Proton Plans Research Articles

Assessment of dose perturbations for metal stent in photon and proton radiotherapy plans for hepatocellular carcinoma

BackgroundThe present study aimed to investigate the dosimetric impact of metal stent for photon and proton treatment plans in hepatocellular carcinoma.MethodsWith computed tomography data of a water-equivalent solid phantom, dose perturbation caused by a metal stent included in the photon and proton treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma was evaluated by comparing Eclipse and RayStation treatment planning system (TPS) to a Monte Carlo (MC) based dose calculator. Photon and proton plans were created with anterior–posterior/posterior-anterior (AP/PA) fields using a 6 MV beam and AP/PA fields of a wobbling beam using 150 MeV and a 10 cm ridge filter. The difference in dose distributions and dosimetric parameters were compared depending on the stent's positions (the bile duct (GB) and intestinal tract (GI)) and angles (0°, 45°, and 90°). Additionally, the dose variation in the target volume including the stent was comparatively evaluated through dose volume histogram (DVH) analysis. And the comparison of clinical cases was carried out in the same way.ResultsPercentage differences in the dosimetric parameters calculated by MC ranged from − 7.0 to 3.9% for the photon plan and − 33.7 to 4.3% for the proton plan, depending on the angle at which the GB and GI stents were placed, compared to those without the stent. The maximum difference was observed at the minimum dose (Dmin), which was observed in both photon and proton plans in the GB and GI stents deployed at a 90° incidence angle. The parameter differences were greater in the proton plan than in photon plan. The target volume showed various dose variations depending on positions and angles of stent for both beams. Compared with no-stent, the doses within the target volume containing the GI and GB stents for the photon beam were overestimated in the high-dose area at 0°, nearly equal within 1% at 45°, and underestimated at 90°. These doses to the proton beam were underestimated at all angles, and the amount of underdose to the target volume increased with an increase in the stent angle. However, the difference was significantly greater with the proton plan than the photon plan.ConclusionsDose perturbations within the target volume due to the presence of the metal stent were not observed in the TPS calculations for photon and proton beams, but MC was used to confirm that there are dose variations within the target volume. The MC results found that delivery of the treatment beam avoiding the stent was the best method to prevent target volume underdose.

Accelerating and improving radiochromic film calibration by utilizing the dose ratio in photon and proton beams.

PurposeRadiochromic films are versatile 2D dosimeters with high‐resolution and near tissue equivalence. To assure high precision and accuracy, a time‐consuming calibration process is required. To improve the time efficiency, a novel calibration method utilizing the ratio of the same dose profile measured at different monitor units (MUs) is introduced and tested in a proton and photon beam.MethodsThe calibration procedure employs the dose ratio of film measurements of the same relative profile for different absolute dose values. Hence, the ratio of the dose is constant at any point of the profile, but the ratio of the net optical densities is not constant. The key idea of the method is to optimize the calibration function until the ratio of the calculated doses is constant. The proposed method was tested in the dose range between 0.25–12 and 1–6 Gy in a proton and photon beam, respectively. A radial symmetric profile and a rectangular profile were created, both having a central plateau region of about 3 cm diameter and a dose falloff of about 1.5 cm at larger distances. The dose falloff region was used as input for the optimization method and the central plateau region served as dose reference points. Only the plateau region of the highest dose entered the optimization as an additional objective. The measured data were randomly split into differently sized training and test sets. The optimization was repeated 1000 times with random start value initialization using the same start values for the standard and the gradient method. Finally, a proton plan with four dose levels was created, which were separated spatially, to test the possibility of a full calibration within a single measurement.ResultsParameter estimation was possible with as low as one dose ratio used for optimization in both the photon and the proton case, yet exhibiting a high sensitivity on the dose level. The root mean squared deviation (RMSD) of the dose was less than 1% when the dose ratio was in the order of 20, whereas the median RMSD of all optimizations was 1.7%. Using four dose levels for optimization resulted in a median RMSD of 1% when randomly selecting the dose levels. Having at least one dose ratio of about 20 included in the optimization considerably improved the RMSD of the calibration function. Using six or eight dose levels reduced the sensitivity on the dose level selection and the median RMSD was 0.8%. A full calibration was possible in a single measurement having four dose levels in one plan but spatially separated.ConclusionsThe number of measurements required to obtain an EBT3 film calibration function could be reduced using the proposed dose ratio method while maintaining the same accuracy as with the standard method.

