Search

Objective . Previous methods for robustness evaluation rely on dose calculation for a number of uncertainty scenarios, which either fails to provide statistical meaning when the number is too small (e.g., ∼8) or becomes unfeasible in daily clinical practice when the number is sufficiently large (e.g., >100). Our proposed deep learning (DL)-based method addressed this issue by avoiding the intermediate dose calculation step and instead directly predicting the percentile dose distribution from the nominal dose distribution using a DL model. In this study, we sought to validate this DL-based statistical robustness evaluation method for efficient and accurate robustness quantification in head and neck (H&N) intensity-modulated proton therapy with diverse beam configurations and multifield optimization. Approach . A dense, dilated 3D U-net was trained to predict the 5th and 95th percentile dose distributions of uncertainty scenarios using the nominal dose and planning CT images. The data set comprised proton therapy plans for 582 H&N cancer patients. Ground truth percentile values were estimated for each patient through 600 dose recalculations, representing randomly sampled uncertainty scenarios. The comprehensive comparisons of different models were conducted for H&N cancer patients, considering those with and without a beam mask and diverse beam configurations, including varying beam angles, couch angles, and beam numbers. The performance of our model trained based on a mixture of patients with H&N and prostate cancer was also assessed in contrast with models trained based on data specific for patients with cancer at either site. Results . The DL-based model's predictions of percentile dose distributions exhibited excellent agreement with the ground truth dose distributions. The average gamma index with 2 mm / 2%, consistently exceeded 97% for both 5th and 95th percentile dose volumes. Mean dose-volume histogram error analysis revealed that predictions from the combined training set yielded mean errors and standard deviations that were generally similar to those in the specific patient training data sets. Significance . Our proposed DL-based method for evaluation of the robustness of proton therapy plans provides precise, rapid predictions of percentile dose for a given confidence level regardless of the beam arrangement and cancer site. This versatility positions our model as a valuable tool for evaluating the robustness of proton therapy across various cancer sites., (Creative Commons Attribution license.)

Introduction: Adjuvant immunotherapy (IO) following concurrent chemotherapy and photon radiation therapy confers an overall survival (OS) benefit for patients with inoperable locally advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (LA-NSCLC); however, outcomes of adjuvant IO after concurrent chemotherapy with proton beam therapy (CPBT) are unknown. We investigated OS and toxicity after CPBT with adjuvant IO versus CPBT alone for inoperable LA-NSCLC., Materials and Methods: We analyzed 354 patients with LA-NSCLC who were prospectively treated with CPBT with or without adjuvant IO from 2009 to 2021. Optimal variable ratio propensity score matching (PSM) matched CPBT with CPBT + IO patients. Survival was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression evaluated the effect of IO on disease outcomes., Results: Median age was 70 years; 71 (20%) received CPBT + IO and 283 (80%) received CPBT only. After PSM, 71 CPBT patients were matched with 71 CPBT + IO patients. Three-year survival rates for CPBT + IO vs CPBT were: OS 67% vs 30% (P < 0.001) and PFS 59% vs 35% (P = 0.017). Three-year LRFS (P = 0.137) and DMFS (P = 0.086) did not differ. Receipt of adjuvant IO was a strong predictor of OS (HR 0.40, P = 0.001) and PFS (HR 0.56, P = 0.030), but not LRFS (HR 0.61, P = 0.121) or DMFS (HR 0.61, P = 0.136). There was an increased incidence of grade ≥3 esophagitis in the CPBT-only group (6% CPBT + IO vs 17% CPBT, P = 0.037)., Conclusion: This study, one of the first to investigate CPBT followed by IO for inoperable LA-NSCLC, showed that IO conferred survival benefits with no increased rates of toxicity., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The recently observed FLASH effect related to high doses delivered with high rates has the potential to revolutionize radiation cancer therapy if promising results are confirmed and an underlying mechanism understood. Comprehensive measurements are essential to elucidate the phenomenon. We report the first-ever demonstration of measurements of successive in-spill and post-spill emissions of gammas arising from irradiations by a FLASH proton beam. A small positron emission tomography (PET) system was exposed in an ocular beam of the Proton Therapy Center at MD Anderson Cancer Center to view phantoms irradiated by 3.5 × 10 10 protons with a kinetic energy of 75.8 MeV delivered in 101.5 ms-long spills yielding a dose rate of 164 Gy s -1 . Most in-spill events were due to prompt gammas. Reconstructed post-spill tomographic events, recorded for up to 20 min, yielded quantitative imaging and dosimetric information. These findings open a new and novel modality for imaging and monitoring of FLASH proton therapy exploiting in-spill prompt gamma imaging followed by post-spill PET imaging., (Creative Commons Attribution license.)

We demonstrate the first ever recorded positron-emission tomography (PET) imaging and dosimetry of a FLASH proton beam at the Proton Center of the MD Anderson Cancer Center. Two scintillating LYSO crystal arrays, read out by silicon photomultipliers, were configured with a partial field of view of a cylindrical poly-methyl methacrylate (PMMA) phantom irradiated by a FLASH proton beam. The proton beam had a kinetic energy of 75.8 MeV and an intensity of about 3.5 × 10 10 protons that were extracted over 101.5 ms-long spills. The radiation environment was characterized by cadmium-zinc-telluride and plastic scintillator counters. Preliminary results indicate that the PET technology used in our tests can efficiently record FLASH beam events. The instrument yielded informative and quantitative imaging and dosimetry of beam-activated isotopes in a PMMA phantom, as supported by Monte Carlo simulations. These studies open a new PET modality that can lead to improved imaging and monitoring of FLASH proton therapy., (Creative Commons Attribution license.)

Objective . Robustness evaluation is critical in particle radiotherapy due to its susceptibility to uncertainties. However, the customary method for robustness evaluation only considers a few uncertainty scenarios, which are insufficient to provide a consistent statistical interpretation. We propose an artificial intelligence-based approach that overcomes this limitation by predicting a set of percentile dose values at every voxel and allows for the evaluation of planning objectives at specific confidence levels. Approach . We built and trained a deep learning (DL) model to predict the 5th and 95th percentile dose distributions, which corresponds to the lower and upper bounds of a two-tailed 90% confidence interval (CI), respectively. Predictions were made directly from the nominal dose distribution and planning computed tomography scan. The data used to train and test the model consisted of proton plans from 543 prostate cancer patients. The ground truth percentile values were estimated for each patient using 600 dose recalculations representing randomly sampled uncertainty scenarios. For comparison, we also tested whether a common worst-case scenario (WCS) robustness evaluation (voxel-wise minimum and maximum) corresponding to a 90% CI could reproduce the ground truth 5th and 95th percentile doses. Main results . The percentile dose distributions predicted by DL yielded excellent agreements with the ground truth dose distributions, with mean dose errors below 0.15 Gy and average gamma passing rates (GPR) at 1 mm/1% above 93.9, which were substantially better than the WCS dose distributions (mean dose error above 2.2 Gy and GPR at 1 mm/1% below 54). We observed similar outcomes in a dose-volume histogram error analysis, where the DL predictions generally yielded smaller mean errors and standard deviations than the WCS evaluation doses. Significance . The proposed method produces accurate and fast predictions (∼2.5 s for one percentile dose distribution) for a given confidence level. Thus, the method has the potential to improve robustness evaluation., (© 2023 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine.)

