Engineering topics

Zhu, X. Ronald

Publications and source records attributed to Zhu, X. Ronald.

18 records

DOE OSTI2016

Quantitative analysis of treatment process time and throughput capacity for spot scanning proton therapy

Purpose: To determine the patient throughput and the overall efficiency of the spot scanning system by analyzing treatment time, equipment availability, and maximum daily capacity for the current spot scanning port at Proton Therapy Center Houston and to assess the daily throughput capacity for a hypothetical spot scanning proton therapy center. Methods: At their proton therapy center, the authors have been recording in an electronic medical record system all treatment data, including disease site, number of fields, number of fractions, delivered dose, energy, range, number of spots, and number of layers for every treatment field. The authors analyzed delivery system downtimes that had been recorded for every equipment failure and associated incidents. These data were used to evaluate the patient census, patient distribution as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, and equipment clinical availability. The duration of each treatment session from patient walk-in to patient walk-out of the spot scanning treatment room was measured for 64 patients with head and neck, central nervous system, thoracic, and genitourinary cancers. The authors retrieved data for total target volume and the numbers of layers and spots for all fields from treatment plans for a total of 271 patients (including the above 64 patients). A sensitivity analysis of daily throughput capacity was performed by varying seven parameters in a throughput capacity model. Results: The mean monthly equipment clinical availability for the spot scanning port in April 2012–March 2015 was 98.5%. Approximately 1500 patients had received spot scanning proton therapy as of March 2015. The major disease sites treated in September 2012–August 2014 were the genitourinary system (34%), head and neck (30%), central nervous system (21%), and thorax (14%), with other sites accounting for the remaining 1%. Spot scanning beam delivery time increased with total target volume and accounted for approximately 30%–40% of total treatment time for the total target volumes exceeding 200 cm{sup 3}, which was the case for more than 80% of the patients in this study. When total treatment time was modeled as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, the model overestimated total treatment time by 12% on average, with a standard deviation of 32%. A sensitivity analysis of throughput capacity for a hypothetical four-room spot scanning proton therapy center identified several priority items for improvements in throughput capacity, including operation time, beam delivery time, and patient immobilization and setup time. Conclusions: The spot scanning port at our proton therapy center has operated at a high performance level and has been used to treat a large number of complex cases. Further improvements in efficiency may be feasible in the areas of facility operation, beam delivery, patient immobilization and setup, and optimization of treatment scheduling.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

Clinical Outcomes and Patterns of Disease Recurrence After Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Oropharyngeal Squamous Carcinoma

Purpose: A single-institution prospective study was conducted to assess disease control and toxicity of proton therapy for patients with head and neck cancer. Methods and Materials: Disease control, toxicity, functional outcomes, and patterns of failure for the initial cohort of patients with oropharyngeal squamous carcinoma (OPC) treated with intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) were prospectively collected in 2 registry studies at a single institution. Locoregional failures were analyzed by using deformable image registration. Results: Fifty patients with OPC treated from March 3, 2011, to July 2014 formed the cohort. Eighty-four percent were male, 50% had never smoked, 98% had stage III/IV disease, 64% received concurrent therapy, and 35% received induction chemotherapy. Forty-four of 45 tumors (98%) tested for p16 were positive. All patients received IMPT (multifield optimization to n=46; single-field optimization to n=4). No Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 4 or 5 toxicities were observed. The most common grade 3 toxicities were acute mucositis in 58% of patients and late dysphagia in 12%. Eleven patients had a gastrostomy (feeding) tube placed during therapy, but none had a feeding tube at last follow-up. At a median follow-up time of 29 months, 5 patients had disease recurrence: local in 1, local and regional in 1, regional in 2, and distant in 1. The 2-year actuarial overall and progression-free survival rates were 94.5% and 88.6%. Conclusions: The oncologic, toxicity, and functional outcomes after IMPT for OPC are encouraging and provide the basis for ongoing and future clinical studies.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2015

