Search

Our randomized clinical study comparing stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and stereotactic body proton therapy (SBPT) for early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was closed prematurely owing to poor enrollment, largely because of lack of volumetric imaging and difficulty in obtaining insurance coverage for the SBPT group. In this article, we describe technology improvements in our new proton therapy center, particularly in image guidance with cone beam CT (CBCT) and CT on rail (CTOR), as well as motion management with real-time gated proton therapy (RGPT) and optical surface imaging. In addition, we have a treatment planning system that provides better treatment plan optimization and more accurate dose calculation. We expect to re-start the SBPT program, including for early stage NSCLC as well as for other disease sites soon after starting patient treatment at our new proton therapy center. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study presents a comprehensive collision avoidance framework based on three‐dimension (3D) computer‐aided design (CAD) modeling, a graphical user interface (GUI) as peripheral to the radiation treatment planning (RTP) environment, and patient‐specific plan parameters for intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Methods: A stand‐alone software application was developed leveraging the Varian scripting application programming interface (API) for RTP database object accessibility. The Collision Avoider software models the Hitachi ProBeat‐V half gantry design and the Kuka robotic couch with triangle mesh structures. Patient‐specific plan parameters are displayed in the collision avoidance software for potential proximity evaluation. The external surfaces of the patients and the immobilization devices are contoured based on computed tomography (CT) images. A "table junction‐to‐CT‐origin" (JCT) measurement is made for every patient at the time of CT simulation to accurately provide reference location of the patient contours to the treatment couch. Collision evaluations were performed virtually with the program during treatment planning to prevent four major types of collisional events: collisions between the gantry head and the treatment couch, gantry head and the patient's body, gantry head and the robotic arm, and collisions between the gantry head and the immobilization devices. Results: The Collision Avoider software was able to accurately model the proton treatment delivery system and the robotic couch position. Commonly employed clinical beam configuration and JCT values were investigated. Brain and head and neck patients require more complex gantry and patient positioning system configurations. Physical measurements were performed to validate 3D CAD model geometry. Twelve clinical proton treatment plans were used to validate the accuracy of the software. The software can predict all four types of collisional events in our clinic since its full implementation in 2020. Conclusion: A highly efficient patient‐specific collision prevention program for scanning proton therapy has been successfully implemented. The graphical program has provided accurate collision detection since its inception at our institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. In proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) continuous delivery, the beam is continuously delivered without interruptions between spots. For synchrotron-based systems, the extracted beam current exhibits a spill structure, and recent publications on beam current measurements have demonstrated significant fluctuations around the nominal values. These fluctuations potentially lead to dose deviations from those calculated assuming a stable beam current. This study investigated the dosimetric implications of such beam current fluctuations during proton PBS continuous scanning. Approach. Using representative clinical proton PBS plans, we performed simulations to mimic a worst-case clinical delivery environment with beam current varies from 50% to 250% of the nominal values. The simulations used the beam delivery parameters optimized for the best beam delivery efficiency of the upcoming particle therapy system at Mayo Clinic Florida. We reconstructed the simulated delivered dose distributions and evaluated the dosimetric impact of beam current fluctuations. Main results. Despite significant beam current fluctuations resulting in deviations at each spot level, the overall dose distributions were nearly identical to those assuming a stable beam current. The 1 mm/1% Gamma passing rate was 100% for all plans. Less than 0.2% root mean square error was observed in the planning target volume dose-volume histogram. Minimal differences were observed in all dosimetric evaluation metrics. Significance. Our findings demonstrate that with our beam delivery system and clinical planning practice, while significant beam current fluctuations may result in large local move monitor unit deviations at each spot level, the overall impact on the dose distribution is minimal., (© 2024 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine.)

Purpose: To summarize the technical delivery parameters of proton plans delivered at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota., Materials and Methods: The database of treated patient proton plans was queried to extract field parameters such as gantry angle, patient support angle, minimum and maximum water-equivalent depth (WED) treated, number of layers, field size, patient orientation, and monitor units. The plans were analyzed in aggregate, by disease site, and by fractionation., Results: There were 2963 proton plans for 2023 distinct treatment sites delivered between June 2015 and September 2018. The mean number of fields per plan was 2.8. The mean number of energy layers per field was 51.9. The mean monitor unit per field was 117.4. The median maximum field dimension was 12.4 cm; 95% of the fields had a maximum dimension < 28.7 cm, and the maximum field dimension was 39.8 cm. The median maximum field WED was 16.4 cm; 95% of the fields reached a maximum WED of ≤ 26.4 cm, and the maximum field WED was 32.4 cm., Conclusion: A large variety of disease sites were treated using the maximum field size (40 cm) and WED (32.4 cm) capabilities of our half-gantry system., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: Anita Mahajan, MD, is an Associate Editor of the International Journal of Particle Therapy. The authors have no other relevant conflicts of interest to disclose., (© Copyright 2020 The Author(s).)

Purpose: To assess gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) adverse events (AEs) of 11 C-choline-positron emission tomography (CholPET) guided lymph node (LN) radiation therapy (RT) in patients who experience biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy., Methods and Materials: From 2013 to 2016, 107 patients experienced biochemical failure of prostate cancer, had CholPET-detected pelvic and/or paraortic LN recurrence, and were referred for RT. Patients received androgen suppression and CholPET guided LN RT (median dose, 45 Gy) with a simultaneous integrated boost to CholPET-avid sites (median dose, 56.25 Gy), all in 25 fractions. RT-naïve patients had the prostatic fossa included in the initial treatment volumes followed by a sequential boost (median dose, 68 Gy). GI and GU AEs were reported per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0) with data gathered retrospectively. Differences in maximum GI and GU AEs at baseline, immediately post-RT, and at early (median, 4 months) and late (median, 14 months) follow-up were assessed., Results: Median follow-up was 16 months (interquartile range [IQR], 11-25). Median prostate-specific antigen at time of positive CholPET was 2.3 ng/mL (IQR, 1.3-4.8), with a median of 2 (IQR, 1-4) choline-avid LNs per patient. Most recurrences were within the pelvis (53%) or pelvis + paraortic (40%). Baseline rates of grade 1 to 2 GI AEs were 8.4% compared with 51.9% (4.7% grade 2) of patients post-RT ( P  < .01). These differences resolved by 4-month (12.2%, P  = .65) and 14-month AE assessments (9.1%, P  = .87). There was no significant change in grade 1 to 2 GU AEs post-RT (64.1%) relative to baseline (56.0%, P  = .21), although differences did arise at 4-month (72.2%, P  = .01) and 14-month (74.3%, P  = .01) AE assessments., Conclusions: Salvage CholPET guided nodal RT has acceptably low rates of acute GI and GU AEs and no significant detriment in 14-month GI AEs. These data are of value in counseling patients and designing prospective trials evaluating the oncologic efficacy of this treatment strategy., (© 2019 The Authors.)