Objective . Irradiation with ultra-high dose rates (>40 Gy s -1 ), also known as FLASH irradiation, has the potential to shift the paradigm of radiation therapy because of its reduced toxicity to normal tissues compared to that of conventional irradiations. The goal of this study was to (1) achieve FLASH irradiation conditions suitable for pre-clinical i n vitro and in vivo biology experiments using our synchrotron-based proton beamline and (2) commission the FLASH irradiation conditions achieved. Approach . To achieve these suitable FLASH conditions, we made a series of adaptations to our proton beamline, including modifying the spill length and size of accelerating cycles, repurposing the reference monitor for dose control, and expanding the field size with a custom double-scattering system. We performed the dosimetric commissioning with measurements using an Advanced Markus chamber and EBT-XD films as well as with Monte Carlo simulations. Main results . Through adaptations, we have successfully achieved FLASH irradiation conditions, with an average dose rate of up to 375 Gy s -1 . The Advanced Markus chamber was shown to be appropriate for absolute dose calibration under our FLASH conditions with a recombination factor ranging from 1.002 to 1.006 because of the continuous nature of our synchrotron-based proton delivery within a spill. Additionally, the absolute dose measured using the Advanced Markus chamber and EBT-XD films agreed well, with average and maximum differences of 0.32% and 1.63%, respectively. We also performed a comprehensive temporal analysis for FLASH spills produced by our system, which helped us identify a unique relationship between the average dose rate and the dose in our FLASH irradiation. Significance. We have established a synchrotron-based proton FLASH irradiation platform with accurate and precise dosimetry that is suitable for pre-clinical biology experiments. The unique time structure of the FLASH irradiation produced by our synchrotron-based system may shed new light onto the mechanism behind the FLASH effect., (© 2022 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine.)

Purpose: The main purpose of this work was to generate and validate the dosimetric accuracy of proton beams of dimensions that are appropriate for in vivo small animal and in vitro ultrahigh dose rate (FLASH) radiotherapy experiments using a synchrotron-based treatment delivery system. This study was performed to enable future investigations of the relevance of a spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) under FLASH conditions., Methods: The spill characteristics of the small field fixed horizontal beam line were modified to deliver accelerated protons in times as short as 2 ms and to control the dose delivered. A Gaussian-like transverse beam profile was transformed into a square uniform one at FLASH dose rates, while avoiding low-dose regions, a crucial requirement to protect normal tissue during FLASH irradiation. Novel beam-shaping devices were designed using Monte Carlo techniques to produce up to about 6 cm 3 of uniform dose in SOBPs while maximizing the dose rate. These included a scattering foil, a conical flattening filter to maximize the flux of protons into the region of interest, energy filters, range compensators, and collimators. The shapes, sizes, and positions of the components were varied to provide the required field sizes and SOBPs., Results: The designed and fabricated devices were used to produce 10-, 15-, and 20-mm diameter, circular field sizes and 10-, 15-, and 20-mm SOBP modulation widths at uniform physical dose rates of up to 375 Gy/s at the center of the SOBP and a minimum dose rate of about 255 Gy/s at the entrance, respectively, in cylindrical volumes. The flatness of lateral dose profiles at the center could be adjusted to within ±1.5% at the center of the SOBP. Assessment of systematic uncertainties, such as impact of misalignments and positioning uncertainties, was performed using simulations, and the results were used to provide appropriate adjustments to ensure high-accuracy FLASH beam delivery for both in vitro and in vivo preclinical experiments., Conclusions: It is feasible to use synchrotron-generated proton beams of sufficient dimensions for FLASH radiobiology experiments. We expect to use the system we developed to acquire in vitro and in vivo small animal FLASH radiobiology data as a function of dose, dose rate, oxygen content, and linear energy transfer to help us understand the underlying mechanisms of the FLASH phenomenon., (© 2021 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Background and Purpose: To determine rates of xerostomia after intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) and identify dosimetric factors associated with xerostomia risk., Materials and Methods: Patients with OPC who received IMRT (n = 429) or IMPT (n = 103) from January 2011 through June 2015 at a single institution were studied retrospectively. Every 3 months after treatment, each patient completed an eight-item self-reported xerostomia-specific questionnaire (XQ; summary XQ score, 0-100). An XQ score of 50 was selected as the demarcation value for moderate-severe (XQs ≥ 50) and no-mild (XQs < 50) xerostomia. The mean doses and percent volumes of organs at risk receiving various doses (V5-V70) were extracted from the initial treatment plans. The dosimetric variables and xerostomia risk were compared using an independent-sample t-test or chi-square test., Results: The median follow-up time was 36.2 months. The proportions of patients with moderate-severe xerostomia were similar in the two treatment groups up to 18 months after treatment. However, moderate-severe xerostomia was less common in the IMPT group than in the IMRT group at 18-24 months (6% vs. 20%; p = 0.025) and 24-36 months (6% vs. 20%; p = 0.01). During the late xerostomia period (24-36 months), high dose/volume exposures (V25-V70) in the oral cavity were associated with high proportions of patients with moderate-severe xerostomia (all p < 0.05), but dosimetric variables regarding the salivary glands were not associated with late xerostomia., Conclusion: IMPT was associated with less late xerostomia than was IMRT in OPC patients. Oral cavity dosimetric variables were related to the occurrence of late xerostomia., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Opinion Statement: The rise in the incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPC), the relatively young age at which it is diagnosed, and its favorable prognosis necessitate the use of treatment techniques that reduce the likelihood of side effects during and after curative treatment. Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is a form of radiotherapy that de-intensifies treatment through dose de-escalation to normal tissues without compromising dose to the primary tumor and involved, regional lymph nodes. Preclinical studies have demonstrated that HPV-positive squamous cell carcinoma is more sensitive to proton radiation than is HPV-negative squamous cell carcinoma. Retrospective studies comparing intensity-modulated photon (X-ray) radiotherapy to IMPT for OPC suggest comparable rates of disease control and lower rates of pain, xerostomia, dysphagia, dysgeusia, gastrostomy tube dependence, and osteoradionecrosis with IMPT-all of which meaningfully affect the quality of life of patients treated for HPV-associated OPC. Two phase III trials currently underway-the "Randomized Trial of IMPT versus IMRT for the Treatment of Oropharyngeal Cancer of the Head and Neck" and the "TOxicity Reduction using Proton bEam therapy for Oropharyngeal cancer (TORPEdO)" trial-are expected to provide prospective, level I evidence regarding the effectiveness of IMPT for such patients.

