Anthropomorphic lung phantom based validation of in-room proton therapy 4D-CBCT image correction for dose calculation.

PURPOSE: Ventilation-induced tumour motion remains a challenge for the accuracy of proton therapy treatments in lung patients. We investigated the feasibility of using a 4D virtual CT (4D-vCT) approach based on deformable image registration (DIR) and motion-aware 4D CBCT reconstruction (MA-ROOSTER) to enable accurate daily proton dose calculation using a gantry-mounted CBCT scanner tailored to proton therapy. METHODS: Ventilation correlated data of 10 breathing phases were acquired from a porcine ex-vivo functional lung phantom using CT and CBCT. 4D-vCTs were generated by (1) DIR of the mid-position 4D-CT to the mid-position 4D-CBCT (reconstructed with the MA-ROOSTER) using a diffeomorphic Morphons algorithm and (2) subsequent propagation of the obtained mid-position vCT to the individual 4D-CBCT phases. Proton therapy treatment planning was performed to evaluate dose calculation accuracy of the 4D-vCTs. A robust treatment plan delivering a nominal dose of 60Gy was generated on the average intensity image of the 4D-CT for an approximated internal target volume (ITV). Dose distributions were then recalculated on individual phases of the 4D-CT and the 4D-vCT based on the optimized plan. Dose accumulation was performed for 4D-vCT and 4D-CT using DIR of each phase to the mid position, which was chosen as reference. Dose based on the 4D-vCT was then evaluated against the dose calculated on 4D-CT both, phase-by-phase as well as accumulated, by comparing dose volume histogram (DVH) values (Dmean, D2%, D98%, D95%) for the ITV, and by a 3D-gamma index analysis (global, 3%/3mm, 5Gy, 20Gy and 30Gy dose thresholds). RESULTS: Good agreement was found between the 4D-CT and 4D-vCT-based ITV-DVH curves. The relative differences ((CT-vCT)/CT) between accumulated values of ITV Dmean, D2%, D95% and D98% for the 4D-CT and 4D-vCT-based dose distributions were -0.2%, 0.0%, -0.1% and -0.1%, respectively. Phase specific values varied between -0.5% and 0.2%, -0.2% and 0.5%, -3.5% and 1.5%, and -5.7% and 2.3%. The relative difference of accumulated Dmean over the lungs was 2.3% and Dmean for the phases varied between -5.4% and 5.8%. The gamma pass-rates with 5Gy, 20Gy and 30Gy thresholds for the accumulated doses were 96.7%, 99.6% and 99.9%, respectively. Phase-by-phase comparison yielded pass-rates between 86% and 97%, 88% and 98%, and 94% and 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Feasibility of the suggested 4D-vCT workflow using proton therapy specific imaging equipment was shown. Results indicate the potential of the method to be applied for daily 4D proton dose estimation.

Pre-treatment patient-specific stopping power by combining list-mode proton radiography and x-ray CT.

The relative stopping power (RSP) uncertainty is the largest contributor to the range uncertainty in proton therapy. The purpose of this work was to develop a systematic method that yields accurate and patient-specific RSPs by combining (1) pre-treatment x-ray CT and (2) daily proton radiography of the patient. The method was formulated as a penalized least squares optimization problem (argmin([Formula: see text])). The parameter A represents the cumulative path-length crossed by the proton in each material, separated by thresholding on the HU. The material RSPs (water equivalent thickness/physical thickness) are denoted by x. The parameter b is the list-mode proton radiography produced using Geant4 simulations. The problem was solved using a non-negative linear-solver with [Formula: see text]. A was computed by superposing proton trajectories calculated with a cubic or linear spline approach to the CT. The material's RSP assigned in Geant4 were used for reference while the clinical HU-RSP calibration curve was used for comparison. The Gammex RMI-467 phantom was first investigated. The standard deviation between the estimated material RSP and the calculated RSP is 0.45%. The robustness of the techniques was then assessed as a function of the number of projections and initial proton energy. Optimization with two initial projections yields precise RSP (⩽1.0%) for 330 MeV protons. 250 MeV protons have shown higher uncertainty (⩽2.0%) due to the loss of precision in the path estimate. Anthropomorphic phantoms of the head, pelvis, and lung were subsequently evaluated. Accurate RSP has been obtained for the head ([Formula: see text]), the lung ([Formula: see text]) and the pelvis ([Formula: see text]). The range precision has been optimized using the calibration curves obtained with the algorithm, yielding a mean [Formula: see text] difference to the reference of 0.11 ±0.09%, 0.28 ± 0.34% and [Formula: see text] in the same order. The solution's accuracy is limited by the assumed HU/RSP bijection, neglecting inherent degeneracy. The proposed formulation of the problem with prior knowledge x-ray CT demonstrates potential to increase the accuracy of present RSP estimates.

