 30.6%, and 14.1 Gy with PBS, respectively. The average heart V30 and V45 were reduced from 10.4% and 7.5% in DS to 8.1% and 5.4% for PBS, respectively. Furthermore, the maximum spinal cord, esophagus and heart dose were decreased from 37.1 Gy, 71.7 Gy and 69.2 Gy with DS to 31.3 Gy, 67.9 Gy and 64.6 Gy with PBS. The conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and global maximal dose were improved from 3.2, 0.08, 77.4 Gy with DS to 2.8, 0.04 and 72.1 Gy with PBS. All differences are statistically significant, with p values <0.05, with the exception of the heart V45 (p= 0.146). Conclusion: PBS with BSPTV achieves better organ sparing and improves target coverage using a repainting method for the treatment of thoracic tumors. Incorporating motion-related uncertainties is essential This work was supported by the US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command under Contract Agreement No. DAMD17-W81XWH-07-2-0121 and W81XWH-09-2-0174.« less