Reducing Dose Uncertainty for Spot-Scanning Proton Beam Therapy of Moving Tumors by Optimizing the Spot Delivery Sequence

Purpose: To develop and validate a novel delivery strategy for reducing the respiratory motion–induced dose uncertainty of spot-scanning proton therapy. Methods and Materials: The spot delivery sequence was optimized to reduce dose uncertainty. The effectiveness of the delivery sequence optimization was evaluated using measurements and patient simulation. One hundred ninety-one 2-dimensional measurements using different delivery sequences of a single-layer uniform pattern were obtained with a detector array on a 1-dimensional moving platform. Intensity modulated proton therapy plans were generated for 10 lung cancer patients, and dose uncertainties for different delivery sequences were evaluated by simulation. Results: Without delivery sequence optimization, the maximum absolute dose error can be up to 97.2% in a single measurement, whereas the optimized delivery sequence results in a maximum absolute dose error of ≤11.8%. In patient simulation, the optimized delivery sequence reduces the mean of fractional maximum absolute dose error compared with the regular delivery sequence by 3.3% to 10.6% (32.5-68.0% relative reduction) for different patients. Conclusions: Optimizing the delivery sequence can reduce dose uncertainty due to respiratory motion in spot-scanning proton therapy, assuming the 4-dimensional CT is a true representation of the patients' breathing patterns.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2015

Selective robust optimization: A new intensity-modulated proton therapy optimization strategy

Purpose: To develop a new robust optimization strategy for intensity-modulated proton therapy as an important step in translating robust proton treatment planning from research to clinical applications. Methods: In selective robust optimization, a worst-case-based robust optimization algorithm is extended, and terms of the objective function are selectively computed from either the worst-case dose or the nominal dose. Two lung cancer cases and one head and neck cancer case were used to demonstrate the practical significance of the proposed robust planning strategy. The lung cancer cases had minimal tumor motion less than 5 mm, and, for the demonstration of the methodology, are assumed to be static. Results: Selective robust optimization achieved robust clinical target volume (CTV) coverage and at the same time increased nominal planning target volume coverage to 95.8%, compared to the 84.6% coverage achieved with CTV-based robust optimization in one of the lung cases. In the other lung case, the maximum dose in selective robust optimization was lowered from a dose of 131.3% in the CTV-based robust optimization to 113.6%. Selective robust optimization provided robust CTV coverage in the head and neck case, and at the same time improved controls over isodose distribution so that clinical requirements may be readily met. Conclusions: Selective robust optimization may provide the flexibility and capability necessary for meeting various clinical requirements in addition to achieving the required plan robustness in practical proton treatment planning settings.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MRI-Based Computed Tomography Metal Artifact Correction Method for Improving Proton Range Calculation Accuracy

Purpose: Computed tomography (CT) artifacts can severely degrade dose calculation accuracy in proton therapy. Prompted by the recently increased popularity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the radiation therapy clinic, we developed an MRI-based CT artifact correction method for improving the accuracy of proton range calculations. Methods and Materials: The proposed method replaces corrupted CT data by mapping CT Hounsfield units (HU number) from a nearby artifact-free slice, using a coregistered MRI. MRI and CT volumetric images were registered with use of 3-dimensional (3D) deformable image registration (DIR). The registration was fine-tuned on a slice-by-slice basis by using 2D DIR. Based on the intensity of paired MRI pixel values and HU from an artifact-free slice, we performed a comprehensive analysis to predict the correct HU for the corrupted region. For a proof-of-concept validation, metal artifacts were simulated on a reference data set. Proton range was calculated using reference, artifactual, and corrected images to quantify the reduction in proton range error. The correction method was applied to 4 unique clinical cases. Results: The correction method resulted in substantial artifact reduction, both quantitatively and qualitatively. On respective simulated brain and head and neck CT images, the mean error was reduced from 495 and 370 HU to 108 and 92 HU after correction. Correspondingly, the absolute mean proton range errors of 2.4 cm and 1.7 cm were reduced to less than 2 mm in both cases. Conclusions: Our MRI-based CT artifact correction method can improve CT image quality and proton range calculation accuracy for patients with severe CT artifacts.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2014

