Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-17T10:43:14.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Simulation study of proton arc therapy with the compact single-room MEVION-S250 proton therapy system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2020

Sven Ferguson ,
Salahuddin Ahmad  and
Imad Ali Open the ORCID record for Imad Ali [Opens in a new window]
Sven Ferguson
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK73104, USA
Salahuddin Ahmad
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK73104, USA
Imad Ali*
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK73104, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Imad Ali, Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Stephenson Oklahoma Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 800 N.E. 10th Street, OKCC L100, Oklahoma City, OK73104, USA. Tel: +1 405 271 8290. Fax: +1 405 271 8297. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aim:

The purpose of this study is to investigate the feasibility of proton arc therapy (PAT) using the double-scattering MEVION-S250 proton system. The treatment planning and dose delivery parameters from PAT were compared with conventional treatment planning techniques.

Materials and methods:

PAT was simulated with multiple conformal and fixed-aperture beams (5–15) using the MEVION-S250-double-scattering proton system. Conformal apertures were simulated with the Eclipse-treatment-planning system: (a) using a static single aperture that provides the best average conformal circular or rectangular apertures to cover the tumour from different angular views (SPAT), and (b) dynamic conformal apertures of the tumour shape at each irradiation angle that can be obtained from a multi-leaf-collimator system (DPAT).

Results:

The DPAT and SPAT plans provided superior dose coverage and sparing of normal tissues in comparison with conventional plans (CPT). The entrance normal tissue and skin doses (<40%) were lowered significantly by delivering dose from different directions over a wider angular view compared to conventional plans that have large entrance dose from only two fields. While the mean and minimum doses from PAT and CPT were comparable, the maximum doses from arc plans were lower than the maximum doses in conventional plans. The SPAT and DPAT plans had comparable dose parameters for regularly shaped targets. The heterogeneity index (HI) was superior in PAT plans which improved with increasing number of beams in arc plans for the different treatment sites. The conformality index (CI) depends on the treatment site and complexity of the shape of the planning target volume where for brain, pancreatic and lung tumours, PAT plans conformality was comparable and sometimes superior to CPT; and HI and CI were generally better in DPAT compared to SPAT.

Conclusions:

PAT plans have superior dose coverage and sparing of normal tissues compared to CPT plans using the MEVION double-scattering system as shown in this simulation study. Ideally, conformal proton arcs require beam shaping and dose delivery with the gantry moving; however, the MEVION double-scattering system lacks a multi-leaf collimator system and cannot deliver dose during gantry rotation. The single aperture conformal proton therapy technique is more time and cost effective compared with conventional techniques that are used currently with the MEVION proton therapy system because of the elimination of the need for patient-specific compensators. In present study, PAT was simulated with the MEVION double-scattering proton therapy system; however, it can be performed also with other proton therapy systems.

Keywords

conformal apertureconventional proton therapymulti-leaf collimatorproton arc therapyscattering proton beam
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , December 2020 , pp. 347 - 354
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Noël, G, Antoni, D. Proton therapy. Cancer Radiother 2016; 20: 508–512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlegel, W, Bortfeld, T, Grosu, L. New Technologies in Radiation Oncology. Springer, Germany, 2006: 257, 347, 356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, S M, Trofimov, A, Safai, S et al. Proton radiotherapy for pediatric central nervous system germ cell tumors: early clinical outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010; 79: 121–129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krejcarek, S C, Grant, P E, Henson, J W, Tarbell, N J, Yock, T I. Physiologic and radiographic evidence of the distal edge of the proton beam in craniospinal irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 68: 646–649.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tommasino, F, Durante, M. Proton radiobiology. Cancers (Basel) 2015; 7: 353–381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Girdhani, S, Sachs, R, Hlatky, L. Biological effects of proton radiation: an update. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 166: 2015; 334–338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teoh, M, Clark, CH, Wood, K, Whitaker, S, Nisbet, A. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: a review of current literature and clinical use in practice. Br J Radiol 2011; 84: 967–996.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vargas, C, Fryer, A, Mahajan, C, et al. Dose-volume comparison of proton therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 70: 744–751.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sandison, G, Papiez, E, Bloch, C, Morphis, J. Phantom assessment of lung dose from proton arc therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997; 38: 891–897.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seco, J, Gu, G, Marcelos, T, Kooy, H, Willers, H. Proton arc reduces range uncertainty effects and improves conformality compared with photon volumetric modulated arc therapy in stereotactic body radiation therapy for non-small cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013; 87: 188–194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ding, X, Li, X, Zhang, M, Kabolizadeh, P, Stevens, C, Yan, D. Spot-Scanning Proton Arc (SPArc) therapy: the first robust and delivery-efficient spot-scanning proton arc therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 96: 1107–1116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, T, Sun, B, Grantham, K, et al. Commissioning and initial experience with the first clinical gantry-mounted proton therapy system. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2016; 17: 24–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prusator, M, Ahmad, S, Chen, Y. TOPAS simulation of the Mevion S250 compact proton therapy unit. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2017; 18: 88–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klein, E E, Bradley, J. Single-room proton radiation therapy systems: no small change. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 95: 147–148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, K L, Bloch, C D, Hill, P M, Klein, E E. Evaluation of neutron dose equivalent from the Mevion S250 proton accelerator: measurements and calculations. Phys Med Biol 2013; 58: 8709–8723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paddick, I. A simple scoring ratio to index the conformity of radiosurgical treatment plans. J Neurosurg 2000; 93: 219–222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feuvert, L, Noël, G, Mazeron, J, Bey, P. Conformity index: a review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 64: 333–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsi, W C, Schreuder, A N, Moyers, M F, et al. Range and modulation dependencies for proton beam dose. Med Phys 2009; 36: 634–641.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heo, S, Yoo, S, Song, Y, et al. Analysis of neutron production in passively scattered ion-beam therapy. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2017; 175: 297–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mojżeszek, N, Farah, J, Kłodowska, M, et al. Measurement of stray neutron doses inside the treatment room from a proton pencil beam scanning system. Phys Med 2017; 34: 80–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howell, R, Burgett, E, Isaacs, D, et al. Measured neutron spectra and dose equivalents from a mevion single-room, passively scattered proton system used for craniospinal irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 95: 749–757.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed