Engineering topics

Sahoo, Narayan

Publications and source records attributed to Sahoo, Narayan.

24 records · Page 2

DOE OSTI2013

Spot-scanning beam proton therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy for ipsilateral head and neck malignancies: A treatment planning comparison

Radiation therapy for head and neck malignancies can have side effects that impede quality of life. Theoretically, proton therapy can reduce treatment-related morbidity by minimizing the dose to critical normal tissues. We evaluated the feasibility of spot-scanning proton therapy for head and neck malignancies and compared dosimetry between those plans and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans. Plans from 5 patients who had undergone IMRT for primary tumors of the head and neck were used for planning proton therapy. Both sets of plans were prepared using computed tomography (CT) scans with the goals of achieving 100% of the prescribed dose to the clinical target volume (CTV) and 95% to the planning TV (PTV) while maximizing conformity to the PTV. Dose-volume histograms were generated and compared, as were conformity indexes (CIs) to the PTVs and mean doses to the organs at risk (OARs). Both modalities in all cases achieved 100% of the dose to the CTV and 95% to the PTV. Mean PTV CIs were comparable (0.371 IMRT, 0.374 protons, p = 0.953). Mean doses were significantly lower in the proton plans to the contralateral submandibular (638.7 cGy IMRT, 4.3 cGy protons, p = 0.002) and parotid (533.3 cGy IMRT, 48.5 cGy protons, p = 0.003) glands; oral cavity (1760.4 cGy IMRT, 458.9 cGy protons, p = 0.003); spinal cord (2112.4 cGy IMRT, 249.2 cGy protons, p = 0.002); and brainstem (1553.52 cGy IMRT, 166.2 cGy protons, p = 0.005). Proton plans also produced lower maximum doses to the spinal cord (3692.1 cGy IMRT, 2014.8 cGy protons, p = 0.034) and brainstem (3412.1 cGy IMRT, 1387.6 cGy protons, p = 0.005). Normal tissue V{sub 10}, V{sub 30}, and V{sub 50} values were also significantly lower in the proton plans. We conclude that spot-scanning proton therapy can significantly reduce the integral dose to head and neck critical structures. Prospective studies are underway to determine if this reduced dose translates to improved quality of life.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2012

Characteristics of optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters in the spread-out Bragg peak region of clinical proton beams

Purpose: Optically stimulated luminescent detectors (OSLDs) have a number of advantages in radiation dosimetry making them excellent dosimeters for quality assurance and patient dose verification. Although the dosimeters have been investigated in several modalities, relatively little work has been done in examining the dosimeters for use in clinical proton beams. This study examined a number of characteristics of the response of the dosimeters in the spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) region of clinical proton beams. Methods: Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeters from Landauer, Inc., specifically the nanoDot dosimeter, were investigated. These dosimeters were placed in a special phantom with a recess to fit the dosimeters without an air gap. Beams with nominal energies of 160, 200, and 250 MeV were used in the passively-scattered proton beam at the MD Anderson Cancer Center Proton Therapy Center. Dosimetric properties including linearity, field size dependence, energy dependence, residual signal as a function of cumulative dose, and postirradiation fading were investigated by taking measurements at the center of SOBPs. Results: The dosimeters showed 1% supralinearity at 200 cGy and 5% supralinearity at 1000 cGy. No noticeable field size dependence of the detector was found for field sizes from 2 x 2 cm{sup 2} to 18 x 18 cm{sup 2}. Residual signal as a function of cumulative dose showed a small increase for measurements up to 1000 cGy. Readout signal depletion of the dosimeters after consecutive readings showed a slightly larger depletion in protons for doses up to 500 cGy but not by a clinically significant amount. Within the center of various SOBP widths and proton energies the variation in response was less than 2%. An average beam quality factor of 1.089 with experimental standard deviation of 0.007 was determined and applied to the data such that the results were within 1.2% of ion chamber data. Conclusions: The nanoDot OSL dosimeter characteristics were studied in the SOBP region of clinical proton beams. To achieve accurate dosimetric readings, corrections to the dosimeter response were applied. Corrections tended to be minimal or broadly consistent. The nanoDot OSLD was found to be an acceptable dosimeter for measurement in the SOBP region for a range of clinical proton beams.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