Clinical Implementation of Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Thoracic Malignancies

Purpose: Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) can improve dose conformality and better spare normal tissue over passive scattering techniques, but range uncertainties complicate its use, particularly for moving targets. We report our early experience with IMPT for thoracic malignancies in terms of motion analysis and management, plan optimization and robustness, and quality assurance. Methods and Materials: Thirty-four consecutive patients with lung/mediastinal cancers received IMPT to a median 66 Gy(relative biological equivalence [RBE]). All patients were able to undergo definitive radiation therapy. IMPT was used when the treating physician judged that IMPT conferred a dosimetric advantage; all patients had minimal tumor motion (<5 mm) and underwent individualized tumor-motion dose-uncertainty analysis and 4-dimensional (4D) computed tomographic (CT)-based treatment simulation and motion analysis. Plan robustness was optimized by using a worst-case scenario method. All patients had 4D CT repeated simulation during treatment. Results: IMPT produced lower mean lung dose (MLD), lung V{sub 5} and V{sub 20}, heart V{sub 40}, and esophageal V{sub 60} than did IMRT (P<.05) and lower MLD, lung V{sub 20}, and esophageal V{sub 60} than did passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) (P<.05). D{sub 5} to the gross tumor volume and clinical target volume was higher with IMPT than with intensity modulated radiation therapy or PSPT (P<.05). All cases were analyzed for beam-angle-specific motion, water-equivalent thickness, and robustness. Beam angles were chosen to minimize the effect of respiratory motion and avoid previously treated regions, and the maximum deviation from the nominal dose-volume histogram values was kept at <5% for the target dose and met the normal tissue constraints under a worst-case scenario. Patient-specific quality assurance measurements showed that a median 99% (range, 95% to 100%) of the pixels met the 3% dose/3 mm distance criteria for the γ index. Adaptive replanning was used for 9 patients (26.5%). Conclusions: IMPT using 4D CT-based planning, motion management, and optimization was implemented successfully and met our quality assurance parameters for treating challenging thoracic cancers.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2014

Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Craniospinal Irradiation: Organ-at-Risk Exposure and a Low-Gradient Junctioning Technique

Purpose: To compare field junction robustness and sparing of organs at risk (OARs) during craniospinal irradiation (CSI) using intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) to conventional passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT). Methods and Materials: Ten patients, 5 adult and 5 pediatric patients, previously treated with PSPT-based CSI were selected for comparison. Anterior oblique cranial fields, using a superior couch rotation, and posterior spinal fields were used for IMPT planning. To facilitate low-gradient field junctioning along the spine, the inverse-planning IMPT technique was divided into 3 stages. Dose indices describing target coverage and normal tissue dose, in silico error modeling, and film dosimetry were used to assess plan quality. Results: Field junction robustness along the spine was improved using the staged IMPT planning technique, reducing the worst case impact of a 4-mm setup error from 25% in PSPT to <5% of prescription dose. This was verified by film dosimetry for clinical delivery. Exclusive of thyroid dose in adult patients, IMPT plans demonstrated sparing of organs at risk as good or better than PSPT. Coverage of the cribriform plate for pediatric (V95% [percentage of volume of the target receiving at least 95% of the prescribed dose]; 87 ± 11 vs 92 ± 7) and adult (V95%; 94 ± 7 vs 100 ± 1) patients and the clinical target in pediatric (V95%; 98 ± 2 vs 100 ± 1) and adult (V95%; 100 ± 1 vs 100 ± 1) patients for PSPT and IMPT plans, respectively, were comparable or improved. For adult patients, IMPT target dose inhomogeneity was increased, as determined by heterogeneity index (HI) and inhomogeneity coefficient (IC). IMPT lowered maximum spinal cord dose, improved spinal dose homogeneity, and reduced exposure to other OARs. Conclusions: IMPT has the potential to improve CSI plan quality and the homogeneity of intrafractional dose at match lines. The IMPT approach developed may also simplify treatments and reduce workload per patient relative to PSPT.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2014

