Literature DB >> 23391817

Clinical application of in-room positron emission tomography for in vivo treatment monitoring in proton radiation therapy.

Chul Hee Min1, Xuping Zhu, Brian A Winey, Kira Grogg, Mauro Testa, Georges El Fakhri, Thomas R Bortfeld, Harald Paganetti, Helen A Shih.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23391817      PMCID: PMC3640852          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.12.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  14 in total

1.  Potential application of PET in quality assurance of proton therapy.

Authors:  K Parodi; W Enghardt
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  The impact of uncertainties in the CT conversion algorithm when predicting proton beam ranges in patients from dose and PET-activity distributions.

Authors:  Samuel España; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-19       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Direct time-of-flight for quantitative, real-time in-beam PET: a concept and feasibility study.

Authors:  Paulo Crespo; Georgy Shakirin; Fine Fiedler; Wolfgang Enghardt; Andreas Wagner
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-11-06       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Comparison between in-beam and offline positron emission tomography imaging of proton and carbon ion therapeutic irradiation at synchrotron- and cyclotron-based facilities.

Authors:  Katia Parodi; Thomas Bortfeld; Thomas Haberer
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2008-07-01       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Implementation and workflow for PET monitoring of therapeutic ion irradiation: a comparison of in-beam, in-room, and off-line techniques.

Authors:  Georgy Shakirin; Henning Braess; Fine Fiedler; Daniela Kunath; Kristin Laube; Katia Parodi; Marlen Priegnitz; Wolfgang Enghardt
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Monitoring proton radiation therapy with in-room PET imaging.

Authors:  Xuping Zhu; Samuel España; Juliane Daartz; Norbert Liebsch; Jinsong Ouyang; Harald Paganetti; Thomas R Bortfeld; Georges El Fakhri
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Design study of an in situ PET scanner for use in proton beam therapy.

Authors:  S Surti; W Zou; M E Daube-Witherspoon; J McDonough; J S Karp
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  The reliability of proton-nuclear interaction cross-section data to predict proton-induced PET images in proton therapy.

Authors:  S España; X Zhu; J Daartz; G El Fakhri; T Bortfeld; H Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 9.  Range uncertainties in proton therapy and the role of Monte Carlo simulations.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Patient study of in vivo verification of beam delivery and range, using positron emission tomography and computed tomography imaging after proton therapy.

Authors:  Katia Parodi; Harald Paganetti; Helen A Shih; Susan Michaud; Jay S Loeffler; Thomas F DeLaney; Norbert J Liebsch; John E Munzenrider; Alan J Fischman; Antje Knopf; Thomas Bortfeld
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2007-07-01       Impact factor: 7.038

View more
  21 in total

1.  Simulation of positron emitters for monitoring of dose distribution in proton therapy.

Authors:  Mohsen Mashayekhi; Ali Asghar Mowlavi; Sayyed Bijan Jia
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2016-10-31

2.  Feasibility study of using fall-off gradients of early and late PET scans for proton range verification.

Authors:  Jongmin Cho; Kira Grogg; Chul Hee Min; Xuping Zhu; Harald Paganetti; Hyun Cheol Lee; Georges El Fakhri
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 3.  In vivo range verification in particle therapy.

Authors:  Katia Parodi; Jerimy C Polf
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Mapping (15)O production rate for proton therapy verification.

Authors:  Kira Grogg; Nathaniel M Alpert; Xuping Zhu; Chul Hee Min; Mauro Testa; Brian Winey; Marc D Normandin; Helen A Shih; Harald Paganetti; Thomas Bortfeld; Georges El Fakhri
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Onboard functional and molecular imaging: a design investigation for robotic multipinhole SPECT.

Authors:  James Bowsher; Susu Yan; Justin Roper; William Giles; Fang-Fang Yin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 6.  The physics of proton therapy.

Authors:  Wayne D Newhauser; Rui Zhang
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Feasibility of proton-activated implantable markers for proton range verification using PET.

Authors:  Jongmin Cho; Geoffrey Ibbott; Michael Gillin; Carlos Gonzalez-Lepera; Uwe Titt; Harald Paganetti; Matthew Kerr; Osama Mawlawi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-10-08       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Feasibility of Using Distal Endpoints for In-room PET Range Verification of Proton Therapy.

Authors:  Kira Grogg; Xuping Zhu; Chul Hee Min; Brian Winey; Thomas Bortfeld; Harald Paganetti; Helen A Shih; Georges El Fakhri
Journal:  IEEE Trans Nucl Sci       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.679

9.  A Recommendation on How to Analyze In-Room PET for In Vivo Proton Range Verification Using a Distal PET Surface Method.

Authors:  Chul Hee Min; Xuping Zhu; Kira Grogg; Georges El Fakhri; Brian Winey; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2014-09-21

Review 10.  Latest developments in in-vivo imaging for proton therapy.

Authors:  Katia Parodi
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-12-12       Impact factor: 3.039

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.