Analysis of the Rate of Re-planning in Spot-Scanning Proton Therapy.

PurposeFinite proton range affords improved dose conformality of radiation therapy when patient regions-of-interest geometries are well characterized. Substantial changes in patient anatomy necessitate re-planning (RP) to maintain effective, safe treatment. Regularly planned verification scanning (VS) is performed to ensure consistent treatment quality. Substantial resources, however, are required to conduct an effective proton plan verification program, which includes but is not limited to, additional computed tomography (CT) scanner time and dedicated personnel: radiation therapists, medical physicists, physicians, and medical dosimetrists.Materials and MethodsVerification scans (VSs) and re-plans (RPs) of 711 patients treated with proton therapy between June 2015 and June 2018 were studied. All treatment RP was performed with the intent to maintain original plan integrity and coverage. The treatments were classified by anatomic site: brain, craniospinal, bone, spine, head and neck (H&N), lung or chest, breast, prostate, rectum, anus, pelvis, esophagus, liver, abdomen, and extremity. Within each group, the dates of initial simulation scan, number of VSs, number of fractions completed at the time of VS, and the frequency of RP were collected. Data were analyzed in terms of rate of RP and individual likelihood of RP.ResultsA total of 2196 VSs and 201 RPs were performed across all treatment sites. H&N and lung or chest disease sites represented the largest proportion of plan modifications in terms of rate of re-plan (RoR: 54% and 58%, respectively) and individual likelihood of RP on a per patient basis (likelihood of RP [RP%]: 46% and 39%, respectively). These sites required RP beyond 4 weeks of treatment, suggesting continued benefit for frequent, periodic VS. Disease sites in the lower pelvis demonstrated a low yield for RP per VS (0.01-0.02), suggesting that decreasing VS frequency, particularly late in treatment, may be reasonable.ConclusionsA large degree of variation in RoR and individual RP% was observed between anatomic treatment sites. The present retrospective analysis provides data to help develop anatomic site–based VS protocols.

Modeling secondary cancer risk ratios for proton versus carbon ion beam therapy: A comparative study based on the local effect model.

Ion beam therapy allows for substantial sparing of normal tissues. Besides deterministic normal-tissue complications, stochastic long-term effects like secondary cancer (SC) induction are of importance when comparing different treatment modalities. To develop a modeling approach for comparison of SC risk in proton and carbon ion therapy. The local effect model (LEM) is used to predict the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of SC induction after particle therapy. A key feature of the new approach is the double use of the LEM, reflecting the competition between the two processes of mutation induction (leading to cancer development) and cell inactivation (leading to suppression of cancer development). Based on previous investigations, treatment plans were in this work analyzed for an idealized geometry in order to assess the underlying systematic dependencies of cancer induction. In a further step, relative SC risks were predicted for proton and carbon ion treatment plans prepared for 10 prostate cancer patients. We investigated the impact of factors such as treatment plan geometry, fractionation scheme, and tissue radiosensitivity to photon irradiation on the ion beam SC risk. Our model studies do not result in a clear preference for either protons or carbon ions, but rather indicate a complex interplay of different aspects. Reduced lateral scattering leads to a lower SC risk for carbon ions compared to protons at the lateral field margins in the entrance channel, while an increased risk was found closely behind the tumor due to projectile fragmentation. The fractionation scheme had little impact on the expected risk ratio. With respect to sensitivity parameters, those characterizing RBE for cell killing of potentially cancerous cells as well as of the primary tumor had the most significant impact. The observed general systematic dependencies are in agreement with results from previous model studies. The prostate patient study reveals reduced SC risks predictions for skin and bones for carbon ions as compared to protons, but higher mean risks for bladder and rectum. The methods established in this work provide a basis for further investigating treatment optimizing strategies for ion beam therapy with regard to SC risk comparisons.