Spot Scanning Proton Therapy for Malignancies of the Base of Skull: Treatment Planning, Acute Toxicities, and Preliminary Clinical Outcomes

Purpose: To describe treatment planning techniques and early clinical outcomes in patients treated with spot scanning proton therapy for chordoma or chondrosarcoma of the skull base. Methods and Materials: From June 2010 through August 2011, 15 patients were treated with spot scanning proton therapy for chordoma (n=10) or chondrosarcoma (n=5) at a single institution. Toxicity was prospectively evaluated and scored weekly and at all follow-up visits according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0. Treatment planning techniques and dosimetric data were recorded and compared with those of passive scattering plans created with clinically applicable dose constraints. Results: Ten patients were treated with single-field-optimized scanning beam plans and 5 with multifield-optimized intensity modulated proton therapy. All but 2 patients received a simultaneous integrated boost as well. The mean prescribed radiation doses were 69.8 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE]; range, 68-70 Gy [RBE]) for chordoma and 68.4 Gy (RBE) (range, 66-70) for chondrosarcoma. In comparison with passive scattering plans, spot scanning plans demonstrated improved high-dose conformality and sparing of temporal lobes and brainstem. Clinically, the most common acute toxicities included fatigue (grade 2 for 2 patients, grade 1 for 8 patients) and nausea (grade 2 for 2 patients, grade 1 for 6 patients). No toxicities of grades 3 to 5 were recorded. At a median follow-up time of 27 months (range, 13-42 months), 1 patient had experienced local recurrence and a second developed distant metastatic disease. Two patients had magnetic resonance imaging-documented temporal lobe changes, and a third patient developed facial numbness. No other subacute or late effects were recorded. Conclusions: In comparison to passive scattering, treatment plans for spot scanning proton therapy displayed improved high-dose conformality. Clinically, the treatment was well tolerated, and with short-term follow-up, disease control rates and toxicity profiles were favorable.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2014

Multifield Optimization Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Tumors: A Translation to Practice

Background: We report the first clinical experience and toxicity of multifield optimization (MFO) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for patients with head and neck tumors. Methods and Materials: Fifteen consecutive patients with head and neck cancer underwent MFO-IMPT with active scanning beam proton therapy. Patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) had comprehensive treatment extending from the base of the skull to the clavicle. The doses for chemoradiation therapy and radiation therapy alone were 70 Gy and 66 Gy, respectively. The robustness of each treatment plan was also analyzed to evaluate sensitivity to uncertainties associated with variations in patient setup and the effect of uncertainties with proton beam range in patients. Proton beam energies during treatment ranged from 72.5 to 221.8 MeV. Spot sizes varied depending on the beam energy and depth of the target, and the scanning nozzle delivered the spot scanning treatment “spot by spot” and “layer by layer.” Results: Ten patients presented with SCC and 5 with adenoid cystic carcinoma. All 15 patients were able to complete treatment with MFO-IMPT, with no need for treatment breaks and no hospitalizations. There were no treatment-related deaths, and with a median follow-up time of 28 months (range, 20-35 months), the overall clinical complete response rate was 93.3% (95% confidence interval, 68.1%-99.8%). Xerostomia occurred in all 15 patients as follows: grade 1 in 10 patients, grade 2 in 4 patients, and grade 3 in 1 patient. Mucositis within the planning target volumes was seen during the treatment of all patients: grade 1 in 1 patient, grade 2 in 8 patients, and grade 3 in 6 patients. No patient experienced grade 2 or higher anterior oral mucositis. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first clinical report of MFO-IMPT for head and neck tumors. Early clinical outcomes are encouraging and warrant further investigation of proton therapy in prospective clinical trials.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2013

Improving spot-scanning proton therapy patient specific quality assurance with HPlusQA, a second-check dose calculation engine

