Search

Background and purpose: Since 2011, our center has been using a library-based Plan-of-the-Day (PotD) strategy for external beam radiotherapy of cervical cancer patients to reduce normal tissue dose while maintaining adequate target coverage. With the advent of fully online-adaptive techniques such as daily online-adaptive replanning, further dose reduction may be possible. However, it is unknown how this reduction relates to plan library approaches, and how the most recent PotD strategies relate to no adaptation. In this study we compare the performance of our current PotD strategy with non-adaptive and fully online-adaptive techniques in terms of target volume size and normal tissue sparing. Materials and methods: Treatment data of 376 patients treated with the PotD protocol between June 2011 and April 2020 were included. The size of the Planning Target Volumes (PTVs) was reconstructed for different strategies: full online adaptation, no adaptation, and the latest clinical version of the PotD protocol. Normal tissue sparing was estimated by the difference in margin volume to construct the PTV and the volume overlap of the PTV with bladder and rectum. Results: The current version of our PotD approach reduced the PTV margin volume by a median of 250 cm3 compared to no adaptation. Bladder-PTV overlap decreased from a median of 142 to 71 cm3, and from 39 to 16 cm3 for rectum-PTV. Fully online-adaptive approaches could further decrease the PTV volume by 144 cm3 using a 5 mm margin for residual errors. In this scenario, bladder-PTV overlap was reduced to 35 cm3 and rectum-PTV overlap to 11 cm3. Conclusion: The current version of the PotD protocol is an effective technique to improve normal tissue sparing compared to no adaptation. Further sparing can be achieved using fully online-adaptive techniques, but at the cost of a more

BackgroundThe first clinical trials to assess the feasibility of FLASH radiotherapy in humans have started (FAST-01, FAST-02) and more trials are foreseen. To increase comparability between trials it is important to assure treatment quality and therefore establish a standard for machine quality assurance (QA). Currently, the AAPM TG-224 report is considered as the standard on machine QA for proton therapy, however, it was not intended to be used for ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) proton beams, which have gained interest due to the observation of the FLASH effect.PurposeThe aim of this study is to find consensus on practical guidelines on machine QA for UHDR proton beams in transmission mode in terms of which QA is required, how they should be done, which detectors are suitable for UHDR machine QA, and what tolerance limits should be applied.MethodsA risk assessment to determine the gaps in the current standard for machine QA was performed by an international group of medical physicists. Based on that, practical guidelines on how to perform machine QA for UHDR proton beams were proposed.ResultsThe risk assessment clearly identified the need for additional guidance on temporal dosimetry, addressing dose rate (constancy), dose spillage, and scanning speed. In addition, several minor changes from AAPM TG-224 were identified; define required dose rate levels, the use of clinically relevant dose levels, and the use of adapted beam settings to minimize activation of detector and phantom materials or to avoid saturation effects of specific detectors. The final report was created based on discussions and consensus.ConclusionsConsensus was reached on what QA is required for UHDR scanning proton beams in transmission mode for isochronous cyclotron-based systems and how they should be performed. However, the group discussions also showed that there is a lack of high temporal resolution detectors and sufficient QA data to set appropriate limits for some of the proposed QA procedure

Objective:In head-and-neck cancer intensity modulated proton therapy, adaptive radiotherapy is currently restricted to offline re-planning, mitigating the effect of slow changes in patient anatomies. Daily online adaptations can potentially improve dosimetry. Here, a new, fully automated online re-optimization strategy is presented. In a retrospective study, this online re-optimization approach was compared to our trigger-based offline re-planning (offlineTB re-planning) schedule, including extensive robustness analyses. Approach:The online re-optimization method employs automated multi-criterial re-optimization, using robust optimization with 1 mm setup-robustness settings (in contrast to 3 mm for offlineTB re-planning). Hard planning constraints and spot addition are used to enforce adequate target coverage, avoid prohibitively large maximum doses and minimize organ-at-risk doses. For 67 repeat-CTs from 15 patients, fraction doses of the two strategies were compared for the CTVs and organs-at-risk. Per repeat-CT, 10.000 fractions with different setup and range robustness settings were simulated using polynomial chaos expansion for fast and accurate dose calculations. Main results. For 14/67 repeat-CTs, offlineTB re-planning resulted in <50% probability of D 98% ≥ 95% of the prescribed dose (D pres) in one or both CTVs, which never happened with online re-optimization. With offlineTB re-planning, eight repeat-CTs had zero probability of obtaining D 98% ≥ 95%D pres for CTV7000, while the minimum probability with online re-optimization was 81%. Risks of xerostomia and dysphagia grade ≥ II were reduced by 3.5 ± 1.7 and 3.9 ± 2.8 percentage point [mean ± SD] (p < 10−5 for both). In online re-optimization, adjustment of spot configuration followed by spot-intensity re-optimization took 3.4 min on average. Sig

Objective. Determining and verifying the number of monitor units is crucial to achieving the desired dose distribution in radiotherapy and maintaining treatment efficacy. However, current commercial treatment planning system(s) dedicated to ocular passive eyelines in proton therapy do not provide the number of monitor units for patient-specific plan delivery. Performing specific pre-treatment field measurements, which is time and resource consuming, is usually gold-standard practice. This proof-of-concept study reports on the development of a multi-institutional-based generalized model for monitor units determination in proton therapy for eye melanoma treatments. Approach. To cope with the small number of patients being treated in proton centers, three European institutes participated in this study. Measurements data were collected to address output factor differences across the institutes, especially as function of field size, spread-out Bragg peak modulation width, residual range, and air gap. A generic model for monitor units prediction using a large number of 3748 patients and broad diversity in tumor patterns, was evaluated using six popular machine learning algorithms: (i) decision tree; (ii) random forest, (iii) extra trees, (iv) K-nearest neighbors, (v) gradient boosting, and (vi) the support vector regression. Features used as inputs into each machine learning pipeline were: Spread-out Bragg peak width, range, air gap, fraction and calibration doses. Performance measure was scored using the mean absolute error, which was the difference between predicted and real monitor units, as collected from institutional gold-standard methods. Main results. Predictions across algorithms were accurate within 3% uncertainty for up to 85.2% of the plans and within 10% uncertainty for up to 98.6% of the plans with the extra trees algorithm. Significance. A proof-of-concept of using machine learning-based generic monitor units determination in ocular proton therapy has be