Objective: Although intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMPT) is dosimetrically superior to passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) for locally advanced NSCLC (LA-NSCLC), direct comparisons of clinical outcomes are lacking. Here, we compare toxicity profiles and clinical outcomes after IMPT versus PSPT for LA-NSCLC., Methods: This is a nonrandomized, comparative study of two independent cohorts with LA-NSCLC (stage II-IIIB, stage IV with solitary brain metastasis) treated with concurrent chemotherapy and proton beam therapy. Toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0) and outcomes were prospectively collected as part of a clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00915005) or prospective registry (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00991094)., Results: Of 139 patients, 86 (62%) received PSPT and 53 (38%) IMPT; median follow-up times were 23.9 and 29.0 months, respectively. IMPT delivered lower mean radiation doses to the lungs (PSPT 16.0 Gy versus IMPT 13.0 Gy, p < 0.001), heart (10.7 Gy versus 6.6 Gy, p = 0.004), and esophagus (27.4 Gy versus 21.8 Gy, p = 0.005). Consequently, the IMPT cohort had lower rates of grade 3 or higher pulmonary (17% versus 2%, p = 0.005) and cardiac (11% versus 0%, p = 0.01) toxicities. Six patients (7%) with PSPT and zero patients (0%) with IMPT experienced grade 4 or 5 toxicity. Lower rates of pulmonary (28% versus 3%, p = 0.006) and cardiac (14% versus 0%, p = 0.05) toxicities were observed in the IMPT cohort even after propensity score matching for baseline imbalances. There was also a trend toward longer median overall survival in the IMPT group (23.9 mo versus 36.2 mo, p = 0.09). No difference was found in the 3-year rates of local (25% versus 20%, p = 0.44), local-regional (29% versus 36%, p = 0.56) and distant (52% versus 51%, p = 0.71) recurrences., Conclusions: IMPT is associated with lower radiation doses to the lung, heart, and esophagus, and lower rates of grade 3 or higher cardiopulmonary toxicity; additional clinical studies will be needed to assess the potential differences in survival between the two techniques., (Copyright © 2020 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Proton therapy is an expanding radiotherapy modality in the United States and worldwide. With the number of proton therapy centers treating patients increasing, so does the need for consistent, high-quality clinical commissioning practices. Clinical commissioning encompasses the entire proton therapy system's multiple components, including the treatment delivery system, the patient positioning system, and the image-guided radiotherapy components. Also included in the commissioning process are the x-ray computed tomography scanner calibration for proton stopping power, the radiotherapy treatment planning system, and corresponding portions of the treatment management system. This commissioning report focuses exclusively on intensity-modulated scanning systems, presenting details of how to perform the commissioning of the proton therapy and ancillary systems, including the required proton beam measurements, treatment planning system dose modeling, and the equipment needed., (© 2020 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Purpose: We aimed to determine whether multiple-CT (MCT) optimization of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) could improve plan robustness to anatomical changes and therefore reduce the additional need for adaptive planning., Methods and Materials: Ten patients with head and neck cancer who underwent IMPT were included in this retrospective study. Each patient had primary planning CT (PCT), a first adaptive planning CT (ACT1), and a second adaptive planning CT (ACT2). Selective robust IMPT plans were generated using each CT data set (PCT, ACT1, and ACT2). Moreover, a MCT optimized plan was generated using the PCT and ACT1 data sets together. Dose distributions optimized using each of the four plans (PCT, ACT1, ACT2, and MCT plans) were re-calculated on ACT2 data. The doses to the target and to organs at risk were compared between optimization strategies., Results: MCT plans for all patients met all target dose and organs-at-risk criteria for all three CT data sets. Target dose and organs-at-risk dose for PCT and ACT1 plans re-calculated on ACT2 data set were compromised, indicating the need for adaptive planning on ACT2 if PCT or ACT1 plans were used. The D 98% of CTV1 and CTV3 of MCT plan re-calculated on ACT2 were both above the coverage criteria. The CTV2 coverage of the MCT plan re-calculated on ACT2 was worse than ACT2 plan. The MCT plan re-calculated on ACT2 data set had lower chiasm, esophagus, and larynx doses than did PCT, ACT1, or ACT2 plans re-calculated on ACT2 data set., Conclusions: MCT optimization can improve plan robustness toward anatomical change and may reduce the number of plan adaptation for head and neck cancers., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess the worst-case robust optimization IMPT plans with setup and range uncertainties and to test the hypothesis that the worst-case robust optimization strategies could cover most possible setup and range uncertainties in the real scenarios., Methods: We analyzed the nominal and worst-case robust optimization IMPT plans of seven patients with head and neck cancer patients. To take uncertainties into account for the dose calculation, we performed a comprehensive simulation in which the dose was recalculated 625 times per given plan using Gaussian systematic setup and proton range uncertainties. Subsequently, based on the simulation results, we calculated the target coverage in all perturbation scenarios, as well as the ratios of target coverage located within the threshold of eight worst-case scenarios. We set the criteria for the optimized plan to be the ratios of 1) the dose delivered to 95% (D95%) of clinical target volumes 1 and 2 (CTV1 and CTV2) above 95% of the prescribed dose, and 2) the D95% of clinical target volume 3 (CTV3) above 90% of the prescribed dose in worst-case situations., Results: The probability that the perturbed-dose indices of the CTVs in each scenario were within the worst-case scenario limits ranged from 89.51 to 91.22% for both the nominal and worst-case robust optimization IMPT plans. A quartile analysis showed that the selective robust optimization IMPT plans all had higher D95% values for CTV1, CTV2, and CTV3 than did the nominal IMPT plans., Conclusions: The worst-case strategy for robust optimization is adequately models and covers most of the setup and range uncertainties for the IMPT treatment of head and neck patients in our center.

