PURPOSE: To describe our experiences with patient-specific quality assurance (QA) for patients with prostate cancer receiving spot scanning proton therapy (SSPT) using single-field uniform dose (SFUD). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The first group of 249 patients with prostate cancer treated with SSPT using SFUD was included in this work. The scanning-beam planning target volume and number of monitor units were recorded and checked for consistency. Patient-specific dosimetric measurements were performed, including the point dose for each plan, depth doses, and two-dimensional (2D) dose distribution in the planes perpendicular to the incident beam direction for each field at multiple depths. The γ-index with 3% dose or 3-mm distance agreement criteria was used to evaluate the 2D dose distributions. RESULTS: We observed a linear relationship between the number of monitor units and scanning-beam planning target volume. The difference between the measured and calculated point doses (mean ± SD) was 0.0% ± 0.7% (range, -2.9% to 1.8%). In general, the depth doses exhibited good agreement except at the distal end of the spread-out Bragg peak. The pass rate of γ-index (mean ± SD) for 2D dose comparison was 96.2% ± 2.6% (range, 90-100%). Discrepancies between the measured and calculated dose distributions primarily resulted from the limitation of the model used by the treatment planning system. CONCLUSIONS: We have established a patient-specific QA program for prostate cancer patients receiving SSPT using SFUD. Published by Elsevier Inc.
PURPOSE: To describe our experiences with patient-specific quality assurance (QA) for patients with prostate cancer receiving spot scanning proton therapy (SSPT) using single-field uniform dose (SFUD). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The first group of 249 patients with prostate cancer treated with SSPT using SFUD was included in this work. The scanning-beam planning target volume and number of monitor units were recorded and checked for consistency. Patient-specific dosimetric measurements were performed, including the point dose for each plan, depth doses, and two-dimensional (2D) dose distribution in the planes perpendicular to the incident beam direction for each field at multiple depths. The γ-index with 3% dose or 3-mm distance agreement criteria was used to evaluate the 2D dose distributions. RESULTS: We observed a linear relationship between the number of monitor units and scanning-beam planning target volume. The difference between the measured and calculated point doses (mean ± SD) was 0.0% ± 0.7% (range, -2.9% to 1.8%). In general, the depth doses exhibited good agreement except at the distal end of the spread-out Bragg peak. The pass rate of γ-index (mean ± SD) for 2D dose comparison was 96.2% ± 2.6% (range, 90-100%). Discrepancies between the measured and calculated dose distributions primarily resulted from the limitation of the model used by the treatment planning system. CONCLUSIONS: We have established a patient-specific QA program for prostate cancerpatients receiving SSPT using SFUD. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Joe Y Chang; Heng Li; X Ronald Zhu; Zhongxing Liao; Lina Zhao; Amy Liu; Yupeng Li; Narayan Sahoo; Falk Poenisch; Daniel R Gomez; Richard Wu; Michael Gillin; Xiaodong Zhang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Maria F Chan; Chin-Cheng Chen; Chengyu Shi; Jingdong Li; Xiaoli Tang; Xiang Li; Dennis Mah Journal: Int J Med Phys Clin Eng Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-05-16
Authors: Steven J Frank; James D Cox; Michael Gillin; Radhe Mohan; Adam S Garden; David I Rosenthal; G Brandon Gunn; Randal S Weber; Merrill S Kies; Jan S Lewin; Mark F Munsell; Matthew B Palmer; Narayan Sahoo; Xiaodong Zhang; Wei Liu; X Ronald Zhu Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-05-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: H Harold Li; Vivian L Rodriguez; Olga L Green; Yanle Hu; Rojano Kashani; H Omar Wooten; Deshan Yang; Sasa Mutic Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-10-25 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Aman Anand; Narayan Sahoo; X Ronald Zhu; Gabriel O Sawakuchi; Falk Poenisch; Richard A Amos; George Ciangaru; Uwe Titt; Kazumichi Suzuki; Radhe Mohan; Michael T Gillin Journal: Med Phys Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 4.071
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
Authors: X R Zhu; F Poenisch; M Lii; G O Sawakuchi; U Titt; M Bues; X Song; X Zhang; Y Li; G Ciangaru; H Li; M B Taylor; K Suzuki; R Mohan; M T Gillin; N Sahoo Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Enzhuo M Quan; Wei Liu; Richard Wu; Yupeng Li; Steven J Frank; Xiaodong Zhang; X Ronald Zhu; Radhe Mohan Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Danairis Hernandez Morales; Jie Shan; Wei Liu; Kurt E Augustine; Martin Bues; Michael J Davis; Mirek Fatyga; Jedediah E Johnson; Daniel W Mundy; Jiajian Shen; James E Younkin; Joshua B Stoker Journal: Med Phys Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 4.071