Literature DB >> 28871980

Empowering Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy Through Physics and Technology: An Overview.

Radhe Mohan1, Indra J Das2, Clifton C Ling3.   

Abstract

Considering the clinical potential of protons attributable to their physical characteristics, interest in proton therapy has increased greatly in this century, as has the number of proton therapy installations. Until recently, passively scattered proton therapy was used almost entirely. Notably, the overall clinical results to date have not shown a convincing benefit of protons over photons. A rapid transition is now occurring with the implementation of the most advanced form of proton therapy, intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). IMPT is superior to passively scattered proton therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dosimetrically. However, numerous limitations exist in the present IMPT methods. In particular, compared with IMRT, IMPT is highly vulnerable to various uncertainties. In this overview we identify three major areas of current limitations of IMPT: treatment planning, treatment delivery, and motion management, and discuss current and future efforts for improvement. For treatment planning, we need to reduce uncertainties in proton range and in computed dose distributions, improve robust planning and optimization, enhance adaptive treatment planning and delivery, and consider how to exploit the variability in the relative biological effectiveness of protons for clinical benefit. The quality of proton therapy also depends on the characteristics of the IMPT delivery systems and image guidance. Efforts are needed to optimize the beamlet spot size for both improved dose conformality and faster delivery. For the latter, faster energy switching time and increased dose rate are also needed. Real-time in-room volumetric imaging for guiding IMPT is in its early stages with cone beam computed tomography (CT) and CT-on-rails, and continued improvements are anticipated. In addition, imaging of the proton beams themselves, using, for instance, prompt γ emissions, is being developed to determine the proton range and to reduce range uncertainty. With the realization of the advances described above, we posit that IMPT, thus empowered, will lead to substantially improved clinical results.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28871980      PMCID: PMC5651132          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.05.005

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


  89 in total

1.  Comments on ICRU report no. 49: stopping powers and ranges for protons and alpha particles.

Authors:  J F Ziegler
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 2.841

2.  Correlation between CT numbers and tissue parameters needed for Monte Carlo simulations of clinical dose distributions.

Authors:  W Schneider; T Bortfeld; W Schlegel
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Intensity modulation methods for proton radiotherapy.

Authors:  A Lomax
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 4.  Organ motion and its management.

Authors:  K M Langen; D T Jones
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2001-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Optimization of beam parameters and treatment planning for intensity modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  Alexei Trofimov; Thomas Bortfeld
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2003-10

6.  A phenomenological model for the relative biological effectiveness in therapeutic proton beams.

Authors:  J J Wilkens; U Oelfke
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2004-07-07       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 7.  Proton therapy in clinical practice: current clinical evidence.

Authors:  Michael Brada; Madelon Pijls-Johannesma; Dirk De Ruysscher
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-03-10       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Gated irradiation with scanned particle beams.

Authors:  Christoph Bert; Alexander Gemmel; Nami Saito; Eike Rietzel
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2009-03-15       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Risk of developing second cancer from neutron dose in proton therapy as function of field characteristics, organ, and patient age.

Authors:  Christina Zacharatou Jarlskog; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2008-06-18       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  4D treatment planning for scanned ion beams.

Authors:  Christoph Bert; Eike Rietzel
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2007-07-03       Impact factor: 3.481

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Treatment planning for proton therapy: what is needed in the next 10 years?

Authors:  Hakan Nystrom; Maria Fuglsang Jensen; Petra Witt Nystrom
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  A Review of Proton Therapy - Current Status and Future Directions.

Authors:  Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Precis Radiat Oncol       Date:  2022-04-27

Review 3.  Proton therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: the road ahead.

Authors:  Eric D Brooks; Matthew S Ning; Vivek Verma; X Ronald Zhu; Joe Y Chang
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2019-09

4.  Proton Therapy for Locally Advanced Oropharyngeal Cancer: Initial Clinical Experience at the University of Washington.

Authors:  Saif Aljabab; Andrew Liu; Tony Wong; Jay J Liao; George E Laramore; Upendra Parvathaneni
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2019-12-19

5.  Dosimetric feasibility of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy in pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation using intensity-modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  Xue-Ying Ren; Peng-Kang He; Xian-Shu Gao; Zhi-Lei Zhao; Bo Zhao; Yun Bai; Si-Wei Liu; Kang Li; Shang-Bin Qin; Ming-Wei Ma; Jing Zhou; Yi Rong
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-04-04       Impact factor: 2.102

Review 6.  Technical Principles of Dual-Energy Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Clinical Applications for Radiation Therapy.

Authors:  Shailaja Sajja; Young Lee; Markus Eriksson; Håkan Nordström; Arjun Sahgal; Masoud Hashemi; James G Mainprize; Mark Ruschin
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-07-30

Review 7.  Adaptive Radiation Therapy (ART) Strategies and Technical Considerations: A State of the ART Review From NRG Oncology.

Authors:  Carri K Glide-Hurst; Percy Lee; Adam D Yock; Jeffrey R Olsen; Minsong Cao; Farzan Siddiqui; William Parker; Anthony Doemer; Yi Rong; Amar U Kishan; Stanley H Benedict; X Allen Li; Beth A Erickson; Jason W Sohn; Ying Xiao; Evan Wuthrick
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2020-10-24       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Beam-Specific Spot Guidance and Optimization for PBS Proton Treatment of Bilateral Head and Neck Cancers.

Authors:  Karla Leach; Shikui Tang; Jared Sturgeon; Andrew K Lee; Ryan Grover; Parag Sanghvi; James Urbanic; Chang Chang
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2021-06-25

Review 9.  Roadmap: proton therapy physics and biology.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti; Chris Beltran; Stefan Both; Lei Dong; Jacob Flanz; Keith Furutani; Clemens Grassberger; David R Grosshans; Antje-Christin Knopf; Johannes A Langendijk; Hakan Nystrom; Katia Parodi; Bas W Raaymakers; Christian Richter; Gabriel O Sawakuchi; Marco Schippers; Simona F Shaitelman; B K Kevin Teo; Jan Unkelbach; Patrick Wohlfahrt; Tony Lomax
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 4.174

10.  A novel approach to Verify air gap and SSD for proton radiotherapy using surface imaging.

Authors:  Xiao Wang; Chi Ma; Rihan Davis; Rahul R Parikh; Salma K Jabbour; Bruce G Haffty; Ning J Yue; Ke Nie; Yin Zhang
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.