Xiaoqiang Li1, Gang Liu2, Guillaume Janssens3, Olivier De Wilde3, Vincent Bossier3, Xavier Lerot3, Antoine Pouppez3, Di Yan4, Craig Stevens4, Peyman Kabolizadeh4, Xuanfeng Ding5. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, USA. Electronic address: Xiaoqiang.Li@beaumont.org. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, USA; Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China; School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China. 3. Advanced Technology Group, Ion Beam Applications SA, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, USA. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, USA. Electronic address: Xuanfeng.Ding@beaumont.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We report the first prototype of spot-scanning arc treatment (SPArc) delivery on a clinical proton beam therapy machine and evaluate its delivery accuracy and efficiency. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A new module called Proton Dynamic Arc Delivery (PDAD) was developed to allow simultaneously delivering spot-scanning proton beam treatments while rotating the gantry on an IBA Proteus®One proton machine. A series of measurements was performed to validate the basic beam characteristics. Subsequently, patient specific quality assurance (QA) of a brain SPArc plan was performed. Total SPArc treatment delivery time was also recorded and compared to the clinically delivered intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) treatment time. Finally, the log file of the SPArc plan was analyzed and processed to reconstruct the actual delivered dose. RESULTS: All the basic beam characteristics were confirmed in the PDAD mode, similar as those measured using fixed gantry deliveries in clinical mode. The brain SPArc plan with similar or superior plan quality was delivered in 4 mins compared to total 11 mins for the clinical treatment of the three-field IMPT plan. The patient QA result showed a good agreement between the measured and calculated dose distributions with the gamma index of 98.6% (3%/3 mm). The analysis of the log file confirmed the accuracy of the SPArc plan delivery, with the gamma index of 98.3% (1%/1 mm) between reconstructed and the planned doses. CONCLUSION: The first prototype of dynamic proton arc delivery on a clinical proton therapy system was successfully performed. The measurements and simulations demonstrated the feasibility of SPArc treatment within the clinical requirements.
PURPOSE: We report the first prototype of spot-scanning arc treatment (SPArc) delivery on a clinical proton beam therapy machine and evaluate its delivery accuracy and efficiency. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A new module called Proton Dynamic Arc Delivery (PDAD) was developed to allow simultaneously delivering spot-scanning proton beam treatments while rotating the gantry on an IBA Proteus®One proton machine. A series of measurements was performed to validate the basic beam characteristics. Subsequently, patient specific quality assurance (QA) of a brain SPArc plan was performed. Total SPArc treatment delivery time was also recorded and compared to the clinically delivered intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) treatment time. Finally, the log file of the SPArc plan was analyzed and processed to reconstruct the actual delivered dose. RESULTS: All the basic beam characteristics were confirmed in the PDAD mode, similar as those measured using fixed gantry deliveries in clinical mode. The brain SPArc plan with similar or superior plan quality was delivered in 4 mins compared to total 11 mins for the clinical treatment of the three-field IMPT plan. The patient QA result showed a good agreement between the measured and calculated dose distributions with the gamma index of 98.6% (3%/3 mm). The analysis of the log file confirmed the accuracy of the SPArc plan delivery, with the gamma index of 98.3% (1%/1 mm) between reconstructed and the planned doses. CONCLUSION: The first prototype of dynamic proton arc delivery on a clinical proton therapy system was successfully performed. The measurements and simulations demonstrated the feasibility of SPArc treatment within the clinical requirements.
Authors: L Volz; C-A Collins-Fekete; E Bär; S Brons; C Graeff; R P Johnson; A Runz; C Sarosiek; R W Schulte; J Seco Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2021-11-29 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Stewart Mein; Thomas Tessonnier; Benedikt Kopp; Semi Harrabi; Amir Abdollahi; Jürgen Debus; Thomas Haberer; Andrea Mairani Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2021-02-04
Authors: Alejandro Mazal; Juan Antonio Vera Sanchez; Daniel Sanchez-Parcerisa; Jose Manuel Udias; Samuel España; Victor Sanchez-Tembleque; Luis Mario Fraile; Paloma Bragado; Alvaro Gutierrez-Uzquiza; Nuria Gordillo; Gaston Garcia; Juan Castro Novais; Juan Maria Perez Moreno; Lina Mayorga Ortiz; Amaia Ilundain Idoate; Marta Cremades Sendino; Carme Ares; Raymond Miralbell; Niek Schreuder Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 6.244
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
Authors: Xiaoqiang Li; Xuanfeng Ding; Weili Zheng; Gang Liu; Guillaume Janssens; Kevin Souris; Ana M Barragán-Montero; Di Yan; Craig Stevens; Peyman Kabolizadeh Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 6.244