A dosimetric comparison of proton versus photon irradiation for paediatric glomus tumour: a case study

Abstract Background: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has revolutionised the way head and neck cancers can be treated. It allows for a more conformal treatment plan when compared to 3D conformal radiation therapy. In paediatric patients, however, IMRT continues to deliver higher doses than desirable. Proton beam therapy on the other hand has the potential to further spare organs-at-risk. Methods: A 16-year-old boy with a left-sided paraganglioma of the left base of skull manifested by headaches, neck pain and tongue cramping was simulated, planned and treated with proton therapy with significant contralateral organ-at-risk sparing. Results: For this patient, dosimetric plan comparison between photon and proton plans clearly showed better sparing of contralateral organs-at-risk with protons. The contralateral parotid gland received a mean dose of 386·3 cGy with photons, whereas it received 1·3 cGy (CGE) in the proton plan. Conclusions: The dosimetric advantage of proton beam over photon beam therapy has successfully been demonstrated in this case study for a paediatric patient with a head and neck tumour. Sparing of contralateral structures is especially important in paediatric patients who are at a greater risk of secondary malignancies due to possible long life expectancy.

Influence of Beam Angle on Normal Tissue Complication Probability of Knowledge-Based Head and Neck Cancer Proton Planning.

Simple SummaryKnowledge-based treatment planning (KBP) solutions can be used to assist in the planning process by automatically generating patient-specific optimization objectives. A KBP model is typically derived from treatment plans with a similar planning methodology, for example beam angles. An end-user might deviate from this methodology for a variety of reasons. The effect of such deviations on KBP plan quality has not been widely explored. We therefore studied this using a human-interaction free proton planning solution to create comparative plans with the default angles used when building the model, and altered beam angle arrangements. Because normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) can be used to select patients for proton therapy, this was used as the primary outcome metric for plan quality. The results show that the beam angle and number of beams only had a small effect on the plan NTCP. This suggests that the model is robust to the various beam arrangements within the range described in this analysis, although a method that automatically further adapts the KBP planning objectives further decreased the NTCP by 1–3%.Knowledge-based planning solutions have brought significant improvements in treatment planning. However, the performance of a proton-specific knowledge-based planning model in creating knowledge-based plans (KBPs) with beam angles differing from those used to train the model remains unexplored. We used a previously validated RapidPlanPT model and scripting to create nine KBPs, one with default and eight with altered beam angles, for 10 recent oropharynx cancer patients. The altered-angle plans were compared against the default-angle ones in terms of grade 2 dysphagia and xerostomia normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), mean doses of several organs at risk, and dose homogeneity index (HI). As KBP could be suboptimal, a proof of principle automatic iterative optimizer (AIO) was added with the aim of reducing the plan NTCP. There were no statistically significant differences in NTCP or HI between default- and altered-angle KBPs, and the altered-angle plans showed a <1% reduction in NTCP. AIO was able to reduce the sum of grade 2 NTCPs in 66/90 cases with mean a reduction of 3.5 ± 1.8%. While the altered-angle plans saw greater benefit from AIO, both default- and altered-angle plans could be improved, indicating that the KBP model alone was not completely optimal to achieve the lowest NTCP. Overall, the data showed that the model was robust to the various beam arrangements within the range described in this analysis.

Dose and robustness comparison of nominal, daily and accumulated doses for photon and proton treatment of sinonasal cancer

IntroductionThe aim was to evaluate and compare the dosimetric effect and robustness towards day-to-day anatomical and setup variations in the delivered dose for photon and proton treatments of sinonasal cancer (SNC) patients. Materials and MethodsPhoton (VMAT) and proton (IMPT) plans were optimized retrospectively for 24 SNC patients. Synthetic CTs (synCT) were obtained by deforming the planning CT (pCT) to the anatomy of every daily cone-beam CT. Both VMAT and IMPT plans were recalculated on the synCTs. The recalculated daily dose was accumulated over the whole treatment on the pCT. Target coverage and dose to organs and risk (OARs) were evaluated for all patients for the nominal, daily and accumulated dose distribution. ResultsIn general, dose to OARs farther away from the target, including brain, chiasm and contralateral optic nerve, was lower for proton plans than photon plans. Whereas, OARs in proximity of the target received a lower dose for photon plans.For proton plans, the target coverage (volume of CTV receiving 95% of prescribed dose), V95%, fell below 99% for 9/24 patients in one or more fractions. For photon plans, 4/24 patients had one or more fractions where V95% fell below 99%. For accumulated doses, V95% was below 99% only in two cases, but above 98% for all patients. ConclusionPhoton and proton treatment have different strengths regarding OAR sparing. The robustness was high for both treatment modalities. Patient selection for either proton or photon radiation therapy of SNC patients should be based on a case-by-case comparison.