Background & Purpose: We report disease control, survival, and toxicity in patients with advanced inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving concurrent chemotherapy and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) at a single institution., Material and Methods: All patients were treated with IMPT with concurrent chemotherapy. Endpoints assessed were local, regional, and distant control, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS)., Results: Fifty-one patients were enrolled with a median follow-up time of 23.0 months; 39 (76%) were treated with a simultaneous integrated boost to the gross tumor volume (GTV). The median GTV dose was 67.3 CGE and the median CTV dose was 60.0 CGE. Median OS and DFS times were 33.9 months and 12.6 months. The 3-year local control rate was 78.3%. Treatment was well tolerated, with a grade 3 toxicity rate of 18% (9 events: 4 esophagitis, 3 dermatitis, 1 esophageal stricture, and 1 fatigue) and no grade 4 or 5 toxicity. The most common grade 2 toxic effects were esophagitis (22 [43%]), dermatitis (16 [31%]), pain (15 [29%]), and fatigue (14 [27%])., Conclusions: Treatment of inoperable NSCLC with IMPT and concurrent chemotherapy achieves excellent disease control with tolerable toxicity., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of setup uncertainties including uncertainties between different breath holds (BH) and inter-fractional anatomical changes under CT-guided BH with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in patients with liver cancer., Methods and Materials: This retrospective study considered 17 patients with liver tumors who underwent feedback-guided BH (FGBH) IMRT treatment with daily CT-on-rail imaging. Planning CT images were acquired at simulation using FGBH, and FGBH CT-on-rail images were also acquired prior to each treatment. Selective robust IMPT plans were generated using planning CT and re-calculated on each daily CT-on-rail image. Subsequently, the fractional doses were deformed and accumulated onto the planning CT according to the deformable image registration between daily and planning CTs. The doses to the target and organs at risk (OARs) were compared between IMRT, planned IMPT, and accumulated IMPT doses., Results: For IMPT plans, the mean of D 98% of CTV for all 17 patients was slightly reduced from the planned dose of 68.90 ± 1.61 Gy to 66.48 ± 1.67 Gy for the accumulated dose. The target coverage could be further improved by adjusting planning techniques. The dose-volume histograms of both planned and accumulated IMPT doses showed better sparing of OARs than that of the IMRT., Conclusions: IMPT with FGBH and CT-on-rail guidance is a robust treatment approach for liver tumor cases., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To report the feasibility of conducting a randomized study to compare the toxicity and efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus stereotactic body proton therapy (SBPT) for high-risk, medically inoperable, early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: Patients with medically inoperable NSCLC with high-risk features (centrally located or <5 cm T3 tumor or isolated lung parenchymal recurrences) were randomly assigned to SBRT or SBPT. Radiation dose was 50 Gy(relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) in 4 12.5-Gy(RBE) fractions prescribed to the planning target volume. Stereotactic body radiation therapy was given using 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy or intensity modulated radiation therapy, and SBPT was given using passive scattering. Consistency in patient setup was ensured with on-board cone beam computed tomography for the SBRT group and with orthogonal X rays for the SBPT group., Results: The study closed early owing to poor accrual, largely because of insurance coverage and lack of volumetric imaging in the SBPT group. Ultimately, 21 patients were enrolled, and 19 patients who received 50 Gy in 4 fractions were included for analysis (9 SBRT, 10 SBPT). At a median follow-up time of 32 months, median overall survival time was 28 months in the SBRT group and not reached in the SBPT group. Three-year overall survival was 27.8% and 90%, 3-year local control was 87.5% (8 of 9) and 90.0% (9 of 10), and 3-year regional control was 47.6% (5 of 9) and 90% (9 of 10) in the SBRT and SBPT groups, respectively. One patient in the SBPT group developed grade 3 skin fibrosis. No patients experienced grade 4/5 toxicity., Conclusion: Poor accrual, due to lack of volumetric imaging and insurance coverage for proton therapy, led to early closure of the trial and precluded accurate assessment of efficacy and toxicity. Comparable maturity of 2 radiation therapy modalities, particularly on-board imaging, and better insurance coverage for SBPT should be considered for future studies., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To establish, in the phase 1 portion of a prospective phase 1/2 study, the maximum tolerated dose of image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or proton therapy (IMPT), both with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), for patients with stage II to IIIB non-small cell lung cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiation therapy., Methods and Materials: Patients had pathologically proven non-small cell lung cancer, either unresectable stage II to IIIB disease or recurrent disease after surgical resection, and could tolerate concurrent chemoradiation. Radiation doses were selectively escalated to the SIB volume (internal gross tumor volume + 5-mm margin), and the dose to the planning target volume (internal gross tumor volume + 8-mm margin for clinical target volume + 5 mm) was kept at 60 Gy [cobalt gray equivalent (CGE)] over 30 fractions. Patients were randomized between the IMRT and IMPT groups if slots were available on the treatment machines for both groups. Otherwise, patients were allocated to IMRT or IMPT, whichever had an open treatment slot on the machine without randomization., Results: Fifteen patients (6 IMRT, 9 IMPT) were enrolled. The highest doses to the SIB were 72 Gy in the IMRT group and 78 Gy(CGE) in the IMPT group. Nine patients (6 IMRT, 3 IMPT) received an SIB dose of 72 Gy(CGE) [biologically effective dose = 89.3 Gy(CGE)], and 6 patients (IMPT) received an SIB dose of 78 Gy(CGE) [biologically effective dose = 98.3 Gy(CGE)]. Dose-limiting (grade ≥3) toxicity (esophagitis) developed in 1 of the 9 patients given 72 Gy(CGE) SIB. Grade ≥3 pneumonitis developed in 2 of the 6 patients treated to 78 Gy(CGE) IMPT SIB: 1 (grade 3) at 3 months after treatment and the other (grade 5, possibly related to treatment) at 2 months after treatment. Only 1 patient developed a marginal tumor recurrence with a median follow-up of 25 months (range, 4.3-47.4 months)., Conclusions: We recommend that an SIB dose of 72 Gy(CGE) be used as the highest SIB dose for the planned randomized phase 2 study., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: Reirradiation of thoracic malignancies is a treatment challenge, with concerns for toxicity and the inability to deliver definitive doses. Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) may allow safe delivery of a higher dose of radiation to the tumor while minimizing toxicities., Methods and Materials: Between 2011 and 2016, 27 patients who received IMPT for reirradiation of thoracic malignancies with definitive intent were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were included if they received a prior thoracic radiation course. All doses were recalculated to an equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions (EQD2). Patients received IMPT to a median dose of 66 EQD2 Gy (range, 43.2-84 Gy) for recurrence of thoracic cancer (93%) or sequentially after a course of thoracic stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (7%)., Results: Twenty-two patients (81%) were treated for non-small cell lung cancer. The median time to reirradiation was 29.5 months. At a median follow-up for all patients of 11.2 months (25.9 surviving patients), the median overall survival was 18.0 months, with a 1-year overall survival of 54%. Four patients (15%) experienced an in-field local failure (LF), with a 1-year freedom from LF rate of 78%. The 1-year freedom from locoregional failure and 1-year progression-free survival rates were 61% and 51%, respectively. Patients who received 66 EQD2 Gy or higher had improved 1-year freedom from LF (100% vs 49%; P = .013), 1-year freedom from locoregional failure (84% vs 23%; P = .035), and 1-year progression-free survival (76% vs 14%; P = .050). Reirradiation was well tolerated, with only 2 patients (7%) experiencing late grade 3 pulmonary toxicity, and none with grade 3 or higher esophagitis. There were no grade 4-5 toxicities., Conclusions: These data represent the largest series of patients treated with IMPT for definitive reirradiation of thoracic cancers. They demonstrate that IMPT provided durable local control with minimal toxicity and suggest that higher doses may improve outcomes., (Copyright © 2017 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We compared mandibular doses and osteoradionecrosis in patients with oropharyngeal cancer after intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT)., Methods and Materials: We identified 584 patients who received definitive radiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer from January 2011 through June 2014 at MD Anderson Cancer Center (534 IMRT and 50 IMPT). The dosimetric variables and osteoradionecrosis were compared with Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test., Results: Median follow-up time for all patients (534 IMRT and IMPT) was 33.8months (33.8months IMRT vs. 34.6months IMPT, P=0.854), and median time to osteoradionecrosis was 11.4months (range 6.74-16.1months). Mandibular doses were lower for patients treated with IMPT (minimum 0.8 vs. 7.3Gy; mean 25.6 vs. 41.2Gy; P<0.001), and osteoradionecrosis rates were lower as well: 2% IMPT (1 grade 1), 7.7% IMRT (12 grade 4, 5 grade 3, 1 grade 2 and 23 grade 1). Osteoradionecrosis location depended on the primary tumor site and high-dose field in the mandible., Conclusions: Osteoradionecrosis events were significantly associated with higher dose irradiation to mandibular. Use of IMPT minimized excess irradiation of the mandible and consequently reduced the risk of osteoradionecrosis for oropharyngeal cancer., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this phase I/II study was to assess the long-term clinical benefits and toxicities of proton beam therapy for medically inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: From June 2006 to September 2011, 35 patients with medically inoperable T1N0M0 (central or superior location, 12 patients) or T2-3N0M0 (any location, 23 patients) NSCLC were treated with 87.5Gy at 2.5Gy/fraction of proton therapy. Toxicities were scored according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0., Results: The median follow-up time was 83.1months (95% CI: 69.2-97.1months). For all 35 patients, the 1, 3, and 5-year overall survival rates were 85.7%, 42.9%, and 28.1%, respectively. The 5-year local recurrence-free, regional recurrence-free, and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 85.0%, 89.2%, and 54.4%, respectively. Different T stages had no effect on local and regional recurrence (p=0.499, p=1.00). However, with the increase in T stages, the distant metastasis rate increased significantly (p=0.006). The most common adverse effects were dermatitis (grade 2, 51.4%; grade 3, 2.9%) and radiation pneumonitis (grade 2, 11.4%; grade 3, 2.9%). Other grade 2 toxicities included esophagitis (2.9%), rib fracture (2.9%), heart toxicities (5.7%), and chest wall pain (2.9%)., Conclusions: According to our long-term follow-up data, proton therapy with ablative doses is well tolerated and effective in medically inoperable early-stage NSCLC. Systemic therapy should be considered to reduce the rate of distant metastasis in cases of T2 and T3 lesions., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To externally validate head and neck cancer (HNC) photon-derived normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models in patients treated with proton beam therapy (PBT)., Methods: This prospective cohort consisted of HNC patients treated with PBT at a single institution. NTCP models were selected based on the availability of data for validation and evaluated by using the leave-one-out cross-validated area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristics curve., Results: 192 patients were included. The most prevalent tumor site was oropharynx (n=86, 45%), followed by sinonasal (n=28), nasopharyngeal (n=27) or parotid (n=27) tumors. Apart from the prediction of acute mucositis (reduction of AUC of 0.17), the models overall performed well. The validation (PBT) AUC and the published AUC were respectively 0.90 versus 0.88 for feeding tube 6months PBT; 0.70 versus 0.80 for physician-rated dysphagia 6months after PBT; 0.70 versus 0.68 for dry mouth 6months after PBT; and 0.73 versus 0.85 for hypothyroidism 12months after PBT., Conclusion: Although a drop in NTCP model performance was expected for PBT patients, the models showed robustness and remained valid. Further work is warranted, but these results support the validity of the model-based approach for selecting treatment for patients with HNC., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) offers great promise in the treatment of a wide variety of cancers owing to the sharp drop-off in radiation dose at a defined point, known as the Bragg peak, beyond which there is no appreciable dose. However, it is also well-understood that PBT is associated with large economic costs, including both capital investment and operating costs. From a medical as well as societal perspective, therefore, it is important to be aware of the economic implications of new technologies such as PBT, and to evaluate the cost effectiveness based on different clinical and treatment scenarios. This review examines PBT from a health economics perspective, evaluating both the design and results of costeffectiveness (CE) studies that have been performed previously. We further examine several salient variables that can affect CE of PBT, including patient, tumor, treatment, and logistical factors. We discuss the implication of technological advances on PBT delivery, and its impact on overall healthcare delivery costs. Additionally, we evaluate the status of economic analyses for PBT and discuss the role of ongoing and future CE studies in better defining the economic role of PBT as part of modern cancer 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(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.

