Browsing by Author "Frank, Steven J."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Fixed- versus Variable-RBE Computations for Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy
    (Elsevier, 2019) Yepes, Pablo; Adair, Antony; Frank, Steven J.; Grosshans, David R.; Liao, Zhongxing; Liu, Amy; Mirkovic, Dragan; Poenisch, Falk; Titt, Uwe; Wang, Qianxia; Mohan, Radhe
    Purpose: To evaluate how using models of proton therapy that incorporate variable relative biological effectiveness (RBE) versus the current practice of using a fixed RBE of 1.1 affects dosimetric indices on treatment plans for large cohorts of patients treated with intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Methods and Materials: Treatment plans for 4 groups of patients who received IMPT for brain, head-and-neck, thoracic, or prostate cancer were selected. Dose distributions were recalculated in 4 ways: 1 with a fast-dose Monte Carlo calculator with fixed RBE and 3 with RBE calculated to 3 different models—McNamara, Wedenberg, and repair-misrepair-fixation. Differences among dosimetric indices (D02, D50, D98, and mean dose) for target volumes and organs at risk (OARs) on each plan were compared between the fixed-RBE and variable-RBE calculations. Results: In analyses of all target volumes, for which the main concern is underprediction or RBE less than 1.1, none of the models predicted an RBE less than 1.05 for any of the cohorts. For OARs, the 2 models based on linear energy transfer, McNamara and Wedenberg, systematically predicted RBE >1.1 for most structures. For the mean dose of 25% of the plans for 2 OARs, they predict RBE equal to or larger than 1.4, 1.3, 1.3, and 1.2 for brain, head-and-neck, thorax, and prostate, respectively. Systematically lower increases in RBE are predicted by repair-misrepair-fixation, with a few cases (eg, femur) in which the RBE is less than 1.1 for all plans. Conclusions: The variable-RBE models predict increased doses to various OARs, suggesting that strategies to reduce high-dose linear energy transfer in critical structures should be developed to minimize possible toxicity associated with IMPT.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Intensity modulated proton arc therapy via geometry-based energy selection for ependymoma
    (Wiley, 2023) Cao, Wenhua; Li, Yupeng; Zhang, Xiaodong; Poenisch, Falk; Yepes, Pablo; Sahoo, Narayan; Grosshans, David; McGovern, Susan; Gunn, G. Brandon; Frank, Steven J.; Zhu, Xiaorong R.
    Purpose We developed and tested a novel method of creating intensity modulated proton arc therapy (IMPAT) plans that uses computing resources similar to those for regular intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans and may offer a dosimetric benefit for patients with ependymoma or similar tumor geometries. Methods Our IMPAT planning method consists of a geometry-based energy selection step with major scanning spot contributions as inputs computed using ray-tracing and single-Gaussian approximation of lateral spot profiles. Based on the geometric relation of scanning spots and dose voxels, our energy selection module selects a minimum set of energy layers at each gantry angle such that each target voxel is covered by sufficient scanning spots as specified by the planner, with dose contributions above the specified threshold. Finally, IMPAT plans are generated by robustly optimizing scanning spots of the selected energy layers using a commercial proton treatment planning system (TPS). The IMPAT plan quality was assessed for four ependymoma patients. Reference three-field IMPT plans were created with similar planning objective functions and compared with the IMPAT plans. Results In all plans, the prescribed dose covered 95% of the clinical target volume (CTV) while maintaining similar maximum doses for the brainstem. While IMPAT and IMPT achieved comparable plan robustness, the IMPAT plans achieved better homogeneity and conformity than the IMPT plans. The IMPAT plans also exhibited higher relative biological effectiveness (RBE) enhancement than did the corresponding reference IMPT plans for the CTV in all four patients and brainstem in three of them. Conclusions The proposed method demonstrated potential as an efficient technique for IMPAT planning and may offer a dosimetric benefit for patients with ependymoma or tumors in close proximity to critical organs. IMPAT plans created using this method had elevated RBE enhancement associated with increased linear energy transfer (LET) in both targets and abutting critical organs.