Improving Access to Proton Treatment in Canada Via a Proton Plan Consultation Service: A Use Case Example

Aim: To provide an overview of the Proton Plan Consultation Service offered at our cancer centre and to demonstrate how that service triggered a reversal in the decision that would have denied a patient access to a treatment not currently offered in Canada. Process: The Proton Consultation Service is a multidisciplinary team comprised of a Radiation Oncologist, two Medical Physicists and two Medical Dosimertists. A referring physician can request a proton plan by completing the online referral form and sending the patients planning CT and photon treatment plan including targets and clinical goals. A 14 yo male with an orbital rhabdomyosarcoma was referred to the Proton Plan Consultation Service from a cancer centre in Montreal. The patient had recently been denied referral to a U.S. Proton Centre for treatment. A proton plan was generated by the consultation service and exported back to the Montreal referring Radiation Oncologist. After reviewing this comparative proton plan against the original photon plan an approval committee for the Quebec government reversed their initial decision and supported sending the child to a U.S. Proton Centre for treatment. Benefits/Challenges: Proton plans allow for reduced normal tissue dose to surrounding structures when compared to photon plans. To highlight with a few examples from this case, the pituitary mean dose was reduced from 1137 cGy in the photon plan to 73 cGy in the proton plan. Brainstem max dose to 0.1 cc was reduced from 1086 cGy to 3 cGy. Finally, right hippocampus max dose to 0.1cc was reduced from 803 cGy to 25 cGy. As radiotherapy can cause neurocognition changes, these dose reductions for normal brain structures may have long-term benefits for this child. The challenges encountered are based around educating the dosimetry staff around best practices for proton planning and expediting the proton plan for the referring centre so the patient experiences limited delay in start of treatment. Impact/Outcomes: This use case demonstrates how the Proton Consultation Service can be used to ensure Canadians have appropriate access to proton treatment. It also serves as an education tool for oncology staff across Canada, highlighting the benefits of proton treatment as a valuable tool for the treatment of cancer in difficult sites.

PO-1497 Identifying an optimal proton planning strategy for varying bowel density in complex neuroblastomas

PO-1497 Identifying an optimal proton planning strategy for varying bowel density in complex neuroblastomas

PO-1496 Comparing standard proton planning strategy for sinonasal cancer with pseudo-arc multifield approach

PO-1496 Comparing standard proton planning strategy for sinonasal cancer with pseudo-arc multifield approach

DIR-based models to predict weekly anatomical changes in head and neck cancer proton therapy

Objective. We proposed two anatomical models for head and neck patients to predict anatomical changes during the course of radiotherapy. Approach. Deformable image registration was used to build two anatomical models: (1) the average model (AM) simulated systematic progressive changes across the patient cohort; (2) the refined individual model (RIM) used a patient’s CT images acquired during treatment to update the prediction for each individual patient. Planning CTs and weekly CTs were used from 20 nasopharynx patients. This dataset included 15 training patients and 5 test patients. For each test patient, a spot scanning proton plan was created. Models were evaluated using CT number differences, contours, proton spot location deviations and dose distributions. Main results. If no model was used, the CT number difference between the planning CT and the repeat CT at week 6 of treatment was on average 128.9 Hounsfield Units (HU) over the test population. This can be reduced to 115.5 HU using the AM, and to 110.5 HU using the RIM3 (RIM, updated at week (3). When the predicted contours from the models were used, the average mean surface distance of parotid glands can be reduced from 1.98 (no model) to 1.16 mm (AM) and 1.19 mm (RIM3) at week 6. Using the proton spot range, the average anatomical uncertainty over the test population reduced from 4.47 ± 1.23 (no model) to 2.41 ± 1.12 mm (AM), and 1.89 ± 0.96 mm (RIM3). Based on the gamma analysis, the average gamma index over the test patients was improved from 93.87 ± 2.48 % (no model) to 96.16 ± 1.84% (RIM3) at week 6. Significance. The AM and the RIM both demonstrated the ability to predict anatomical changes during the treatment. The RIM can gradually refine the prediction of anatomical changes based on the AM. The proton beam spots provided an accurate and effective way for uncertainty evaluation.