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to validate the use of HPlusQA, spot-scanning proton therapy (SSPT) dose calculation software developed at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, as second-check dose calculation software for patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA). The authors also showed how HPlusQA can be used within the current PSQA framework.Methods: The authors compared the dose calculations of HPlusQA and the Eclipse treatment planning system with 106 planar dose measurements made as part of PSQA. To determine the relative performance and the degree of correlation between HPlusQA and Eclipse, the authors compared calculated with measured point doses. Then, to determine how well HPlusQA can predict when the comparisons between Eclipse calculations and the measured dose will exceed tolerance levels, the authors compared gamma index scores for HPlusQA versus Eclipse with those of measured doses versus Eclipse. The authors introduce the αβγ transformation as a way to more easily compare gamma scores.Results: The authors compared measured and calculated dose planes using the relative depth, z/R × 100%, where z is the depth of the measurement and R is the proton beam range. For relative depths than less than 80%, both Eclipse and HPlusQA calculations were within 2 cGy of dose measurements on average. When the relative depth was greater than 80%, the agreement between the calculations and measurements fell to 4 cGy. For relative depths less than 10%, the Eclipse and HPlusQA dose discrepancies showed a negative correlation, −0.21. Otherwise, the correlation between the dose discrepancies was positive and as large as 0.6. For the dose planes in this study, HPlusQA correctly predicted when Eclipse had and had not calculated the dose to within tolerance 92% and 79% of the time, respectively. In 4 of 106 cases, HPlusQA failed to predict when the comparison between measurement and Eclipse's calculation had exceeded the tolerance levels of 3% for dose and 3 mm for distance-to-agreement.Conclusions: The authors found HPlusQA to be reasonably effective (79%± 10%) in determining when the comparison between measured dose planes and the dose planes calculated by the Eclipse treatment planning system had exceeded the acceptable tolerance levels. When used as described in this study, HPlusQA can reduce the need for patient specific quality assurance measurements by 64%. The authors believe that the use of HPlusQA as a dose calculation second check can increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the QA process.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2013

Patient-specific quantification of respiratory motion-induced dose uncertainty for step-and-shoot IMRT of lung cancer

Purpose: The objective of this study was to quantify respiratory motion-induced dose uncertainty at the planning stage for step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using an analytical technique.Methods: Ten patients with stage II/III lung cancer who had undergone a planning four-dimensional (4D) computed tomographic scan and step-and-shoot IMRT planning were selected with a mix of motion and tumor size for this retrospective study. A step-and-shoot IMRT plan was generated for each patient. The maximum and minimum doses with respiratory motion were calculated for each plan, and the mean deviation from the 4D dose was calculated, taking delivery time, fractionation, and patient breathing cycle into consideration.Results: For all patients evaluated in this study, the mean deviation from the 4D dose in the planning target volume (PTV) was <2.5%, with a standard deviation <1.2%, and maximum point dose variation from the 4D dose was <6.2% in the PTV assuming delivery dose rate of 200 MU/min and patient breathing cycle of 8 s. The motion-induced dose uncertainty is a function of motion, fractionation, MU (plan modulation), dose rate, and patient breathing cycle.Conclusions: Respiratory motion-induced dose uncertainty varies from patient to patient. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the dose uncertainty on a patient-specific basis, which could be useful for plan evaluation and treatment strategy determination for selected patients.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2013

