| Literature DB >> 23824131 |
T T Böhlen1, J Bauer, M Dosanjh, A Ferrari, T Haberer, K Parodi, V Patera, A Mairani.
Abstract
Ion beam therapy, as an emerging radiation therapy modality, requires continuous efforts to develop and improve tools for patient treatment planning (TP) and research applications. Dose and fluence computation algorithms using the Monte Carlo (MC) technique have served for decades as reference tools for accurate dose computations for radiotherapy. In this work, a novel MC-based treatment-planning (MCTP) tool for ion beam therapy using the pencil beam scanning technique is presented. It allows single-field and simultaneous multiple-fields optimization for realistic patient treatment conditions and for dosimetric quality assurance for irradiation conditions at state-of-the-art ion beam therapy facilities. It employs iterative procedures that allow for the optimization of absorbed dose and relative biological effectiveness (RBE)-weighted dose using radiobiological input tables generated by external RBE models. Using a re-implementation of the local effect model (LEM), the MCTP tool is able to perform TP studies using ions with atomic numbers Z ≤ 8. Example treatment plans created with the MCTP tool are presented for carbon ions in comparison with a certified analytical treatment-planning system. Furthermore, the usage of the tool to compute and optimize mixed-ion treatment plans, i.e. plans including pencil beams of ions with different atomic numbers, is demonstrated. The tool is aimed for future use in research applications and to support treatment planning at ion beam facilities.Entities:
Keywords: FLUKA; Monte Carlo; ion beam therapy; treatment planning
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23824131 PMCID: PMC3700514 DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrt050
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Radiat Res ISSN: 0449-3060 Impact factor: 2.724
Fig. 1.Carbon ion field computed and optimized by the MCTP tool for a cube-shaped target volume in water. The pencil beams were optimized to yield a constant absorbed dose of 1 Gy in the target volume.
Fig. 2.Test treatment plan of a brain tumour treated with carbon ions. DVHs of the clinical target volume (CTV) and the brain stem of a treatment plan created with an analytical treatment planning tool, the MC recalculation of the same plan, and a treatment plan created with the MCTP tool.
Fig. 3.Test treatment plan of a brain tumour treated with carbon ions. Sagittal (left), coronal (middle) and axial (right) view are shown for (a) a treatment plan created with a TPS using an analytical dose engine, (b) the MC recalculation of the same plan, and (c) a treatment plan created with the MCTP tool. RBE-weighted doses are shown in colour-wash-scale. Hounsfield units of the planning CT are shown in grey-scale. Contours show the clinical target volume and the brain stem.
Fig. 4.A 4-cm SOBP obtained using a combination of mono-directional proton and carbon ion pencil beams while optimizing for a constant RBE in the target volume. The left and right panels show RBE-weighted dose and RBE along the central axis of the field. The plan was optimized using the LEM-IV model for the proton and carbon ion beams with parameters for human salivary gland cells. The area with the fine stripes marks the target volume.
Fig. 5.A 4-cm SOBP obtained using a combination of opposed fields of proton and carbon ion pencil beams. A constant RBE-weighted dose in the target volume is achieved while delivering a ‘high-LET boost’ to a central hypoxic area with carbon ions, associated with a higher RBE, and delivering the dose around the boost region preferably by low-LET protons. The left and right panels show the RBE-weighted dose and RBE along the central axis of the field. The plan was optimized using the LEM-IV model for the proton and carbon ion beams with parameters for human salivary gland cells. The area with the fine stripes marks the target volume including the boost volume.