Literature DB >> 29595145

Feasibility of online IMPT adaptation using fast, automatic and robust dose restoration.

Kinga Bernatowicz1, Xavier Geets, Ana Barragan, Guillaume Janssens, Kevin Souris, Edmond Sterpin.   

Abstract

Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) offers excellent dose conformity and healthy tissue sparing, but it can be substantially compromised in the presence of anatomical changes. A major dosimetric effect is caused by density changes, which alter the planned proton range in the patient. Three different methods, which automatically restore an IMPT plan dose on a daily CT image were implemented and compared: (1) simple dose restoration (DR) using optimization objectives of the initial plan, (2) voxel-wise dose restoration (vDR), and (3) isodose volume dose restoration (iDR). Dose restorations were calculated for three different clinical cases, selected to test different capabilities of the restoration methods: large range adaptation, complex dose distributions and robust re-optimization. All dose restorations were obtained in less than 5 min, without manual adjustments of the optimization settings. The evaluation of initial plans on repeated CTs showed large dose distortions, which were substantially reduced after restoration. In general, all dose restoration methods improved DVH-based scores in propagated target volumes and OARs. Analysis of local dose differences showed that, although all dose restorations performed similarly in high dose regions, iDR restored the initial dose with higher precision and accuracy in the whole patient anatomy. Median dose errors decreased from 13.55 Gy in distorted plan to 9.75 Gy (vDR), 6.2 Gy (DR) and 4.3 Gy (iDR). High quality dose restoration is essential to minimize or eventually by-pass the physician approval of the restored plan, as long as dose stability can be assumed. Motion (as well as setup and range uncertainties) can be taken into account by including robust optimization in the dose restoration. Restoring clinically-approved dose distribution on repeated CTs does not require new ROI segmentation and is compatible with an online adaptive workflow.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29595145     DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aaba8c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  9 in total

Review 1.  Online daily adaptive proton therapy.

Authors:  Francesca Albertini; Michael Matter; Lena Nenoff; Ye Zhang; Antony Lomax
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Adaptive proton therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti; Pablo Botas; Gregory C Sharp; Brian Winey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Evaluation of CBCT scatter correction using deep convolutional neural networks for head and neck adaptive proton therapy.

Authors:  Arthur Lalonde; Brian Winey; Joost Verburg; Harald Paganetti; Gregory C Sharp
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Comparison of weekly and daily online adaptation for head and neck intensity-modulated proton therapy.

Authors:  Mislav Bobić; Arthur Lalonde; Gregory C Sharp; Clemens Grassberger; Joost M Verburg; Brian A Winey; Antony J Lomax; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Anatomic changes in head and neck intensity-modulated proton therapy: Comparison between robust optimization and online adaptation.

Authors:  Arthur Lalonde; Mislav Bobić; Brian Winey; Joost Verburg; Gregory C Sharp; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 6.901

6.  Online adaptive dose restoration in intensity modulated proton therapy of lung cancer to account for inter-fractional density changes.

Authors:  Elena Borderías Villarroel; Xavier Geets; Edmond Sterpin
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-07-13

7.  Integrating Structure Propagation Uncertainties in the Optimization of Online Adaptive Proton Therapy Plans.

Authors:  Lena Nenoff; Gregory Buti; Mislav Bobić; Arthur Lalonde; Konrad P Nesteruk; Brian Winey; Gregory Charles Sharp; Atchar Sudhyadhom; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-14       Impact factor: 6.575

8.  Benchmarking daily adaptation using fully automated radiotherapy treatment plan optimization for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Thyrza Z Jagt; Tomas M Janssen; Anja Betgen; Lisa Wiersema; Rick Verhage; Sanne Garritsen; Tineke Vijlbrief-Bosman; Peter de Ruiter; Peter Remeijer; Corrie A M Marijnen; Femke P Peters; Jan-Jakob Sonke
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2022-08-18

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

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.