Quality assurance of proton beams using a multilayer ionization chamber system

Purpose: The measurement of percentage depth-dose (PDD) distributions for the quality assurance of clinical proton beams is most commonly performed with a computerized water tank dosimetry system with ionization chamber, commonly referred to as water tank. Although the accuracy and reproducibility of this method is well established, it can be time-consuming if a large number of measurements are required. In this work the authors evaluate the linearity, reproducibility, sensitivity to field size, accuracy, and time-savings of another system: the Zebra, a multilayer ionization chamber system.Methods: The Zebra, consisting of 180 parallel-plate ionization chambers with 2 mm resolution, was used to measure depth-dose distributions. The measurements were performed for scattered and scanned proton pencil beams of multiple energies delivered by the Hitachi PROBEAT synchrotron-based delivery system. For scattered beams, the Zebra-measured depth-dose distributions were compared with those measured with the water tank. The principal descriptors extracted for comparisons were: range, the depth of the distal 90% dose; spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) length, the region between the proximal 95% and distal 90% dose; and distal-dose fall off (DDF), the region between the distal 80% and 20% dose. For scanned beams, the Zebra-measured ranges were compared with those acquired using a Bragg peak chamber during commissioning.Results: The Zebra demonstrated better than 1% reproducibility and monitor unit linearity. The response of the Zebra was found to be sensitive to radiation field sizes greater than 12.5 × 12.5 cm; hence, the measurements used to determine accuracy were performed using a field size of 10 × 10 cm. For the scattered proton beams, PDD distributions showed 1.5% agreement within the SOBP, and 3.8% outside. Range values agreed within −0.1 ± 0.4 mm, with a maximum deviation of 1.2 mm. SOBP length values agreed within 0 ± 2 mm, with a maximum deviation of 6 mm. DDF values agreed within 0.3 ± 0.1 mm, with a maximum deviation of 0.6 mm. For the scanned proton pencil beams, Zebra and Bragg peak chamber range values demonstrated agreement of 0.0 ± 0.3 mm with a maximum deviation of 1.3 mm. The setup and measurement time for all Zebra measurements was 3 and 20 times less, respectively, compared to the water tank measurements.Conclusions: Our investigation shows that the Zebra can be useful not only for fast but also for accurate measurements of the depth-dose distributions of both scattered and scanned proton beams. The analysis of a large set of measurements shows that the commonly assessed beam quality parameters obtained with the Zebra are within the acceptable variations specified by the manufacturer for our delivery system.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

DOE OSTI2013

Preliminary evaluation of multifield and single-field optimization for the treatment planning of spot-scanning proton therapy of head and neck cancer

Purpose: Spot-scanning proton therapy (SSPT) using multifield optimization (MFO) can generate highly conformal dose distributions, but it is more sensitive to setup and range uncertainties than SSPT using single-field optimization (SFO). The authors compared the two optimization methods for the treatment of head and neck cancer with bilateral targets and determined the superior method on the basis of both the plan quality and the plan robustness in the face of setup and range uncertainties.Methods: Four patients with head and neck cancer with bilateral targets who received SSPT treatment in the authors' institution were studied. The patients had each been treated with a MFO plan using three fields. A three-field SFO plan (3F-SFO) and a two-field SFO plan (2F-SFO) with the use of a range shifter in the beam line were retrospectively generated for each patient. The authors compared the plan quality and robustness to uncertainties of the SFO plans with the MFO plans. Robustness analysis of each plan was performed to generate the two dose distributions consisting of the highest and the lowest possible doses (worst-case doses) from the spatial and range perturbations at every voxel. Dosimetric indices from the nominal and worst-case plans were compared.Results: The 3F-SFO plans generally yielded D95 and D5 values in the targets that were similar to those of the MFO plans. 3F-SFO resulted in a lower dose to the oral cavity than MFO in all four patients by an average of 9.9 Gy, but the dose to the two parotids was on average 6.7 Gy higher for 3F-SFO than for MFO. 3F-SFO plans reduced the variations of dosimetric indices under uncertainties in the targets by 22.8% compared to the MFO plans. Variations of dosimetric indices under uncertainties in the organs at risk (OARs) varied between organs and between patients, although they were on average 9.2% less for the 3F-SFO plans than for the MFO plans. Compared with the MFO plans, the 2F-SFO plans showed a reduced dose to the parotids for both the nominal dose and in the worst-case scenario, but the plan robustness in the target of the 2F-SFO plans was not notably greater than that of the MFO plans.Conclusions: Compared with MFO, 3F-SFO improves plan robustness in the targets but degrades dose sparing in the parotids in both the nominal and worst-case scenarios. Although 2F-SFO improves parotid sparing compared with MFO, it produces little improvement in plan robustness. Therefore, considering its tolerable target coverage and sparing of OARs in worst-case scenarios, the authors recommend MFO as the planning method for the treatment of head and neck cancer with bilateral targets.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2013

