Abstract
Intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) can produce plans with similar target dose conformity but lower normal tissue dose than intensity‐modulated X‐ray therapy (IMXT). However, due to the finite range of proton beams in tissue, proton therapy treatment plans are usually more sensitive to setup uncertainties than X‐ray therapy plans. In this work, the energy margin (EM) concept, which was initially developed for passive scattering proton therapy, was generalized to apply to IMPT treatment planning. The effectiveness of the EM method was evaluated on five head‐and‐neck cancer patients with distal edge tracking (DET) treatment plans by comparing the original plans (ORG) without an EM to those with an EM. Three beam arrangements were considered: 24 beams delivered over a 360° arc, 12 beams delivered over a 180° arc, and 12 beams delivered over two 90° fan angles. Setup uncertainty was modeled by sampling rigid translational shifts from a Gaussian distribution with a mean of 0 mm and standard deviation of 2 mm in all directions. Delivered dose distributions for all 30 fractions were recalculated using the Geant4 Monte Carlo code. Normalized total dose (NTD) for both the CTV and a ring structure surrounding the PTV were recorded. The plan quality comparison revealed that EM plans had the same CTV coverage but higher dose to the normal tissue than ORG plans. After the simulated delivery, ORG plans resulted in more than 3% underdosage to 5% of the CTV volume in all three beam arrangements, whereas the EM plans did not. Both ORG and EM plans did not produce more than 5% overdose to D2% of the ring structure. The use of an EM for IMPT treatment planning can substantially reduce sensitivity of the resulting dose distributions to setup uncertainty.PACS number: 87.55.K‐
Highlights
171 Zhang et al.: Reducing dose variation in Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) edge tracking (DET).(10) 3D modulation is the most widely implemented IMPT method[11,12] in which a 3D grid of proton beam spots, each with individually controllable intensities, is used to cover the whole target region for each beam angle
Even with multiple beam angles, distal edge tracking (DET) still uses 3 to 10 times fewer spots than 3D modulation.[5,13,14] DET is expected to reduce IMPT delivery time relative to that of 3D modulation if the time saved by delivering fewer proton pencil beams exceeds the time spent delivering beams from multiple angles by moving the gantry and/or patient table
Since setup uncertainty is limited in magnitude, there exists for each individual pencil beam a minimum energy that guarantees that the pencil beam will reach the designated location during the course of treatment
Summary
171 Zhang et al.: Reducing dose variation in IMPT edge tracking (DET).(10) 3D modulation is the most widely implemented IMPT method[11,12] in which a 3D grid of proton beam spots, each with individually controllable intensities, is used to cover the whole target region for each beam angle. For pencil beam scanning proton therapy systems (such as the low-pulserate dielectric wall accelerator)(15) requiring considerably more time to deliver multiple pencil beams, DET would be expected to have greatest saving on delivery time. Mechanical challenges, such as the difficulty of rotating a bulky proton gantry, must be considered when delivering DET, requiring that the number of DET beam angles is kept reasonably low
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