A Dosimetric Comparison of Lattice, Brass, and Proton Grid Therapy Treatment Plans

PurposeOur purpose was to dosimetrically compare volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) lattice radiation therapy (LRT), brass, and proton grid therapy planning techniques and suggest potential clinical applications for each. Methods and MaterialsFour plans delivering 20 Gy in 1 fraction were created for each of 22 patients. Brass and proton grid plans used a single static field and the same beam angle. Proton grid plans used the same beam size and spacing as the brass block. Two VMAT LRT plans were generated for each patient: one with 1-cm diameter lattice points spaced 2-cm center-to-center (2-cm VMAT) and another with 1.5-cm diameter lattice points spaced 3-cm center-to-center (3- cm VMAT). Maximum, minimum, mean, and equivalent uniform dose and the dose to 90%, 50%, 20%, 10%, and 5% (D90%[%], D50%[%], etc) of gross tumor volume (GTV) were reported. D10%/D90% characterized dose heterogeneity. Normal tissue dose was generalized by the maximum dose and volume in cubic centimeters of tissue outside the GTV receiving 30% and 50% of prescription (body-GTV V30%[cm3]; body-GTV V50%[cm3]). ResultsVMAT LRT plans delivered the highest maximum GTV doses while brass and proton plans delivered higher D5%(%), D10%(%), and D20%(%) values. D50%(%), D90%(%), and minimum dose varied little between plan types. Proton and brass plans had the highest dose heterogeneity. Two-centimeter VMAT and brass grid plans had the highest mean GTV doses. Two-centimeter VMAT plans had the highest equivalent uniform dose, followed by 3-cm VMAT, brass, and proton plans. VMAT LRT plans exhibited the lowest normal tissue maximum and body GTV V30%(cm3) and body GTV V50%(cm3) values. ConclusionsAn in-depth comparison of target and normal tissue dosimetric parameters for common photon and proton grid therapy planning techniques was made. Strengths of each plan type were noted leading to general recommendations on usage.

Feasibility of lattice radiotherapy using proton and carbon-ion pencil beam for sinonasal malignancy.

BackgroundSinonasal malignancies are a treatment challenge because of their complex anatomy and close proximity to organs at risk (OARs). We aimed to investigate the feasibility of lattice radiotherapy (LRT) using pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton or carbon-ion beams in the treatment of sinonasal malignancies.MethodsA total of 10 patients with nonoperative and bulky sinonasal adenoid cystic carcinomas (ACC) were enrolled. Spherical vertices with a 1 cm diameter and average center-to-center (c-t-c) distance of 3.51 cm were delineated within the gross tumor volumes (GTVs). The prescription doses were 15 Gy[relative biologic effectiveness (RBE)] to the vertices and 3 to 3.5 Gy(RBE) to the periphery, delivered as clinical target volume boosts (CTVboosts) in 1 fraction. Photon, proton, and carbon-ion LRT plans were generated. Peak-to-valley dose ratios (PVDRs) and the doses delivered to the vertices, the CTVboost, and OARs were compared among the 3 plans.ResultsThe mean PVDRmin values for the photon, proton, and carbon-ion LRT plans were 4.78 (range, 4.34 to 5.36), 4.82 (range, 4.15 to 5.37), and 4.69 (range, 4.31 to 5.28), respectively. The mean PVDRmean values for the same plans were 3.42 (range, 3.15 to 3.79), 2.93 (range, 2.19 to 3.74), and 3.58 (range, 3.09 to 4.68), respectively. There were no significant differences between the PVDRmin and PVDRmean values across the 3 LRT plans. Most critical organs were better protected in the proton and carbon-ion LRT plans than in the photon LRT plans. The photon LRT plans showed the highest maximum degree (Dmax) of vertices. Furthermore, these plans did not introduce more doses to the OARs compared to the 1-fraction clinical boost plan.ConclusionsDespite minimal differences in PVDR, proton and carbon-ion LRT plans can better protect OARs than photon LRT plans.

Treatment planning for Flash radiotherapy: General aspects and applications to proton beams.

