Literature DB >> 35130520

Investigating aperture-based approximations to model a focused dynamic collimation system for pencil beam scanning proton therapy.

Nicholas P Nelson1, Wesley S Culberson1, Daniel E Hyer2, Blake R Smith2, Ryan T Flynn2, Patrick M Hill3.   

Abstract

Purpose. The Dynamic Collimation System (DCS) is an energy layer-specific collimation device designed to reduce the lateral penumbra in pencil beam scanning proton therapy. The DCS consists of two pairs of nickel trimmers that rapidly and independently move and rotate to intercept the scanning proton beam and an integrated range shifter to treat targets less than 4 cm deep. This work examines the validity of a single aperture approximation to model the DCS, a commonly used approximation in commercial treatment planning systems, as well as higher-order aperture-based approximations for modeling DCS-collimated dose distributions.Methods. An experimentally validated TOPAS/Geant4-based Monte Carlo model of the DCS integrated with a beam model of the IBA pencil beam scanning dedicated nozzle was used to simulate DCS- and aperture-collimated 100 MeV beamlets and composite treatment plans. The DCS was represented by three different aperture approximations: a single aperture placed halfway between the upper and lower trimmer planes, two apertures located at the upper and lower trimmer planes, and four apertures, located at both the upstream and downstream faces of each pair of trimmers. Line profiles and three-dimensional regions of interest were used to evaluate the validity and limitations of the aperture approximations investigated.Results. For pencil beams without a range shifter, minimal differences were observed between the DCS and single aperture approximation. For range shifted beamlets, the single aperture approximation yielded wider penumbra widths (up to 18%) in the X-direction and sharper widths (up to 9.4%) in the Y-direction. For the example treatment plan, the root-mean-square errors (RMSEs) in an overall three-dimensional region of interest were 1.7%, 1.3%, and 1.7% for the single aperture, two aperture, and four aperture models, respectively. If the region of interest only encompasses the lateral edges outside of the target, the resulting RMSEs were 1.7%, 1.1%, and 0.5% single aperture, two aperture, and four aperture models, respectively.Conclusions. Monte Carlo simulations of the DCS demonstrated that a single aperture approximation is sufficient for modeling pristine fields at the Bragg depth while range shifted fields require a higher-order aperture approximation. For the treatment plan considered, the double aperture model performed the best overall, however, the four-aperture model most accurately modeled the lateral field edges at the expense of increased dose differences proximal to and within the target.
© 2022 IOP Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Monte Carlo; collimation; dose calculations; proton therapy; treatment planning

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35130520      PMCID: PMC8917788          DOI: 10.1088/2057-1976/ac525f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biomed Phys Eng Express        ISSN: 2057-1976


  24 in total

1.  Intensity modulation methods for proton radiotherapy.

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

2.  Two-dimensional pencil beam scaling: an improved proton dose algorithm for heterogeneous media.

Authors:  Hanitra Szymanowski; Uwe Oelfke
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2002-09-21       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  A pencil beam algorithm for intensity modulated proton therapy derived from Monte Carlo simulations.

Authors:  Martin Soukup; Matthias Fippel; Markus Alber
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2005-10-19       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 4.  Alpha-particles for targeted therapy.

Authors:  George Sgouros
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2008-04-23       Impact factor: 15.470

5.  Experimental characterization of two-dimensional spot profiles for two proton pencil beam scanning nozzles.

Authors:  Liyong Lin; Christopher G Ainsley; Timothy D Solberg; James E McDonough
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-12-30       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  A pencil beam algorithm for proton dose calculations.

Authors:  L Hong; M Goitein; M Bucciolini; R Comiskey; B Gottschalk; S Rosenthal; C Serago; M Urie
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  A method for modeling laterally asymmetric proton beamlets resulting from collimation.

Authors:  Edgar Gelover; Dongxu Wang; Patrick M Hill; Ryan T Flynn; Mingcheng Gao; Steve Laub; Mark Pankuch; Daniel E Hyer
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Impact of spot size on plan quality of spot scanning proton radiosurgery for peripheral brain lesions.

Authors:  Dongxu Wang; Blake Dirksen; Daniel E Hyer; John M Buatti; Arshin Sheybani; Eric Dinges; Nicole Felderman; Mindi TenNapel; John E Bayouth; Ryan T Flynn
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  An investigation into the robustness of dynamically collimated proton therapy treatments.

Authors:  Blake R Smith; Daniel E Hyer; Wesley S Culberson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2020-05-16       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Improving Head and Neck Cancer Treatments Using Dynamic Collimation in Spot Scanning Proton Therapy.

Authors:  Alexandra Moignier; Edgar Gelover; Dongxu Wang; Blake Smith; Ryan Flynn; Maura Kirk; Liyong Lin; Timothy Solberg; Alexander Lin; Daniel Hyer
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2016-03-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.