DOE OSTI2012

A procedure to determine the planar integral spot dose values of proton pencil beam spots

Purpose: Planar integral spot dose (PISD) of proton pencil beam spots (PPBSs) is a required input parameter for beam modeling in some treatment planning systems used in proton therapy clinics. The measurement of PISD by using commercially available large area ionization chambers, like the PTW Bragg peak chamber (BPC), can have large uncertainties due to the size limitation of these chambers. This paper reports the results of our study of a novel method to determine PISD values from the measured lateral dose profiles and peak dose of the PPBS. Methods: The PISDs of 72.5, 89.6, 146.9, 181.1, and 221.8 MeV energy PPBSs were determined by area integration of their planar dose distributions at different depths in water. The lateral relative dose profiles of the PPBSs at selected depths were measured by using small volume ion chambers and were investigated for their angular anisotropies using Kodak XV films. The peak spot dose along the beam's central axis (D{sub 0}) was determined by placing a small volume ion chamber at the center of a broad field created by the superposition of spots at different locations. This method allows eliminating positioning uncertainties and the detector size effect that could occur when measuring it in single PPBS. The PISD was then calculated by integrating the measured lateral relative dose profiles for two different upper limits of integration and then multiplying it with corresponding D{sub 0}. The first limit of integration was set to radius of the BPC, namely 4.08 cm, giving PISD{sub RBPC}. The second limit was set to a value of the radial distance where the profile dose falls below 0.1% of the peak giving the PISD{sub full}. The calculated values of PISD{sub RBPC} obtained from area integration method were compared with the BPC measured values. Long tail dose correction factors (LTDCFs) were determined from the ratio of PISD{sub full}/PISD{sub RBPC} at different depths for PPBSs of different energies. Results: The spot profiles were found to have angular anisotropy. This anisotropy in PPBS dose distribution could be accounted in a reasonable approximate manner by taking the average of PISD values obtained using the in-line and cross-line profiles. The PISD{sub RBPC} values fall within 3.5% of those measured by BPC. Due to inherent dosimetry challenges associated with PPBS dosimetry, which can lead to large experimental uncertainties, such an agreement is considered to be satisfactory for validation purposes. The PISD{sub full} values show differences ranging from 1 to 11% from BPC measured values, which are mainly due to the size limitation of the BPC to account for the dose in the long tail regions of the spots extending beyond its 4.08 cm radius. The dose in long tail regions occur both for high energy beams such as 221.8 MeV PPBS due to the contributions of nuclear interactions products in the medium, and for low energy PPBS because of their larger spot sizes. The calculated LTDCF values agree within 1% with those determined by the Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. Conclusions: The area integration method to compute the PISD from PPBS lateral dose profiles is found to be useful both to determine the correction factors for the values measured by the BPC and to validate the results from MC simulations.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

DOE OSTI2012

Dosimetric Comparison of Three-Dimensional Conformal Proton Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy, and Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Treatment of Pediatric Craniopharyngiomas

Purpose: Cranial irradiation in pediatric patients is associated with serious long-term adverse effects. We sought to determine whether both three-dimensional conformal proton radiotherapy (3D-PRT) and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) compared with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) decrease integral dose to brain areas known to harbor neuronal stem cells, major blood vessels, and other normal brain structures for pediatric patients with craniopharyngiomas. Methods and Materials: IMRT, forward planned, passive scattering proton, and IMPT plans were generated and optimized for 10 pediatric patients. The dose was 50.4 Gy (or cobalt Gy equivalent) delivered in 28 fractions with the requirement for planning target volume (PTV) coverage of 95% or better. Integral dose data were calculated from differential dose-volume histograms. Results: The PTV target coverage was adequate for all modalities. IMRT and IMPT yielded the most conformal plans in comparison to 3D-PRT. Compared with IMRT, 3D-PRT and IMPT plans had a relative reduction of integral dose to the hippocampus (3D-PRT, 20.4; IMPT, 51.3%{sup Asterisk-Operator }), dentate gyrus (27.3, 75.0%{sup Asterisk-Operator }), and subventricular zone (4.5, 57.8%{sup Asterisk-Operator }). Vascular organs at risk also had reduced integral dose with the use of proton therapy (anterior cerebral arteries, 33.3{sup Asterisk-Operator }, 100.0%{sup Asterisk-Operator }; middle cerebral arteries, 25.9%{sup Asterisk-Operator }, 100%{sup Asterisk-Operator }; anterior communicating arteries, 30.8{sup Asterisk-Operator }, 41.7%{sup Asterisk-Operator }; and carotid arteries, 51.5{sup Asterisk-Operator }, 77.6{sup Asterisk-Operator }). Relative reduction of integral dose to the infratentorial brain (190.7{sup Asterisk-Operator }, 109.7%{sup Asterisk-Operator }), supratentorial brain without PTV (9.6, 26.8%{sup Asterisk-Operator }), brainstem (45.6, 22.4%{sup Asterisk-Operator }), and whole brain without PTV (19.4{sup Asterisk-Operator }, 34.4%{sup Asterisk-Operator }) were recorded with the use of proton therapy. ({sup Asterisk-Operator }Differences were significant based on Friedman's test with Bonferroni-Dunn correction, {alpha} = 0.05) Conclusions: The current study found that proton therapy was able to avoid excess integral radiation dose to a variety of normal structures at all dose levels while maintaining equal target coverage. Future studies will examine the clinical benefits of these dosimetric advantages.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2012

