A single-field integrated boost treatment planning technique for spot scanning proton therapy

Radiation Oncology

David R Grosshans¹  Anita Mahajan¹  Michael T Gillin²  Steven J Frank¹  Thomas Pugh¹  Seungtaek Choi¹  Eric L Chang¹  Andrew K Lee¹  Xiaoqiang Li²  Richard Y Wu²  Narayan Sahoo²  Xiaodong Zhang²  Heng Li²  Falk Poenisch²  Xiaorong Ronald Zhu² 

[1] Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, USA;Departments of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Unit 1150, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX, USA

关键词: SFIB;    Single field integrated boost;    Single-field optimization;    Spot scanning;    Proton therapy;   

Others  :  1151374
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-717X-9-202

 received in 2013-11-20, accepted in 2014-09-05,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Purpose

Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans are normally generated utilizing multiple field optimization (MFO) techniques. Similar to photon based IMRT, MFO allows for the utilization of a simultaneous integrated boost in which multiple target volumes are treated to discrete doses simultaneously, potentially improving plan quality and streamlining quality assurance and treatment delivery. However, MFO may render plans more sensitive to the physical uncertainties inherent to particle therapy. Here we present clinical examples of a single-field integrated boost (SFIB) technique for spot scanning proton therapy based on single field optimization (SFO) treatment-planning techniques.

Methods and materials

We designed plans of each type for illustrative patients with central nervous system (brain and spine), prostate and head and neck malignancies. SFIB and IMPT plans were constructed to deliver multiple prescription dose levels to multiple targets using SFO or MFO, respectively. Dose and fractionation schemes were based on the current clinical practice using X-ray IMRT in our clinic. For inverse planning, dose constraints were employed to achieve the desired target coverage and normal tissue sparing. Conformality and inhomogeneity indices were calculated to quantify plan quality. We also compared the worst-case robustness of the SFIB, sequential boost SFUD, and IMPT plans.

Results

The SFIB technique produced more conformal dose distributions than plans generated by sequential boost using a SFUD technique (conformality index for prescription isodose levels; 0.585 ± 0.30 vs. 0.435 ± 0.24, SFIB vs. SFUD respectively, Wilcoxon matched-pair signed rank test, p < 0.01). There was no difference in the conformality index between SFIB and IMPT plans (0.638 ± 0.27 vs. 0.633 ± 0.26, SFIB vs. IMPT, respectively). Heterogeneity between techniques was not significantly different. With respect to clinical metrics, SFIB plans proved more robust than the corresponding IMPT plans.

