Technical note: Evaluation and second check of a commercial Monte Carlo dose engine for small-field apertures in pencil beam scanning proton therapy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of the RayStation Monte Carlo dose engine (RayStation MC) in modeling small-field block apertures in proton pencil beam scanning. Furthermore, we evaluate the suitability of MCsquare as a second check for RayStation MC. METHODS: We have enhanced MCsquare to model block apertures. To test the accuracy of both RayStation MC and the newly enhanced MCsquare, we compare the dose predictions of each to in-water dose measurements obtained using diode detectors and radiochromic film. Nine brass apertures with openings of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 cm and either 2 cm or 4 cm thickness were used in the irradiation of a water phantom. Two measurement setups were used, one with a range shifter and 119.7 MeV proton beam energy and the other with no range shifter and 147 MeV proton beam energy. To further test the validity of RayStation MC and MCsquare in modeling block apertures and to evaluate MCsquare as a second check tool, 10 small-field (average target volume 8.3 cm3 ) patient treatment plans were calculated by each dose engine followed by a statistical comparison. RESULTS: Comparing to the absolute dose measurements in water, RayStation MC differed by 1.2% ± 1.0% while MCsquare differed by -1.8% ± 3.7% in the plateau region of a pristine Bragg peak. Compared to the in-water film measurements, RayStation MC and MCsquare both performed well with an average 2D-3D gamma passing rate of 99.4% and 99.7% (3%/3 mm), respectively. A t-test comparing the agreement with the film measurements between RayStation MC and MCsquare suggested that the relative spatial dose distributions calculated by MCsquare and RayStation MC were statistically indistinguishable. Directly comparing the dose calculations between MCsquare and RayStation MC over 10 patients resulted in an average 3D-3D gamma passing rates of 98.5% (3%/3 mm) and 94.1% (2%/2 mm), respectively. CONCLUSION: The validity of RayStation MC algorithm for use with patient-specific apertures has been expanded to include small apertures. MCsquare has been enhanced to model apertures and was found to be an adequate second check of RayStation MC in this scenario.

Per-voxel constraints to minimize hot spots in linear energy transfer-guided robust optimization for base of skull head and neck cancer patients in IMPT.

PURPOSE: Due to the employment of quadratic programming using soft constraints to implement dose volume constraints and the "trial-and-error" procedure needed to achieve a clinically acceptable plan, conventional dose volume constraints (upper limit) are not adequately effective in controlling small and isolated hot spots in the dose/linear energy transfer (LET) distribution. Such hot spots can lead to adverse events. In order to mitigate the risk of brain necrosis, one of the most clinically significant adverse events in patients receiving intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for base of skull (BOS) cancer, we propose per-voxel constraints to minimize hot spots in LET-guided robust optimization. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten BOS cancer patients treated with IMPT were carefully selected by meeting one of the following conditions: (1) diagnosis of brain necrosis during follow-up; and (2) considered high risk for brain necrosis by not meeting dose constraints to the brain. An optimizing structure (BrainOPT) and an evaluating structure (BrainROI) that both contained the aforementioned hot dose regions in the brain were generated for optimization and evaluation, respectively. Two plans were generated for every patient: one using conventional dose-only robust optimization, the other using LET-guided robust optimization. The impact of LET was integrated into the optimization via a term of extra biological dose (xBD). A novel optimization tool of per-voxel constraints to control small and isolated hot spots in either the dose, LET, or combined (dose/LET) distribution was developed and used to minimize dose/LET hot spots of the selected structures. Indices from dose-volume histogram (DVH) and xBD dose-volume histogram (xBDVH) were used in the plan evaluation. A newly developed tool of the dose-LET-volume histogram (DLVH) was also adopted to illustrate the underlying mechanism. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for statistical comparison of the DVH and xBDVH indices between the conventional dose-only and the LET-guided robustly optimized plans. RESULTS: Per-voxel constraints effectively and efficiently minimized dose hot spots in both dose-only and LET-guided robust optimization and LET hot spots in LET-guided robust optimization. Compared to the conventional dose-only robust optimization, the LET-guided robust optimization could generate plans with statistically lower xBD hot spots in BrainROI (VxBD,50 Gy[RBE], p = 0.009; VxBD,60 Gy[RBE], p = 0.025; xBD1cc, p = 0.017; xBD2cc, p = 0.022) with comparable dose coverage, dose hot spots in the target, and dose hot spots in BrainROI. DLVH analysis indicated that LET-guided robust optimization could either reduce LET at the same dose level or redistribute high LET from high dose regions to low dose regions. CONCLUSION: Per-voxel constraint is a powerful tool to minimize dose/LET hot spots in IMPT. The LET-guided robustly optimized plans outperformed the conventional dose-only robustly optimized plans in terms of xBD hot spots control.

Beam angle comparison for distal esophageal carcinoma patients treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy.