Statistical Assessment of Proton Treatment Plans Under Setup and Range Uncertainties

Purpose: To evaluate a method for quantifying the effect of setup errors and range uncertainties on dose distribution and dose–volume histogram using statistical parameters; and to assess existing planning practice in selected treatment sites under setup and range uncertainties. Methods and Materials: Twenty passively scattered proton lung cancer plans, 10 prostate, and 1 brain cancer scanning-beam proton plan(s) were analyzed. To account for the dose under uncertainties, we performed a comprehensive simulation in which the dose was recalculated 600 times per given plan under the influence of random and systematic setup errors and proton range errors. On the basis of simulation results, we determined the probability of dose variations and calculated the expected values and standard deviations of dose–volume histograms. The uncertainties in dose were spatially visualized on the planning CT as a probability map of failure to target coverage or overdose of critical structures. Results: The expected value of target coverage under the uncertainties was consistently lower than that of the nominal value determined from the clinical target volume coverage without setup error or range uncertainty, with a mean difference of −1.1% (−0.9% for breath-hold), −0.3%, and −2.2% for lung, prostate, and a brain cases, respectively. The organs with most sensitive dose under uncertainties were esophagus and spinal cord for lung, rectum for prostate, and brain stem for brain cancer. Conclusions: A clinically feasible robustness plan analysis tool based on direct dose calculation and statistical simulation has been developed. Both the expectation value and standard deviation are useful to evaluate the impact of uncertainties. The existing proton beam planning method used in this institution seems to be adequate in terms of target coverage. However, structures that are small in volume or located near the target area showed greater sensitivity to uncertainties.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2013

Use of treatment log files in spot scanning proton therapy as part of patient-specific quality assurance

Purpose: The purpose of this work was to assess the monitor unit (MU) values and position accuracy of spot scanning proton beams as recorded by the daily treatment logs of the treatment control system, and furthermore establish the feasibility of using the delivered spot positions and MU values to calculate and evaluate delivered doses to patients. Methods: To validate the accuracy of the recorded spot positions, the authors generated and executed a test treatment plan containing nine spot positions, to which the authors delivered ten MU each. The spot positions were measured with radiographic films and Matrixx 2D ion-chambers array placed at the isocenter plane and compared for displacements from the planned and recorded positions. Treatment logs for 14 patients were then used to determine the spot MU values and position accuracy of the scanning proton beam delivery system. Univariate analysis was used to detect any systematic error or large variation between patients, treatment dates, proton energies, gantry angles, and planned spot positions. The recorded patient spot positions and MU values were then used to replace the spot positions and MU values in the plan, and the treatment planning system was used to calculate the delivered doses to patients. The results were compared with the treatment plan. Results: Within a treatment session, spot positions were reproducible within {+-}0.2 mm. The spot positions measured by film agreed with the planned positions within {+-}1 mm and with the recorded positions within {+-}0.5 mm. The maximum day-to-day variation for any given spot position was within {+-}1 mm. For all 14 patients, with {approx}1 500 000 spots recorded, the total MU accuracy was within 0.1% of the planned MU values, the mean (x, y) spot displacement from the planned value was (-0.03 mm, -0.01 mm), the maximum (x, y) displacement was (1.68 mm, 2.27 mm), and the (x, y) standard deviation was (0.26 mm, 0.42 mm). The maximum dose difference between calculated dose to the patient based on the plan and recorded data was within 2%. Conclusions: The authors have shown that the treatment log file in a spot scanning proton beam delivery system is precise enough to serve as a quality assurance tool to monitor variation in spot position and MU value, as well as the delivered dose uncertainty from the treatment delivery system. The analysis tool developed here could be useful for assessing spot position uncertainty and thus dose uncertainty for any patient receiving spot scanning proton beam therapy.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2012