Background: Owing to its physical properties, intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) used for patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma has the ability to reduce the dose to organs at risk compared to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) while maintaining adequate tumor coverage. Our aim was to compare the clinical outcomes of these two treatment modalities., Methods: We performed a 1:2 matching of IMPT to IMRT patients. Our study cohort consisted of IMPT patients from a prospective quality of life study and consecutive IMRT patients treated at a single institution during the period 2010-2014. Patients were matched on unilateral/bilateral treatment, disease site, human papillomavirus status, T and N status, smoking status, and receipt of concomitant chemotherapy. Survival analyzes were performed using a Cox model and binary toxicity endpoints using a logistic regression analysis., Results: Fifty IMPT and 100 IMRT patients were included. The median follow-up time was 32months. There were no imbalances in patient/tumor characteristics except for age (mean age 56.8years for IMRT patients and 61.1years for IMPT patients, p-value=0.010). Statistically significant differences were not observed in overall survival (hazard ratio (HR)=0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.12-2.50, p-value=0.44) or in progression-free survival (HR=1.02; 95% CI: 0.41-2.54; p-value=0.96). The age-adjusted odds ratio (OR) for the presence of a gastrostomy (G)-tube during treatment for IMPT vs IMRT were OR=0.53; 95% CI: 0.24-1.15; p-value=0.11 and OR=0.43; 95% CI: 0.16-1.17; p-value=0.10 at 3months after treatment. When considering the pre-planned composite endpoint of grade 3 weight loss or G-tube presence, the ORs were OR=0.44; 95% CI: 0.19-1.0; p-value=0.05 at 3months after treatment and OR=0.23; 95% CI: 0.07-0.73; p-value=0.01 at 1year after treatment., Conclusion: Our results suggest that IMPT is associated with reduced rates of feeding tube dependency and severe weight loss without jeopardizing outcome. Prospective multicenter randomized trials are needed to validate such findings., (Copyright © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Respiratory motion is traditionally assessed using tumor motion magnitude. In proton therapy, respiratory motion causes density variations along the beam path that result in uncertainties of proton range. This work has investigated the use of water-equivalent thickness (WET) to quantitatively assess the effects of respiratory motion on calculated dose in passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT). A cohort of 29 locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with 87 PSPT treatment fields were selected for analysis. The variation in WET (ΔWET) along each field was calculated between exhale and inhale phases of the simulation four-dimensional computed tomography. The change in calculated dose (ΔDose) between full-inhale and full-exhale phase was quantified for each field using dose differences, 3D gamma analysis, and differential area under the curve (ΔAUC) analysis. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated between ΔDose and ΔWET. Three PSPT plans were redesigned using field angles to minimize variations in ΔWET and compared to the original plans. The median ΔWET over 87 treatment fields ranged from 1-9 mm, while the ΔWET 95th percentile value ranged up to 42 mm. The ΔWET was significantly correlated (p < 0.001) to the ΔDose for all metrics analyzed. The patient plans that were redesigned using ΔWET analysis to select field angles were more robust to the effects of respiratory motion, as ΔAUC values were reduced by more than 60% in all three cases. The tumor motion magnitude alone does not capture the potential dosimetric error due to respiratory motion because the proton range is sensitive to the motion of all patient anatomy. The use of ΔWET has been demonstrated to identify situations where respiratory motion can impact the calculated dose. Angular analysis of ΔWET may be capable of designing radiotherapy plans that are more robust to the effects of respiratory motion.