A Beam-Specific Planning Target Volume (PTV) Design for Proton Therapy to Account for Setup and Range Uncertainties

Purpose: To report a method for explicitly designing a planning target volume (PTV) for treatment planning and evaluation in heterogeneous media for passively scattered proton therapy and scanning beam proton therapy using single-field optimization (SFO). Methods and Materials: A beam-specific PTV (bsPTV) for proton beams was derived by ray-tracing and shifting ray lines to account for tissue misalignment in the presence of setup error or organ motion. Range uncertainties resulting from inaccuracies in computed tomography-based range estimation were calculated for proximal and distal surfaces of the target in the beam direction. The bsPTV was then constructed based on local heterogeneity. The bsPTV thus can be used directly as a planning target as if it were in photon therapy. To test the robustness of the bsPTV, we generated a single-field proton plan in a virtual phantom. Intentional setup and range errors were introduced. Dose coverage to the clinical target volume (CTV) under various simulation conditions was compared between plans designed based on the bsPTV and a conventional PTV. Results: The simulated treatment using the bsPTV design performed significantly better than the plan using the conventional PTV in maintaining dose coverage to the CTV. With conventional PTV plans, the minimum coverage to the CTV dropped from 99% to 67% in the presence of setup error, internal motion, and range uncertainty. However, plans using the bsPTV showed minimal drop of target coverage from 99% to 94%. Conclusions: The conventional geometry-based PTV concept used in photon therapy does not work well for proton therapy. We investigated and validated a beam-specific PTV method for designing and evaluating proton plans.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2011

Patient-Specific Quality Assurance for Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving Spot Scanning Proton Therapy Using Single-Field Uniform Dose

Purpose: To describe our experiences with patient-specific quality assurance (QA) for patients with prostate cancer receiving spot scanning proton therapy (SSPT) using single-field uniform dose (SFUD). Methods and Materials: The first group of 249 patients with prostate cancer treated with SSPT using SFUD was included in this work. The scanning-beam planning target volume and number of monitor units were recorded and checked for consistency. Patient-specific dosimetric measurements were performed, including the point dose for each plan, depth doses, and two-dimensional (2D) dose distribution in the planes perpendicular to the incident beam direction for each field at multiple depths. The {gamma}-index with 3% dose or 3-mm distance agreement criteria was used to evaluate the 2D dose distributions. Results: We observed a linear relationship between the number of monitor units and scanning-beam planning target volume. The difference between the measured and calculated point doses (mean {+-} SD) was 0.0% {+-} 0.7% (range, -2.9% to 1.8%). In general, the depth doses exhibited good agreement except at the distal end of the spread-out Bragg peak. The pass rate of {gamma}-index (mean {+-} SD) for 2D dose comparison was 96.2% {+-} 2.6% (range, 90-100%). Discrepancies between the measured and calculated dose distributions primarily resulted from the limitation of the model used by the treatment planning system. Conclusions: We have established a patient-specific QA program for prostate cancer patients receiving SSPT using SFUD.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