The increased radioresistence of healthy tissues when irradiated at very high dose rates (known as the Flash effect) is a radiobiological mechanism that is currently investigated to increase the therapeutic ratio of radiotherapy treatments. To maximize the benefits of the clinical application of Flash, a patient-specific balance between different properties of the dose distribution should be found, that is, Flash needs to be one of the variables considered in treatment planning. We investigated the Flash potential of three proton therapy planning and beam delivery techniques, each on a different anatomical region. Based on a set of beam delivery parameters, on hypotheses on the dose and dose rate thresholds needed for the Flash effect to occur, and on two definitions of Flash dose rate, we generated exemplary illustrations of the capabilities of current proton therapy equipment to generate Flash dose distributions. All techniques investigated could both produce dose distributions comparable with a conventional proton plan and reach the Flash regime, to an extent that was strongly dependent on the dose per fraction and the Flash dose threshold. The beam current, Flash dose rate threshold, and dose rate definition typically had a more moderate effect on the amount of Flash dose in normal tissue. A systematic estimation of the impact of Flash on different patient anatomies and treatment protocols is possible only if Flash-specific treatment planning features become readily available. Planning evaluation tools such as a voxel-based dose delivery time structure, and the inclusion in the optimization cost function of parameters directly associated with Flash (e.g., beam current, spot delivery sequence, and scanning speed), are needed to generate treatment plans that are taking full advantage of the potential benefits of the Flasheffect.

Quantification of biological range uncertainties in patients treated at the Krakow proton therapy centre

BackgroundVariable relative biological effectiveness (vRBE) in proton therapy might significantly modify the prediction of RBE-weighted dose delivered to a patient during proton therapy. In this study we will present a method to quantify the biological range extension of the proton beam, which results from the application of vRBE approach in RBE-weighted dose calculation.Methods and materialsThe treatment plans of 95 patients (brain and skull base patients) were used for RBE-weighted dose calculation with constant and the McNamara RBE model. For this purpose the Monte Carlo tool FRED was used. The RBE-weighted dose distributions were analysed using indices from dose-volume histograms. We used the volumes receiving at least 95% of the prescribed dose (V95) to estimate the biological range extension resulting from vRBE approach.ResultsThe vRBE model shows higher median value of relative deposited dose and D95 in the planning target volume by around 1% for brain patients and 4% for skull base patients. The maximum doses in organs at risk calculated with vRBE was up to 14 Gy above dose limit. The mean biological range extension was greater than 0.4 cm.DiscussionOur method of estimation of biological range extension is insensitive for dose inhomogeneities and can be easily used for different proton plans with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) optimization. Using volumes instead of dose profiles, which is the common method, is more universal. However it was tested only for IMPT plans on fields arranged around the tumor area.ConclusionsAdopting a vRBE model results in an increase in dose and an extension of the beam range, which is especially disadvantageous in cancers close to organs at risk. Our results support the need to re-optimization of proton treatment plans when considering vRBE.

Implementation of Photon Treatment Back-up Workflow at a High-Volume Proton Center: Safety, Quality, and Patient Considerations

PurposeA successful proton beam therapy (PBT) center relies heavily on the proper function and maintenance of a proton beam therapy machine. However, when a PBT machine is non-operational, a proton facility is hindered with delays that can potentially lead to inferior treatment outcome due to treatment interruption. This article reports a viable solution for a photon back-up plan in a proton down event. Methods and MaterialsThe implementation of a workflow for which proton plans are converted to photon plans so that patients can be treated using photons has been a successful strategy to reduce delays and mitigate its effect on patient care. This workflow was established through collaboration of physicians, physicists, dosimetrists, therapists, nurses, and schedulers. Results and conclusionsA tiered system established by disease site, number of fractions, and individualized circumstances is used to prioritize patients. Proton-photon backup planning strategy and physics check details were described. This article provides an overview of workflow of conversion of PBT to photon when the PBT machine is down. Specific needs of patients undergoing proton beam therapy are addressed.

Proceedings to the 7th Annual Conference of the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group North America (PTCOG-NA)

Proceedings to the 7th Annual Conference of the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group North America (PTCOG-NA)

Towards range-guidance in proton therapy to detect organ motion-induced dose degradations