PURPOSE: To compare the dosimetric performances of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans generated with two different beam angle configurations (the Right-Left oblique posterior beams and the Superior-Inferior oblique posterior beams) for the treatment of distal esophageal carcinoma in the presence of uncertainties and interplay effect. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty patients' IMPT plans were retrospectively selected, with 10 patients treated with the R-L oblique posterior beams (Group R-L) and the other 10 patients treated with the S-I oblique posterior beams (Group S-I). Patients in both groups were matched by their clinical target volumes (CTVs-high and low dose levels) and respiratory motion amplitudes. Dose-volume-histogram (DVH) indices were used to assess plan quality. DVH bandwidth was calculated to evaluate plan robustness. Interplay effect was quantified using four-dimensional (4D) dynamic dose calculation with random respiratory starting phase of each fraction. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for heart, liver, and lung was calculated, respectively, to estimate the clinical outcomes. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for statistical comparison between the two groups. RESULTS: Compared with plans in Group R-L, plans in Group S-I resulted in significantly lower liver Dmean and lung V30Gy[RBE] with slightly higher but clinically acceptable spinal cord Dmax . Similar plan robustness was observed between the two groups. When interplay effect was considered, plans in Group S-I performed statistically better for heart Dmean and V30Gy[RBE] , lung Dmean and V5Gy[RBE] , and liver Dmean , with slightly increased but clinically acceptable spinal cord Dmax . NTCP for liver was significantly better in Group S-I. CONCLUSIONS: IMPT plans in Group S-I have better sparing of liver, heart, and lungs at the slight cost of spinal cord maximum dose protection, and are more interplay-effect resilient compared to IMPT plans in Group R-L. Our study supports the routine use of the S-I oblique posterior beams for the treatments of distal esophageal carcinoma.

Technical Note: Treatment planning system (TPS) approximations matter - comparing intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plan quality and robustness between a commercial and an in-house developed TPS for nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PURPOSE: Approximate dose calculation methods were used in the nominal dose distribution and the perturbed dose distributions due to uncertainties in a commercial treatment planning system (CTPS) for robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). We aimed to investigate whether the approximations influence plan quality, robustness, and interplay effect of the resulting IMPT plans for the treatment of locally advanced lung cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten consecutively treated locally advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients were selected. Two IMPT plans were created for each patient using our in-house developed TPS, named "Solo," and also the CTPS, EclipseTM (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA), respectively. The plans were designed to deliver prescription doses to internal target volumes (ITV) drawn by a physician on averaged four-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT). Solo plans were imported back to CTPS, and recalculated in CTPS for fair comparison. Both plans were further verified for each patient by recalculating doses in the inhalation and exhalation phases to ensure that all plans met clinical requirements. Plan robustness was quantified on all phases using dose-volume-histograms (DVH) indices in the worst-case scenario. The interplay effect was evaluated for every plan using an in-house developed software, which randomized starting phases of each field per fraction and accumulated dose in the exhalation phase based on the patient's breathing motion pattern and the proton spot delivery in a time-dependent fashion. DVH indices were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Compared to the plans generated using CTPS on the averaged CT, Solo plans had significantly better target dose coverage and homogeneity (normalized by the prescription dose) in the worst-case scenario [ITV D95% : 98.04% vs 96.28%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.020; ITV D5% -D95% : 7.20% vs 9.03%, P = 0.049] while all DVH indices were comparable in the nominal scenario. On the inhalation phase, Solo plans had better target dose coverage and cord Dmax in the nominal scenario [ITV D95% : 99.36% vs 98.45%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.014; cord Dmax : 20.07 vs 23.71 Gy(RBE), P = 0.027] with better target coverage and cord Dmax in the worst-case scenario [ITV D95% : 97.89% vs 96.47%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.037; cord Dmax : 24.57 vs 28.14 Gy(RBE), P = 0.037]. On the exhalation phase, similar phenomena were observed in the nominal scenario [ITV D95% : 99.63% vs 98.87%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.037; cord Dmax : 19.67 vs 23.66 Gy(RBE), P = 0.039] and in the worst-case scenario [ITV D95% : 98.20% vs 96.74%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.027; cord Dmax : 23.47 vs 27.93 Gy(RBE), P = 0.027]. In terms of interplay effect, plans generated by Solo had significantly better target dose coverage and homogeneity, less hot spots, and lower esophageal Dmean , and cord Dmax [ITV D95% : 101.81% vs 98.68%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.002; ITV D5% -D95% : 2.94% vs 7.51%, P = 0.002; cord Dmax : 18.87 vs 22.29 Gy(RBE), P = 0.014]. CONCLUSIONS: Solo-generated IMPT plans provide improved cord sparing, better target robustness in all considered phases, and reduced interplay effect compared with CTPS. Consequently, the approximation methods currently used in commercial TPS programs may have space for improvement in generating optimal IMPT plans for patient cases with locally advanced lung cancer.