Literature DB >> 11318312

Intensity modulated proton therapy: a clinical example.

A J Lomax1, T Boehringer, A Coray, E Egger, G Goitein, M Grossmann, P Juelke, S Lin, E Pedroni, B Rohrer, W Roser, B Rossi, B Siegenthaler, O Stadelmann, H Stauble, C Vetter, L Wisser.   

Abstract

In this paper, we report on the clinical application of fully automated three-dimensional intensity modulated proton therapy, as applied to a 34-year-old patient presenting with a thoracic chordoma. Due to the anatomically challenging position of the lesion, a three-field technique was adopted in which fields incident through the lungs and heart, as well as beams directed directly at the spinal cord, could be avoided. A homogeneous target dose and sparing of the spinal cord was achieved through field patching and computer optimization of the 3D fluence of each field. Sensitivity of the resultant plan to delivery and calculational errors was determined through both the assessment of the potential effects of range and patient setup errors, and by the application of Monte Carlo dose calculation methods. Ionization chamber profile measurements and 2D dosimetry using a scintillator/CCD camera arrangement were performed to verify the calculated fields in water. Modeling of a 10% overshoot of proton range showed that the maximum dose to the spinal cord remained unchanged, but setup error analysis showed that dose homogeneity in the target volume could be sensitive to offsets in the AP direction. No significant difference between the MC and analytic dose calculations was found and the measured dosimetry for all fields was accurate to 3% for all measured points. Over the course of the treatment, a setup accuracy of +/-4 mm (2 s.d.) could be achieved, with a mean offset in the AP direction of 0.1 mm. Inhalation/exhalation CT scans indicated that organ motion in the region of the target volume was negligible. We conclude that 3D IMPT plans can be applied clinically and safely without modification to our existing delivery system. However, analysis of the calculated intensity matrices should be performed to assess the practicality, or otherwise, of the plan.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11318312     DOI: 10.1118/1.1350587

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  42 in total

1.  Robust optimization of intensity modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  Wei Liu; Xiaodong Zhang; Yupeng Li; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Influence of robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy with different dose delivery techniques.

Authors:  Wei Liu; Yupeng Li; Xiaoqiang Li; Wenhua Cao; Xiaodong Zhang
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  A parameter study of pencil beam proton dose distributions for the treatment of ocular melanoma utilizing spot scanning.

Authors:  Kenneth Sutherland; Satoshi Miyajima; Hiroyuki Date; Hiroki Shirato; Masayori Ishikawa; Masao Murakami; Mitsuru Yamagiwa; Paul Bolton; Toshiki Tajima
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2009-09-19

4.  A gas scintillator detector for 2D dose profile monitoring in pencil beam scanning and pulsed beam proton radiotherapy treatments.

Authors:  S E Vigdor; A V Klyachko; K A Solberg; M Pankuch
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Radiotherapy treatment of early-stage prostate cancer with IMRT and protons: a treatment planning comparison.

Authors:  Alexei Trofimov; Paul L Nguyen; John J Coen; Karen P Doppke; Robert J Schneider; Judith A Adams; Thomas R Bortfeld; Anthony L Zietman; Thomas F Delaney; William U Shipley
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2007-05-21       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Reducing the sensitivity of IMPT treatment plans to setup errors and range uncertainties via probabilistic treatment planning.

Authors:  Jan Unkelbach; Thomas Bortfeld; Benjamin C Martin; Martin Soukup
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Robust optimization for intensity-modulated proton therapy with soft spot sensitivity regularization.

Authors:  Wenbo Gu; Dan Ruan; Daniel O'Connor; Wei Zou; Lei Dong; Min-Yu Tsai; Xun Jia; Ke Sheng
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Robust treatment planning with conditional value at risk chance constraints in intensity-modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  Yu An; Jianming Liang; Steven E Schild; Martin Bues; Wei Liu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Four-dimensional Monte Carlo simulations demonstrating how the extent of intensity-modulation impacts motion effects in proton therapy lung treatments.

Authors:  Stephen Dowdell; Clemens Grassberger; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.071

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

Authors:  Heng Li; Narayan Sahoo; Falk Poenisch; Kazumichi Suzuki; Yupeng Li; Xiaoqiang Li; Xiaodong Zhang; Andrew K Lee; Michael T Gillin; X Ronald Zhu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.