Conclusions

SFIB technique for scanning beam proton therapy (SSPT) is now routinely employed in our clinic. The SFIB technique is a natural application of SFO and offers several advantages over SFUD, including more conformal plans, seamless treatment delivery and more efficient planning and QA. SFIB may be more robust than IMPT and has been the treatment planning technique of choice for some patients.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Zhu et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Delaney TF, Kooy HM: Proton and Charged Particle Radiotherapy. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.
• [2]Haberer T, Becher W, Schardt D, Kraft G: Magnetic scanning system for heavy ion therapy. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 1993, 330:296-305.
• [3]ICRU: Prescribing, Recording, And Reporting Proton-Beam Therapy. Washington DC: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 2007.
• [4]Pedroni E, Bacher R, Blattmann H, Bohringer T, Coray A, Lomax A, Lin S, Munkel G, Scheib S, Schneider U, Tourovsky A: The 200-mev proton therapy project at the Paul scherrer institute: conceptual design and practical realization. Med Phys 1995, 22:37-53.
• [5]Lomax A: Intensity modulation methods for proton radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 1999, 44:185-205.
• [6]Lomax AJ: Intensity modulated proton therapy and its sensitivity to treatment uncertainties 1: the potential effects of calculational uncertainties. Phys Med Biol 2008, 53:1027-1042.
• [7]Lomax AJ: Intensity modulated proton therapy and its sensitivity to treatment uncertainties 2: the potential effects of inter-fraction and inter-field motions. Phys Med Biol 2008, 53:1043-1056.
• [8]Lomax AJ, Bohringer T, Coray D, Egger E, Goitein G, Grossmann M, Juelke P, Lin S, Pedroni E, Rohrer B, Roser W, Rossi B, Siegenthaler B, Stadelmann O, Stauble H, Vetter C, Wisser L: Intensity modulated proton therapy: a clinical example. Med Phys 2001, 28:317-324.
• [9]Lomax AJ, Bohringer T, Bolsi A, Coray D, Emert F, Goitein G, Jermann M, Lin S, Pedroni E, Rutz H, Stadelmann O, Timmermann B, Verwey J, Weber DC: Treatment planning and verification of proton therapy using spot scanning: Initial experiences. Med Phys 2004, 31:3150-3157.
• [10]Smith AR: Vision 20/20: proton therapy. Med Phys 2009, 36:556-568.
• [11]Zhu XR, Sahoo N, Zhang X, Robertson D, Li H, Choi S, Lee MT, Gillin AK: Intensity modulated proton therapy treatment planning using single-field optimization: the impact of monitor unit constraints on plan quality. Med Phys 2010, 37:1210-1219.
• [12]Fredriksson A, Forsgren A, Hardemark B: Minimax optimization for handling range and setup uncertainties in proton therapy. Med Phys 2011, 38:1672-1684.
• [13]Zhu XR, Poenisch F, Song X, Johnson JL, Ciangaru G, Taylor MB, Lii M, Martin C, Arjomandy B, Lee AK, Choi S, Nguyen QN, Gillin MT, Sahoo N: Patient-specific quality assurance for prostate cancer patients receiving spot scanning proton therapy using single-field uniform dose. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011, 81:552-559.
• [14]Wu Q, Manning M, Schmidt-Ullrich R, Mohan R: The potential for sparing of parotids and escalation of biologically effective dose with intensity-modulated radiation treatments of head and neck cancers: a treatment design study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 46:195-205.
• [15]Zhu XR, Poenisch F, Lii M, Sawakuchi G, Titt U, Bues M, Song X, Zhang X, Li Y, Ciangaru G, Li H, Taylor MB, Suzuki K, Mohan R, Gillin MT, Sahoo N: Commissioning dose computation models for spot scanning proton beams in water for a commercially available treatment planning system. Med Phys 2013, 40:041723. 041721-041715
• [16]Park PC, Zhu XR, Lee AK, Sahoo N, Melancon AD, Zhang L, Dong L: A beam-specific planning target volume (ptv) design for proton therapy to account for setup and range uncertainties. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011.
• [17]Meyer J, Bluett J, Amos R, Levy L, Choi S, Nguyen QN, Zhu XR, Gillin MT, Lee AK: Spot scanning proton beam therapy for prostate cancer: treatment planning technique and analysis of consequences of rotational and translational alignment errors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010, 78:428-434.
• [18]Zhu XR, Prado K, Liu HH, Guerrero TM, Jeter M, Liao Z, Rice D, Forster K, Stevens CW: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for mesothelioma: impact of multileaf collimator leaf width and pencil beam size on planning quality and delivery efficiency. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005, 62:1525-1534.
• [19]Quan EM, Liu W, Wu R, Li Y, Frank SJ, Zhang X, Zhu XR, Mohan R: Preliminary evaluation of multifield and single-field optimization for the treatment planning of spot-scanning proton therapy of head and neck cancer. Med Phys 2013, 40:081709.
• [20]Yang M, Zhu XR, Park PC, Titt U, Mohan R, Virshup G, Clayton JE, Dong L: Comprehensive analysis of proton range uncertainties related to patient stopping-power-ratio estimation using the stoichiometric calibration. Phys Med Biol 2012, 57:4095-4115.
• [21]Li XA, Alber M, Deasy JO, Jackson A, Ken Jee KW, Marks LB, Martel MK, Mayo C, Moiseenko V, Nahum AE, Niemierko A, Semenenko VA, Yorke ED: The use and qa of biologically related models for treatment planning: Short report of the tg-166 of the therapy physics committee of the aapm. Med Phys 2012, 39:1386-1409.
• [22]Liu W, Zhang X, Li Y, Mohan R: Robust optimization of intensity modulated proton therapy. Med Phys 2012, 39:1079-1091.
• [23]Cozzia L, Bolsi A, Nicolini G, Fogliata A: The simultaneous integrated boost with proton beams in head and neck patients. Z Med Phys 2004, 14:180-188.