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., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.

We describe the rationale and implementation of a method for analyzing in-room positron emission tomography (PET) data to verify the proton beam range. The method is based on analyzing distal PET surfaces after passive scattering proton beam delivery. Typically in vivo range verification is done by comparing measured and predicted PET distribution for a single activity level at a selected activity line along the beam passage. In the method presented here, we suggest using a middle point method based on dual PET activity levels to minimize the uncertainty due to local variations in the PET activity. Furthermore, we introduce 2-dimensional (2D) PET activity level surfaces based on 3-dimensional maps of the PET activities along the beam passage. This allows determining not only average range differences but also range difference distributions as well as root mean square deviations (RMSDs) for a more comprehensive range analysis. The method is demonstrated using data from 8 patients who were scanned with an in-room PET scanner. For each of the 8 patients, the average range difference was less than 5 mm and the RMSD was 4 to 11 mm between the measured and simulated PET activity level surfaces for single-field treatments. An ongoing protocol at our institution allows the use of a single field for patients being imaged for the PET range verification study at 1 fraction during their treatment course. Visualizing the range difference distributions using the PET surfaces offers a convenient visual verification of range uncertainties in 2D. Using the distal activity level surfaces of simulated and measured PET distributions at the middle of 25% and 50% activity level is a robust method for in vivo range verification., (© The Author(s) 2014.)

Purpose: This work was a proof-of-principle study for the evaluation of oxygen-15 ((15)O) production as an imaging target through the use of positron emission tomography (PET), to improve verification of proton treatment plans and to study the effects of perfusion., Methods and Materials: Dynamic PET measurements of irradiation-produced isotopes were made for a phantom and rabbit thigh muscles. The rabbit muscle was irradiated and imaged under both live and dead conditions. A differential equation was fitted to phantom and in vivo data, yielding estimates of (15)O production and clearance rates, which were compared to live versus dead rates for the rabbit and to Monte Carlo predictions., Results: PET clearance rates agreed with decay constants of the dominant radionuclide species in 3 different phantom materials. In 2 oxygen-rich materials, the ratio of (15)O production rates agreed with the expected ratio. In the dead rabbit thighs, the dynamic PET concentration histories were accurately described using (15)O decay constant, whereas the live thigh activity decayed faster. Most importantly, the (15)O production rates agreed within 2% (P>.5) between conditions., Conclusions: We developed a new method for quantitative measurement of (15)O production and clearance rates in the period immediately following proton therapy. Measurements in the phantom and rabbits were well described in terms of (15)O production and clearance rates, plus a correction for other isotopes. These proof-of-principle results support the feasibility of detailed verification of proton therapy treatment delivery. In addition, (15)O clearance rates may be useful in monitoring permeability changes due to therapy., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We compared conventionally optimized intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) treatment plans against worst-case scenario optimized treatment plans for lung cancer. The comparison of the 2 IMPT optimization strategies focused on the resulting plans' ability to retain dose objectives under the influence of patient setup, inherent proton range uncertainty, and dose perturbation caused by respiratory motion., Methods and Materials: For each of the 9 lung cancer cases, 2 treatment plans were created that accounted for treatment uncertainties in 2 different ways. The first used the conventional method: delivery of prescribed dose to the planning target volume that is geometrically expanded from the internal target volume (ITV). The second used a worst-case scenario optimization scheme that addressed setup and range uncertainties through beamlet optimization. The plan optimality and plan robustness were calculated and compared. Furthermore, the effects on dose distributions of changes in patient anatomy attributable to respiratory motion were investigated for both strategies by comparing the corresponding plan evaluation metrics at the end-inspiration and end-expiration phase and absolute differences between these phases. The mean plan evaluation metrics of the 2 groups were compared with 2-sided paired Student t tests., Results: Without respiratory motion considered, we affirmed that worst-case scenario optimization is superior to planning target volume-based conventional optimization in terms of plan robustness and optimality. With respiratory motion considered, worst-case scenario optimization still achieved more robust dose distributions to respiratory motion for targets and comparable or even better plan optimality (D95% ITV, 96.6% vs 96.1% [P = .26]; D5%- D95% ITV, 10.0% vs 12.3% [P = .082]; D1% spinal cord, 31.8% vs 36.5% [P = .035])., Conclusions: Worst-case scenario optimization led to superior solutions for lung IMPT. Despite the fact that worst-case scenario optimization did not explicitly account for respiratory motion, it produced motion-resistant treatment plans. However, further research is needed to incorporate respiratory motion into IMPT robust optimization., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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 V5 and V20, heart V40, and esophageal V60 than did IMRT (P<.05) and lower MLD, lung V20, and esophageal V60 than did passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) (P<.05). D5 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., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is commonly delivered via the spot-scanning technique. To 'scan' the target volume, the proton beam is controlled by varying its energy to penetrate the patient's body at different depths. Although scanning the proton beamlets or spots with the same energy can be as fast as 10-20 m s(-1), changing from one proton energy to another requires approximately two additional seconds. The total IMPT delivery time thus depends mainly on the number of proton energies used in a treatment. Current treatment planning systems typically use all proton energies that are required for the proton beam to penetrate in a range from the distal edge to the proximal edge of the target. The optimal selection of proton energies has not been well studied. In this study, we sought to determine the feasibility of optimizing and reducing the number of proton energies in IMPT planning. We proposed an iterative mixed-integer programming optimization method to select a subset of all available proton energies while satisfying dosimetric criteria. We applied our proposed method to six patient datasets: four cases of prostate cancer, one case of lung cancer, and one case of mesothelioma. The numbers of energies were reduced by 14.3%-18.9% for the prostate cancer cases, 11.0% for the lung cancer cases and 26.5% for the mesothelioma case. The results indicate that the number of proton energies used in conventionally designed IMPT plans can be reduced without degrading dosimetric performance. The IMPT delivery efficiency could be improved by energy layer optimization leading to increased throughput for a busy proton center in which a delivery system with slow energy switch is employed.

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., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The clinical advantage of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) may be diminished by range and patient setup uncertainties. We evaluated the effectiveness of robust optimization that incorporates uncertainties into the treatment planning optimization algorithm for treatment of base of skull cancers., Methods and Materials: We compared 2 IMPT planning methods for 10 patients with base of skull chordomas and chondrosarcomas: (1) conventional optimization, in which uncertainties are dealt with by creating a planning target volume (PTV); and (2) robust optimization, in which uncertainties are dealt with by optimizing individual spot weights without a PTV. We calculated root-mean-square deviation doses (RMSDs) for every voxel to generate RMSD volume histograms (RVHs). The area under the RVH curve was used for relative comparison of the 2 methods' plan robustness. Potential benefits of robust planning, in terms of target dose coverage and homogeneity and sparing of organs at risk (OARs) were evaluated using established clinical metrics. Then the plan evaluation metrics were averaged and compared with 2-sided paired t tests. The impact of tumor volume on the effectiveness of robust optimization was also analyzed., Results: Relative to conventionally optimized plans, robustly optimized plans were less sensitive for both targets and OARs. In the nominal scenario, robust and conventional optimization resulted in similar D95% doses (D95% clinical target volume [CTV]: 63.3 and 64.8 Gy relative biologic effectiveness [RBE]), P <.01]) and D5%-D95% (D5%-D95% CTV: 8.0 and 7.1 Gy[RBE], [P <.01); irradiation of OARs was less with robust optimization (brainstem V60: 0.076 vs 0.26 cm(3) [P <.01], left temporal lobe V70: 0.22 vs 0.41 cm(3), [P = .068], right temporal lobe V70: 0.016 vs 0.11 cm(3), [P = .096], left cochlea Dmean: 28.1 vs 30.1 Gy[RBE], [P = .023], right cochlea Dmean: 23.7 vs 25.2 Gy[RBE], [P = .059]). Results in the worst-case scenario were analogous., Conclusions: Robust optimization is effective for creating clinically feasible IMPT plans for tumors of the base of skull.

