Department of Medical Physics, The Oklahoma Proton Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Boca Raton Regional Hospital, Lynn Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Feb;23(2):e13512. doi: 10.1002/acm2.13512. Epub 2022 Jan 6.
The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the impact of spot size on the interplay effect, plan robustness, and dose to the organs at risk for lung cancer plans in pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy METHODS: The current retrospective study included 13 lung cancer patients. For each patient, small spot (∼3 mm) plans and large spot (∼8 mm) plans were generated. The Monte Carlo algorithm was used for both robust plan optimization and final dose calculations. Each plan was normalized, such that 99% of the clinical target volume (CTV) received 99% of the prescription dose. Interplay effect was evaluated for treatment delivery starting in two different breathing phases (T0 and T50). Plan robustness was investigated for 12 perturbed scenarios, which combined the isocenter shift and range uncertainty. The nominal and worst-case scenario (WCS) results were recorded for each treatment plan. Equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were evaluated for the total lung, heart, and esophagus.
In comparison to large spot plans, the WCS values of small spot plans at CTV D , D , D , D , and D were higher with the average differences of 2.2% (range, 0.3%-3.7%), 2.3% (range, 0.5%-4.0%), 2.6% (range, 0.6%-4.4%), 2.7% (range, 0.9%-5.2%), and 2.7% (range, 0.3%-6.0%), respectively. The nominal and WCS mean dose and EUD for the esophagus, heart, and total lung were higher in large spot plans. The difference in NTCP between large spot and small spot plans was up to 1.9% for the total lung, up to 0.3% for the heart, and up to 32.8% for the esophagus. For robustness acceptance criteria of CTV D ≥ 98% of the prescription dose, seven small spot plans had all 12 perturbed scenarios meeting the criteria, whereas, for 13 large spot plans, there were ≥2 scenarios failing to meet the criteria. Interplay results showed that, on average, the target coverage in large spot plans was higher by 1.5% and 0.4% in non-volumetric and volumetric repainting plans, respectively.
For robustly optimized PBS lung cancer plans in our study, a small spot machine resulted in a more robust CTV against the setup and range errors when compared to a large spot machine. In the absence of volumetric repainting, large spot PBS lung plans were more robust against the interplay effect. The use of a volumetric repainting technique in both small and large spot PBS lung plans led to comparable interplay target coverage.
本研究旨在评估点扩展大小对肺癌计划中铅笔束扫描(PBS)质子治疗的相互作用效应、计划稳健性和危及器官剂量的影响。
本回顾性研究纳入了 13 例肺癌患者。为每位患者生成了小光斑(约 3mm)和大光斑(约 8mm)计划。蒙特卡罗算法用于稳健计划优化和最终剂量计算。每个计划均进行归一化,使得 99%的临床靶区(CTV)接受 99%的处方剂量。评估了从两个不同呼吸阶段(T0 和 T50)开始的治疗输送的相互作用效应。针对等中心移位和范围不确定性,研究了 12 个扰动场景的计划稳健性。记录了每个治疗计划的名义和最坏情况(WCS)结果。评估了总肺、心脏和食管的等效均匀剂量(EUD)和正常组织并发症概率(NTCP)。
与大光斑计划相比,小光斑计划在 CTV D 、 D 、 D 、 D 和 D 处的 WCS 值更高,平均差异分别为 2.2%(范围:0.3%-3.7%)、2.3%(范围:0.5%-4.0%)、2.6%(范围:0.6%-4.4%)、2.7%(范围:0.9%-5.2%)和 2.7%(范围:0.3%-6.0%)。大光斑计划的 CTV 、 D 、 D 、 D 和 D 的名义和 WCS 平均剂量和 EUD 较高。总肺、心脏和食管的 NTCP 差值在大光斑计划中高达 1.9%,在心脏中高达 0.3%,在食管中高达 32.8%。对于 CTV D ≥ 98%处方剂量的稳健性接受标准,7 个小光斑计划的所有 12 个扰动场景均符合标准,而 13 个大光斑计划中至少有 2 个场景不符合标准。相互作用结果表明,在非体积重绘和体积重绘计划中,大光斑计划的靶区覆盖率平均分别提高了 1.5%和 0.4%。
在本研究中,对于稳健优化的 PBS 肺癌计划,与大光斑机器相比,小光斑机器可使 CTV 对设置和范围误差更稳健。在没有体积重绘的情况下,大光斑 PBS 肺癌计划对相互作用效应更稳健。在小光斑和大光斑 PBS 肺癌计划中使用体积重绘技术可使相互作用靶区覆盖率相当。