Dynamically accumulated dose and 4D accumulated dose for moving tumors

Purpose: The purpose of this work was to investigate the relationship between dynamically accumulated dose (dynamic dose) and 4D accumulated dose (4D dose) for irradiation of moving tumors, and to quantify the dose uncertainty induced by tumor motion. Methods: The authors established that regardless of treatment modality and delivery properties, the dynamic dose will converge to the 4D dose, instead of the 3D static dose, after multiple deliveries. The bounds of dynamic dose, or the maximum estimation error using 4D or static dose, were established for the 4D and static doses, respectively. Numerical simulations were performed (1) to prove the principle that for each phase, after multiple deliveries, the average number of deliveries for any given time converges to the total number of fractions (K) over the number of phases (N); (2) to investigate the dose difference between the 4D and dynamic doses as a function of the number of deliveries for deliveries of a 'pulsed beam'; and (3) to investigate the dose difference between 4D dose and dynamic doses as a function of delivery time for deliveries of a 'continuous beam.' A Poisson model was developed to estimate the mean dose error as a function of number of deliveries or delivered time for both pulsed beam and continuous beam. Results: The numerical simulations confirmed that the number of deliveries for each phase converges to K/N, assuming a random starting phase. Simulations for the pulsed beam and continuous beam also suggested that the dose error is a strong function of the number of deliveries and/or total deliver time and could be a function of the breathing cycle, depending on the mode of delivery. The Poisson model agrees well with the simulation. Conclusions: Dynamically accumulated dose will converge to the 4D accumulated dose after multiple deliveries, regardless of treatment modality. Bounds of the dynamic dose could be determined using quantities derived from 4D doses, and the mean dose difference between the dynamic dose and 4D dose as a function of number of deliveries and/or total deliver time was also established.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

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 OSTI2011

Toward a better understanding of the gamma index: Investigation of parameters with a surface-based distance method

Purpose: The purpose of this work was to clarify the interactions between the parameters used in the {gamma} index with the surface-based distance method, which itself can be viewed as a generalized version of the {gamma} index. The examined parameters included the distance to agreement (DTA)/dose difference (DD) criteria, the percentage used as a passing criterion, and the passing percentage for given DTA/DD criteria. The specific aims of our work were (1) to understand the relationships between the parameters used in the {gamma} index, (2) to determine the detection limit, or the minimum detectable error, of the {gamma} index with a given set of parameters, and (3) to establish a procedure to determine parameters that are consistent with the capacity of an IMRT QA system. Methods: The surface-based distance technique with dose gradient factor was derived, and then the relationship between surface-based distance and {gamma} index was established. The dose gradient factor for plans and measurements of 10 IMRT patients, 10 spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) patients, and 3 Radiological Physics Center (RPC) head and neck phantom were calculated and evaluated. The detection limits of the surface-based distance and {gamma} index methods were examined by introducing known shifts to the 10 IMRT plans. Results: The means of the dose gradient factors were 0.434 mm/% and 0.956 mm/% for the SRS and IMRT plans, respectively. Key quantities (including the mean and 90th and 99th percentiles of the distance distribution) of the surface-based distance distribution between two dose distributions were linearly proportional to the actual shifts. However, the passing percentage of the {gamma} index for a given set of DTA/DD criteria was not associated with the actual shift. For IMRT, using the standard quality assurance criteria of 3 mm/3% DTA/DD and a 90% passing rate, we found that the detection limit of the {gamma} index in terms of global shift was 4.07 mm/4.07 % without noise. Conclusions: Surface-based distance is a direct measure of the difference between two dose distributions and can be used to evaluate or determine parameters for use in calculating the {gamma} index. The dose gradient factor represents the weighting between spatial and dose shift and should be determined before DTA/DD criteria are set. The authors also present a procedure to determine {gamma} index parameters from measurements.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