Introduction. Internal organ motion and deformations may cause dose degradations in proton therapy (PT) that are challenging to resolve using conventional image-guidance strategies. This study aimed to investigate the potential of range guidance using water-equivalent path length (WEPL) calculations to detect dose degradations occurring in PT. Materials and methods. Proton ranges were estimated using WEPL calculations. Field-specific isodose surfaces in the planning CT (pCT), from robustly optimised five-field proton plans (opposing lateral and three posterior/posterior oblique beams) for locally advanced prostate cancer patients, were used as starting points. WEPLs to each point on the field-specific isodoses in the pCT were calculated. The corresponding range for each point was found in the repeat CTs (rCTs). The spatial agreement between the resulting surfaces in the rCTs (hereafter referred to as iso-WEPLs) and the isodoses re-calculated in rCTs was evaluated for different dose levels and Hausdorff thresholds (2–5 mm). Finally, the sensitivity and specificity of detecting target dose degradation (V95% < 95%) using spatial agreement measures between the iso-WEPLs and isodoses in the pCT was evaluated. Results. The spatial agreement between the iso-WEPLs and isodoses in the rCTs depended on the Hausdorff threshold. The agreement was 65%–88% for a 2 mm threshold, 83%–96% for 3 mm, 90%–99% for 4 mm, and 94%–99% for 5 mm, across all fields and isodose levels. Minor differences were observed between the different isodose levels investigated. Target dose degradations were detected with 82%–100% sensitivity and 75%–80% specificity using a 2 mm Hausdorff threshold for the lateral fields. Conclusion. Iso-WEPLs were comparable to isodoses re-calculated in the rCTs. The proposed strategy could detect target dose degradations occurring in the rCTs and could be an alternative to a fully-fledged dose re-calculation to detect anatomical variations severely influencing the proton range.

Toward MR-only proton therapy planning for pediatric brain tumors: Synthesis of relative proton stopping power images with multiple sequence MRI and development of an online quality assurance tool.

To generate synthetic relative proton stopping power (sRPSP) images from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequence(s) and develop an online quality assurance (QA) tool for sRPSP to facilitate safe integration of magnetic resonance (MR)-only proton planning into clinical practice. Planning computed tomography (CT) and MR images of 195 pediatric brain tumor patients were utilized (training: 150, testing: 45). Seventeen consistent-cycle generative adversarial network (ccGAN) models were trained separately using paired CT-converted RPSP and MRI datasets to transform a subject's MRI into sRPSP. T1-weighted (T1W), T2-weighted (T2W), and FLAIR MRI were permutated to form 17 combinations, with or without preprocessing, for determining the optimal training sequence(s). For evaluation, sRPSP images were converted to synthetic CT (sCT) and compared to the real CT in terms of mean absolute error (MAE) in Hounsfield units (HU). For QA, sCT was deformed and compared to a reference template built from training dataset to produce a flag map, highlighting pixels that deviate by >100HU and fall outside the mean±standard deviation reference intensity. The gamma intensity analysis (10%/3mm) of the deformed sCT against the QA template on the intensity difference was investigated as a surrogate of sCT accuracy. The sRPSP images generated from a single T1W or T2W sequence outperformed that generated from multi-MRI sequences in terms of MAE (all p<0.05). Preprocessing with N4 bias and histogram matching reduced MAE of T2W MRI-based sCT (54±21HU vs. 42±13HU, p=0.002). The gamma intensity analysis of sCT against the QA template was highly correlated with the MAE of sCT against the real CT in the testing cohort (r=-0.89 for T1W sCT; r=-0.93 for T2W sCT). Accurate sRPSP images can be generated from T1W/T2W MRI for proton planning. A QA tool highlights regions of inaccuracy, flagging problematic cases unsuitable for clinical use.

Impact of geometric distortion on dose deviation for photon and proton treatment plans.

We investigated the dose deviation related to geometric distortion and dose gradient on magnetic resonance‐only treatment planning for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy and proton therapy. The residual geometric distortion of two different magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences (A) and (B) was applied in the computed tomography image and the structure set of each patient through a polynomial MRI geometric distortion model to simulate MRI‐based treatment planning. A 3D histogram was generated to specify the relationship of dose deviation to geometric distortion and dose gradient. When the dose gradient (Gd) approached zero, the maximum dose deviation reached 1.64% and 2.71% for photon plans of sequences A and B, respectively. For proton plans, the maximum dose deviation reached 3.15% and 4.89% for sequences A and B, respectively. When the geometric distortion (d) was close to zero, the maximum dose deviation was less than 0.8% for photon and proton plans of both sequences. Under extreme conditions (d = 2 mm and Gd = 4.5%/mm), the median value of dose deviation reached 3% and 3.49% for photon and proton plans, respectively for sequence A, and 2.93% and 4.55% for photon and proton plans, respectively, for sequence B. We demonstrate that the dose deviation is specific to MRI hardware parameters. Compared to the photon plan, the proton plan is more sensitive to the changes in geometric distortion. For typical clinical MRI geometric distortion (d ≤2 mm), the median dose deviation is expected to be within 3% and 5% for photon and proton plans, respectively.