Influence of robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy with different dose delivery techniques

被引:72
|
作者
Liu, Wei [1 ]
Li, Yupeng [1 ]
Li, Xiaoqiang [1 ]
Cao, Wenhua [2 ]
Zhang, Xiaodong [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Phys, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] Univ Houston, Dept Ind Engn, Houston, TX 77204 USA
关键词
robust optimization; IMPT; distal edge tracking; PENCIL BEAM ALGORITHM; TREATMENT UNCERTAINTIES; RANGE UNCERTAINTIES; PROSTATE-CANCER; RADIOTHERAPY; SENSITIVITY; APPROXIMATION; STRATEGY; ERRORS; TUMORS;
D O I
10.1118/1.4711909
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: The distal edge tracking (DET) technique in intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) allows for high energy efficiency, fast and simple delivery, and simple inverse treatment planning; however, it is highly sensitive to uncertainties. In this study, the authors explored the application of DET in IMPT (IMPT-DET) and conducted robust optimization of IMPT-DET to see if the planning technique's sensitivity to uncertainties was reduced. They also compared conventional and robust optimization of IMPT-DET with three-dimensional IMPT (IMPT-3D) to gain understanding about how plan robustness is achieved. Methods: They compared the robustness of IMPT-DET and IMPT-3D plans to uncertainties by analyzing plans created for a typical prostate cancer case and a base of skull (BOS) cancer case (using data for patients who had undergone proton therapy at our institution). Spots with the highest and second highest energy layers were chosen so that the Bragg peak would be at the distal edge of the targets in IMPT-DET using 36 equally spaced angle beams; in IMPT-3D, 3 beams with angles chosen by a beam angle optimization algorithm were planned. Dose contributions for a number of range and setup uncertainties were calculated, and a worst-case robust optimization was performed. A robust quantification technique was used to evaluate the plans' sensitivity to uncertainties. Results: With no uncertainties considered, the DET is less robust to uncertainties than is the 3D method but offers better normal tissue protection. With robust optimization to account for range and setup uncertainties, robust optimization can improve the robustness of IMPT plans to uncertainties; however, our findings show the extent of improvement varies. Conclusions: IMPT's sensitivity to uncertainties can be improved by using robust optimization. They found two possible mechanisms that made improvements possible: (1) a localized single-field uniform dose distribution (LSFUD) mechanism, in which the optimization algorithm attempts to produce a single-field uniform dose distribution while minimizing the patching field as much as possible; and (2) perturbed dose distribution, which follows the change in anatomical geometry. Multiple-instance optimization has more knowledge of the influence matrices; this greater knowledge improves IMPT plans' ability to retain robustness despite the presence of uncertainties. (C) 2012 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.4711909]
引用
收藏
页码:3089 / 3101
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Motion-robust intensity-modulated proton therapy for distal esophageal cancer
    Yu, Jen
    Zhang, Xiaodong
    Liao, Li
    Li, Heng
    Zhu, Ronald
    Park, Peter C.
    Sahoo, Narayan
    Gillin, Michael
    Li, Yupeng
    Chang, Joe Y.
    Komaki, Ritsuko
    Lin, Steven H.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2016, 43 (03) : 1111 - 1118
  • [32] Dosimetric consequences of image guidance techniques on robust optimized intensity-modulated proton therapy for treatment of breast Cancer
    Xiaoying Liang
    Raymond B. Mailhot Vega
    Zuofeng Li
    Dandan Zheng
    Nancy Mendenhall
    Julie A. Bradley
    [J]. Radiation Oncology, 15
  • [33] Dosimetric consequences of image guidance techniques on robust optimized intensity-modulated proton therapy for treatment of breast Cancer
    Liang, Xiaoying
    Vega, Raymond B.
    Li, Zuofeng
    Zheng, Dandan
    Mendenhall, Nancy
    Bradley, Julie A.
    [J]. RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2020, 15 (01)
  • [34] Proton Therapy for Nasopharyngeal Cancer: A Matched Case-control Study of Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy and Intensity-Modulated Photon Therapy
    Li, X.
    Lee, A.
    Lee, N.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2020, 106 (05): : 1138 - 1139
  • [35] Improve Functional Lung Dose Sparing Using Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy
    Gu, W.
    Wang, C.
    Hasse, K.
    Lyu, Q.
    Santhanam, A.
    Sheng, K.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 45 (06) : E161 - E161
  • [36] Optimization of the Irradiation Efficiency of intensity-modulated Proton Therapy Plans through prioritized Optimization
    Mueller, B. S.
    Wilkens, J. J.
    [J]. STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2016, 192 : 80 - 80
  • [37] Dose conformation of intensity-modulated stereotactic photon beams, proton beams, and intensity-modulated proton beams for intracranial lesions
    Baumert, BG
    Norton, IA
    Lomax, AJ
    Davis, JB
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2004, 60 (04): : 1314 - 1324
  • [38] Robust optimization to reduce the impact of biological effect variation from physical uncertainties in intensity-modulated proton therapy
    Bai, Xuemin
    Lim, Gino
    Grosshans, David
    Mohan, Radhe
    Cao, Wenhua
    [J]. PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2019, 64 (02):
  • [39] Benefits from Achilles 'Heel of Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy via Worst-Case Robust Optimization
    Liu, W.
    Zhang, X.
    Li, Y.
    Chen, W.
    Mohan, R.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (06)
  • [40] Anatomic Changes in Head and Neck Intensity-modulated Proton Therapy: Comparison between Robust Optimization and Daily Adaptation
    Lalonde, A.
    Bobic, M.
    Winey, B.
    Verburg, J.
    Sharp, G.
    Paganetti, H.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2020, 108 (03): : S77 - S78