Steven van de Water1, Sairos Safai1, Jacobus M Schippers1,2, Damien C Weber1,3,4, Antony J Lomax1,5. 1. Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute , Villigen , Switzerland. 2. Department of Radiation Therapy, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen , Groningen , the Netherlands. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Bern , Bern , Switzerland. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zürich , Zürich , Switzerland. 5. Department of Physics, ETH Zürich , Zürich , Switzerland.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed at evaluating spatially varying instantaneous dose rates for different intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) planning strategies and delivery scenarios, and comparing these with FLASH dose rates (>40 Gy/s). Material and methods: In order to quantify dose rates in three-dimensions, we proposed the 'dose-averaged dose rate' (DADR) metric, defined for each voxel as the dose-weighted mean of the instantaneous dose rates of all spots (i.e., pencil beams). This concept was applied to four head-and-neck cases, each planned with clinical (4 fields) and various spot-reduced IMPT techniques: 'standard' (4 fields), 'arc' (120 fields) and 'arc-shoot-through' (120 fields; 229 MeV only). For all plans, different delivery scenarios were simulated: constant beam intensity, variable beam intensity for a clinical Varian ProBeam system, varied per energy layer or per spot, and theoretical spot-wise variable beam intensity (i.e., no monitor/safety limitations). DADR distributions were calculated assuming 2-Gy or 6-Gy fractions. Results: Spot-reduced plans contained 17-52 times fewer spots than clinical plans, with no deterioration of plan quality. For the clinical plans, the mean DADR in normal tissue for 2-Gy fractionation was 1.7 Gy/s (median over all patients) at maximum, whereas in standard spot-reduced plans it was 0.7, 4.4, 7.1, and 12.1 Gy/s, for the constant, energy-layer-wise, spot-wise, and theoretical spot-wise delivery scenarios, respectively. Similar values were observed for arc plans. Arc-shoot-through planning resulted in DADR values of 3.0, 6.0, 14.1, and 24.4 Gy/s, for the abovementioned scenarios. Hypofractionation (3×) generally resulted in higher dose rates, up to 73.2 Gy/s for arc-shoot-through plans. The DADR was inhomogeneously distributed with highest values at beam entrance and at the Bragg peak. Conclusion: FLASH dose rates were not achieved for conventional planning and clinical spot-scanning machines. As such, increased spot-wise beam intensities, spot-reduced planning, hypofractionation and arc-shoot-through plans were required to achieve FLASH compatible dose rates.
Background: This study aimed at evaluating spatially varying instantaneous dose rates for different intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) planning strategies and delivery scenarios, and comparing these with FLASH dose rates (>40 Gy/s). Material and methods: In order to quantify dose rates in three-dimensions, we proposed the 'dose-averaged dose rate' (DADR) metric, defined for each voxel as the dose-weighted mean of the instantaneous dose rates of all spots (i.e., pencil beams). This concept was applied to four head-and-neck cases, each planned with clinical (4 fields) and various spot-reduced IMPT techniques: 'standard' (4 fields), 'arc' (120 fields) and 'arc-shoot-through' (120 fields; 229 MeV only). For all plans, different delivery scenarios were simulated: constant beam intensity, variable beam intensity for a clinical Varian ProBeam system, varied per energy layer or per spot, and theoretical spot-wise variable beam intensity (i.e., no monitor/safety limitations). DADR distributions were calculated assuming 2-Gy or 6-Gy fractions. Results: Spot-reduced plans contained 17-52 times fewer spots than clinical plans, with no deterioration of plan quality. For the clinical plans, the mean DADR in normal tissue for 2-Gy fractionation was 1.7 Gy/s (median over all patients) at maximum, whereas in standard spot-reduced plans it was 0.7, 4.4, 7.1, and 12.1 Gy/s, for the constant, energy-layer-wise, spot-wise, and theoretical spot-wise delivery scenarios, respectively. Similar values were observed for arc plans. Arc-shoot-through planning resulted in DADR values of 3.0, 6.0, 14.1, and 24.4 Gy/s, for the abovementioned scenarios. Hypofractionation (3×) generally resulted in higher dose rates, up to 73.2 Gy/s for arc-shoot-through plans. The DADR was inhomogeneously distributed with highest values at beam entrance and at the Bragg peak. Conclusion: FLASH dose rates were not achieved for conventional planning and clinical spot-scanning machines. As such, increased spot-wise beam intensities, spot-reduced planning, hypofractionation and arc-shoot-through plans were required to achieve FLASH compatible dose rates.
Authors: Michele M Kim; Arash Darafsheh; Jan Schuemann; Ivana Dokic; Olle Lundh; Tianyu Zhao; José Ramos-Méndez; Lei Dong; Kristoffer Petersson Journal: IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci Date: 2021-06-22
Authors: Hao Gao; Jiulong Liu; Yuting Lin; Gregory N Gan; Guillem Pratx; Fen Wang; Katja Langen; Jeffrey D Bradley; Ronny L Rotondo; Harold H Li; Ronald C Chen Journal: Med Phys Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 4.506
Authors: J Ramos-Méndez; N Domínguez-Kondo; J Schuemann; A McNamara; E Moreno-Barbosa; Bruce Faddegon Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2020-10-02 Impact factor: 2.841
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