A maximum likelihood method for high resolution proton radiography/proton CT.

Multiple Coulomb scattering (MCS) is the largest contributor to blurring in proton imaging. In this work, we developed a maximum likelihood least squares estimator that improves proton radiography's spatial resolution. The water equivalent thickness (WET) through projections defined from the source to the detector pixels were estimated such that they maximizes the likelihood of the energy loss of every proton crossing the volume. The length spent in each projection was calculated through the optimized cubic spline path estimate. The proton radiographies were produced using Geant4 simulations. Three phantoms were studied here: a slanted cube in a tank of water to measure 2D spatial resolution, a voxelized head phantom for clinical performance evaluation as well as a parametric Catphan phantom (CTP528) for 3D spatial resolution. Two proton beam configurations were used: a parallel and a conical beam. Proton beams of 200 and 330 MeV were simulated to acquire the radiography. Spatial resolution is increased from 2.44 lp cm-1 to 4.53 lp cm-1 in the 200 MeV beam and from 3.49 lp cm-1 to 5.76 lp cm-1 in the 330 MeV beam. Beam configurations do not affect the reconstructed spatial resolution as investigated between a radiography acquired with the parallel (3.49 lp cm-1 to 5.76 lp cm-1) or conical beam (from 3.49 lp cm-1 to 5.56 lp cm-1). The improved images were then used as input in a photon tomography algorithm. The proton CT reconstruction of the Catphan phantom shows high spatial resolution (from 2.79 to 5.55 lp cm-1 for the parallel beam and from 3.03 to 5.15 lp cm-1 for the conical beam) and the reconstruction of the head phantom, although qualitative, shows high contrast in the gradient region. The proposed formulation of the optimization demonstrates serious potential to increase the spatial resolution (up by 65[Formula: see text]) in proton radiography and greatly accelerate proton computed tomography reconstruction.

Technical Note: Procedure for the calibration and validation of kilo-voltage cone-beam CT models.

PURPOSE: The aim of this work is to propose a general and simple procedure for the calibration and validation of kilo-voltage cone-beam CT (kV CBCT) models against experimental data. METHODS: The calibration and validation of the CT model is a two-step procedure: the source model then the detector model. The source is described by the direction dependent photon energy spectrum at each voltage while the detector is described by the pixel intensity value as a function of the direction and the energy of incident photons. The measurements for the source consist of a series of dose measurements in air performed at each voltage with varying filter thicknesses and materials in front of the x-ray tube. The measurements for the detector are acquisitions of projection images using the same filters and several tube voltages. The proposed procedure has been applied to calibrate and assess the accuracy of simple models of the source and the detector of three commercial kV CBCT units. If the CBCT system models had been calibrated differently, the current procedure would have been exclusively used to validate the models. Several high-purity attenuation filters of aluminum, copper, and silver combined with a dosimeter which is sensitive to the range of voltages of interest were used. A sensitivity analysis of the model has also been conducted for each parameter of the source and the detector models. RESULTS: Average deviations between experimental and theoretical dose values are below 1.5% after calibration for the three x-ray sources. The predicted energy deposited in the detector agrees with experimental data within 4% for all imaging systems. CONCLUSIONS: The authors developed and applied an experimental procedure to calibrate and validate any model of the source and the detector of a CBCT unit. The present protocol has been successfully applied to three x-ray imaging systems. The minimum requirements in terms of material and equipment would make its implementation suitable in most clinical environments.