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., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: For treatment of the entire cranium using passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) compensators are often employed in order to reduce lens and cochlear exposure. We sought to assess the advantages and consequences of utilizing compensators for the treatment of the whole brain as a component of craniospinal radiation (CSI) with PSPT. Moreover, we evaluated the potential benefits of spot scanning beam delivery in comparison to PSPT., Methods: Planning computed tomography scans for 50 consecutive CSI patients were utilized to generate passive scattering proton therapy treatment plans with and without Lucite compensators (PSW and PSWO respectively). A subset of 10 patients was randomly chosen to generate scanning beam treatment plans for comparison. All plans were generated using an Eclipse treatment planning system and were prescribed to a dose of 36 Gy(RBE), delivered in 20 fractions, to the whole brain PTV. Plans were normalized to ensure equal whole brain target coverage. Dosimetric data was compiled and statistical analyses performed using a two-tailed Student's t-test with Bonferroni corrections to account for multiple comparisons., Results: Whole brain target coverage was comparable between all methods. However, cribriform plate coverage was superior in PSWO plans in comparison to PSW (V95%; 92.9 ± 14 vs. 97.4 ± 5, p < 0.05). As predicted, PSWO plans had significantly higher lens exposure in comparison to PSW plans (max lens dose Gy(RBE): left; 24.8 ± 0.8 vs. 22.2 ± 0.7, p < 0.05, right; 25.2 ± 0.8 vs. 22.8 ± 0.7, p < 0.05). However, PSW plans demonstrated no significant cochlear sparing vs. PSWO (mean cochlea dose Gy(RBE): 36.4 ± 0.2 vs. 36.7 ± 0.1, p = NS). Moreover, dose homogeneity was inferior in PSW plans in comparison to PSWO plans as reflected by significant alterations in both whole brain and brainstem homogeneity index (HI) and inhomogeneity coefficient (IC). In comparison to both PSPT techniques, multi-field optimized intensity modulated (MFO-IMPT) spot scanning treatment plans displayed superior sparing of both lens and cochlea (max lens: 12.5 ± 0.6 and 12.9 ± 0.7 right and left respectively; mean cochlea 28.6 ± 0.5 and 27.4 ± 0.2), although heterogeneity within target volumes was comparable to PSW plans., Conclusions: For PSPT treatments, the addition of a compensator imparts little clinical advantage. In contrast, the incorporation of spot scanning technology as a component of CSI treatments, offers additional normal tissue sparing which is likely of clinical significance.

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.

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 V10, V30, and V50 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., (© 2013 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.)

Purpose: To report quality of life (QOL)/toxicity in men treated with proton beam therapy for localized prostate cancer and to compare outcomes between passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT) and spot-scanning proton therapy (SSPT)., Methods and Materials: Men with localized prostate cancer enrolled on a prospective QOL protocol with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up were reviewed. Comparative groups were defined by technique (PSPT vs SSPT). Patients completed Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite questionnaires at baseline and every 3-6 months after proton beam therapy. Clinically meaningful differences in QOL were defined as ≥0.5 × baseline standard deviation. The cumulative incidence of modified Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade ≥2 gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) toxicity and argon plasma coagulation were determined by the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: A total of 226 men received PSPT, and 65 received SSPT. Both PSPT and SSPT resulted in statistically significant changes in sexual, urinary, and bowel Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite summary scores. Only bowel summary, function, and bother resulted in clinically meaningful decrements beyond treatment completion. The decrement in bowel QOL persisted through 24-month follow-up. Cumulative grade ≥2 GU and GI toxicity at 24 months were 13.4% and 9.6%, respectively. There was 1 grade 3 GI toxicity (PSPT group) and no other grade ≥3 GI or GU toxicity. Argon plasma coagulation application was infrequent (PSPT 4.4% vs SSPT 1.5%; P=.21). No statistically significant differences were appreciated between PSPT and SSPT regarding toxicity or QOL., Conclusion: Both PSPT and SSPT confer low rates of grade ≥2 GI or GU toxicity, with preservation of meaningful sexual and urinary QOL at 24 months. A modest, yet clinically meaningful, decrement in bowel QOL was seen throughout follow-up. No toxicity or QOL differences between PSPT and SSPT were identified. Long-term comparative results in a larger patient cohort are warranted., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Proton therapy is very sensitive to uncertainties introduced during treatment planning and dose delivery. PET imaging of proton induced positron emitter distributions is the only practical approach for in vivo, in situ verification of proton therapy. This article reviews the current status of proton therapy verification with PET imaging. The different data detecting systems (in-beam, in-room and off-line PET), calculation methods for the prediction of proton induced PET activity distributions, and approaches for data evaluation are discussed.

To evaluate the dosimetric consequences of rotational and translational alignment errors in patients receiving intensity-modulated proton therapy with multifield optimization (MFO-IMPT) for prostate cancer. Ten control patients with localized prostate cancer underwent treatment planning for MFO-IMPT. Rotational and translation errors were simulated along each of 3 axes: anterior-posterior (A-P), superior-inferior (S-I), and left-right. Clinical target-volume (CTV) coverage remained high with all alignment errors simulated. Rotational errors did not result in significant rectum or bladder dose perturbations. Translational errors resulted in larger dose perturbations to the bladder and rectum. Perturbations in rectum and bladder doses were minimal for rotational errors and larger for translational errors. Rectum V45 and V70 increased most with A-P misalignment, whereas bladder V45 and V70 changed most with S-I misalignment. The bladder and rectum V45 and V70 remained acceptable even with extreme alignment errors. Even with S-I and A-P translational errors of up to 5mm, the dosimetric profile of MFO-IMPT remained favorable. MFO-IMPT for localized prostate cancer results in robust coverage of the CTV without clinically meaningful dose perturbations to normal tissue despite extreme rotational and translational alignment errors., (Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The purpose of this study is to investigate the feasibility and impact of incorporating deliverable monitor unit (MU) constraints into spot intensity optimization (SIO) in intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) treatment planning. The current treatment planning system (TPS) for IMPT disregards deliverable MU constraints in the SIO routine. It performs a post-processing procedure on an optimized plan to enforce deliverable MU values that are required by the spot scanning proton delivery system. This procedure can create a significant dose distribution deviation between the optimized and post-processed deliverable plans, especially when small spot spacings are used. In this study, we introduce a two-stage linear programming approach to optimize spot intensities and constrain deliverable MU values simultaneously, i.e., a deliverable SIO (DSIO) model. Thus, the post-processing procedure is eliminated and the associated optimized plan deterioration can be avoided. Four prostate cancer cases at our institution were selected for study and two parallel opposed beam angles were planned for all cases. A quadratic programming based model without MU constraints, i.e., a conventional SIO (CSIO) model, was also implemented to emulate commercial TPS. Plans optimized by both the DSIO and CSIO models were evaluated for five different settings of spot spacing from 3 to 7 mm. For all spot spacings, the DSIO-optimized plans yielded better uniformity for the target dose coverage and critical structure sparing than did the CSIO-optimized plans. With reduced spot spacings, more significant improvements in target dose uniformity and critical structure sparing were observed in the DSIO than in the CSIO-optimized plans. Additionally, better sparing of the rectum and bladder was achieved when reduced spacings were used for the DSIO-optimized plans. The proposed DSIO approach ensures the deliverability of optimized IMPT plans that take into account MU constraints. This eliminates the post-processing procedure required by the TPS as well as the resultant deteriorating effect on ultimate dose distributions. This approach therefore allows IMPT plans to adopt all possible spot spacings optimally. Moreover, dosimetric benefits can be achieved using smaller spot spacings.

