Abstract

Purpose/Objective(s)Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation has appeared in primary commercial treatment-planning systems and various in-house platforms. Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) and metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques complement MC capabilities. However, no publications have yet reported how proton therapy centers implement these new technologies, and a national survey is required to determine the feasibility of including MC and companion techniques in cooperative group clinical trials.Materials/MethodsA 9-question survey was designed to query key clinical parameters: scope of MC utilization, validation methods for heterogeneities, clinical site-specific imaging guidance, proton range uncertainties, and how implants are handled. A national survey was distributed to all 29 operational US proton therapy centers on 13 May 2019.ResultsWe received responses from 25 centers (86% participation). Commercial MC was most commonly used for primary plan optimization (16 centers) or primary dose evaluation (18 centers), while in-house MC was used more frequently for secondary dose evaluation (7 centers). Based on the survey, MC was used infrequently for gastrointestinal, genitourinary, gynecology and extremity compared with other more heterogeneous disease sites (P < .007). Although many centers had published DECT research, only 3/25 centers had implemented DECT clinically, either in the treatment-planning system or to override implant materials. Most centers (64%) treated patients with metal implants on a case-by-case basis, with a variety of methods reported. Twenty-four centers (96%) used MAR images and overrode the surrounding tissue artifacts; however, there was no consensus on how to determine metal dimension, materials density, or stopping powers.ConclusionThe use of MC for primary dose calculation and optimization was prevalent and, therefore, likely feasible for clinical trials. There was consensus to use MAR and override tissues surrounding metals but no consensus about how to use DECT and MAR for human tissues and implants. Development and standardization of these advanced technologies are strongly encouraged for vendors and clinical physicists.

Highlights

  • The number of proton therapy centers has increased rapidly in recent years

  • The proton pencil beam scanning technique has been widely implemented in almost all new proton centers, and it is expected to be the future trend in proton therapy [1]

  • Taylor et al [2] reported that proton centers using the analytical dose engine had low passing rates on the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) lung phantom

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The number of proton therapy centers has increased rapidly in recent years. The proton pencil beam scanning technique has been widely implemented in almost all new proton centers, and it is expected to be the future trend in proton therapy [1]. The dose calculation algorithm plays an important role in the accuracy and quality of proton beam therapy. The analytic dose engine, such as pencil beam superposition convolution (PSC), has the advantage of fast calculation speed and is widely implemented in commercial treatment-planning systems (TPSs), such as Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, California), RayStation (RaySearch Laboratories, Stockholm, Sweden), and Pinnacle (Philips, Amsterdam, Netherlands). Taylor et al [2] reported that proton centers using the analytical dose engine had low passing rates on the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) lung phantom. Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation has been found to improve dose calculation accuracy in low-density heterogeneities, and correspondingly, has a favorable IROC lung phantom pass rate. MC has been reported to be advantageous in highly heterogeneous patients and is recommended for patients with a large metal implant [3,4,5,6,7]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call