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., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.

Positron emission tomography (PET) has been suggested as an imaging technique for in vivo proton dose and range verification after proton induced-tissue activation. During proton treatment, irradiated tissue is activated and decays while emitting positrons. In this paper, we assessed the feasibility of using PET imaging after proton treatment to determine tissue elemental composition by evaluating the resultant composite decay curve of activated tissue. A phantom consisting of sections composed of different combinations of (1)H, (12)C, (14)N, and (16)O was irradiated using a pristine Bragg peak and a 6 cm spread-out Bragg-peak (SOBP) proton beam. The beam ranges defined at 90% distal dose were 10 cm; the delivered dose was 1.6 Gy for the near monoenergetic beam and 2 Gy for the SOBP beam. After irradiation, activated phantom decay was measured using an in-room PET scanner for 30 min in list mode. Decay curves from the activated (12)C and (16)O sections were first decomposed into multiple simple exponential decay curves, each curve corresponding to a constituent radioisotope, using a least-squares method. The relative radioisotope fractions from each section were determined. These fractions were used to guide the decay curve decomposition from the section consisting mainly of (12)C + (16)O and calculate the relative elemental composition of (12)C and (16)O. A Monte Carlo simulation was also used to determine the elemental composition of the (12)C + (16)O section. The calculated compositions of the (12)C + (16)O section using both approaches (PET and Monte Carlo) were compared with the true known phantom composition. Finally, two patients were imaged using an in-room PET scanner after proton therapy of the head. Their PET data and the technique described above were used to construct elemental composition ((12)C and (16)O) maps that corresponded to the proton-activated regions. We compared the (12)C and (16)O compositions of seven ROIs that corresponded to the vitreous humor, adipose/face mask, adipose tissue, and brain tissue with ICRU 46 elemental composition data. The (12)C and (16)O compositions of the (12)C + (16)O phantom section were estimated to within a maximum difference of 3.6% for the near monoenergetic and SOBP beams over an 8 cm depth range. On the other hand, the Monte Carlo simulation estimated the corresponding (12)C and (16)O compositions in the (12)C + (16)O section to within a maximum difference of 3.4%. For the patients, the (12)C and (16)O compositions in the seven ROIs agreed with the ICRU elemental composition data, with a mean (maximum) difference of 9.4% (15.2%). The (12)C and (16)O compositions of the phantom and patients were estimated with relatively small differences. PET imaging may be useful for determining the tissue elemental composition and thereby improving proton treatment planning and verification.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the potential of using in-room positron emission tomography (PET) for treatment verification in proton therapy and for deriving suitable PET scan times., Methods and Materials: Nine patients undergoing passive scattering proton therapy underwent scanning immediately after treatment with an in-room PET scanner. The scanner was positioned next to the treatment head after treatment. The Monte Carlo (MC) method was used to reproduce PET activities for each patient. To assess the proton beam range uncertainty, we designed a novel concept in which the measured PET activity surface distal to the target at the end of range was compared with MC predictions. The repositioning of patients for the PET scan took, on average, approximately 2 minutes. The PET images were reconstructed considering varying scan times to test the scan time dependency of the method., Results: The measured PET images show overall good spatial correlations with MC predictions. Some discrepancies could be attributed to uncertainties in the local elemental composition and biological washout. For 8 patients treated with a single field, the average range differences between PET measurements and computed tomography (CT) image-based MC results were <5 mm (<3 mm for 6 of 8 patients) and root-mean-square deviations were 4 to 11 mm with PET-CT image co-registration errors of approximately 2 mm. Our results also show that a short-length PET scan of 5 minutes can yield results similar to those of a 20-minute PET scan., Conclusions: Our first clinical trials in 9 patients using an in-room PET system demonstrated its potential for in vivo treatment monitoring in proton therapy. For a quantitative range prediction with arbitrary shape of target volume, we suggest using the distal PET activity surface., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is highly sensitive to uncertainties in beam range and patient setup. Conventionally, these uncertainties are dealt using geometrically expanded planning target volume (PTV). In this paper, the authors evaluated a robust optimization method that deals with the uncertainties directly during the spot weight optimization to ensure clinical target volume (CTV) coverage without using PTV. The authors compared the two methods for a population of head and neck (H&N) cancer patients., Methods: Two sets of IMPT plans were generated for 14 H&N cases, one being PTV-based conventionally optimized and the other CTV-based robustly optimized. For the PTV-based conventionally optimized plans, the uncertainties are accounted for by expanding CTV to PTV via margins and delivering the prescribed dose to PTV. For the CTV-based robustly optimized plans, spot weight optimization was guided to reduce the discrepancy in doses under extreme setup and range uncertainties directly, while delivering the prescribed dose to CTV rather than PTV. For each of these plans, the authors calculated dose distributions under various uncertainty settings. The root-mean-square dose (RMSD) for each voxel was computed and the area under the RMSD-volume histogram curves (AUC) was used to relatively compare plan robustness. Data derived from the dose volume histogram in the worst-case and nominal doses were used to evaluate the plan optimality. Then the plan evaluation metrics were averaged over the 14 cases and were compared with two-sided paired t tests., Results: CTV-based robust optimization led to more robust (i.e., smaller AUCs) plans for both targets and organs. Under the worst-case scenario and the nominal scenario, CTV-based robustly optimized plans showed better target coverage (i.e., greater D95%), improved dose homogeneity (i.e., smaller D5% - D95%), and lower or equivalent dose to organs at risk., Conclusions: CTV-based robust optimization provided significantly more robust dose distributions to targets and organs than PTV-based conventional optimization in H&N using IMPT. Eliminating the use of PTV and planning directly based on CTV provided better or equivalent normal tissue sparing.