Analysis of treatment process time for real-time-image gated-spot-scanning proton-beam therapy (RGPT) system.

We developed a synchrotron-based real-time-image gated-spot-scanning proton-beam therapy (RGPT) system and utilized it to clinically operate on moving tumors in the liver, pancreas, lung, and prostate. When the spot-scanning technique is linked to gating, the beam delivery time with gating can increase, compared to that without gating. We aim to clarify whether the total treatment process can be performed within approximately 30 min (the general time per session in several proton therapy facilities), even for gated-spot-scanning proton-beam delivery with implanted fiducial markers. Data from 152 patients, corresponding to 201 treatment plans and 3577 sessions executed from October 2016 to June 2018, were included in this study. To estimate the treatment process time, we utilized data from proton beam delivery logs during the treatment for each patient. We retrieved data, such as the disease site, total target volume, field size at the isocenter, and the number of layers and spots for each field, from the treatment plans. We quantitatively analyzed the treatment process, which includes the patient load (or setup), bone matching, marker matching, beam delivery, patient unload, and equipment setup, using the data obtained from the log data. Among all the cases, 90 patients used the RGPT system (liver: n = 34; pancreas: n = 5; lung: n = 4; and prostate: n = 47). The mean and standard deviation (SD) of the total treatment process time for the RGPT system was 30.3 ± 7.4 min, while it was 25.9 ± 7.5 min for those without gating treatment, excluding craniospinal irradiation (CSI; head and neck: n = 16, pediatric: n = 31, others: n = 15); for CSI (n = 11) with two or three isocenters, the process time was 59.9 ± 13.9 min. Our results demonstrate that spot-scanning proton therapy with a gating function can be achieved in approximately 30-min time slots.

Quantitative analysis of treatments using real-time image gated spot-scanning with synchrotron-based proton beam therapy system log data.

A synchrotron-based real-time image gated spot-scanning proton beam therapy (RGPT) system with inserted fiducial markers can irradiate a moving tumor with high accuracy. As gated treatments increase the beam delivery time, this study aimed to investigate the frequency of intra-field adjustments corresponding to the baseline shift or drift and the beam delivery efficiency of a synchrotron-based RGPT system. Data from 118 patients corresponding to 127 treatment plans and 2810 sessions between October 2016 and March 2019 were collected. We quantitatively analyzed the proton beam delivery time, the difference between the ideal beam delivery time based on a simulated synchrotron magnetic excitation pattern and the actual treatment beam delivery time, frequency corresponding to the baseline shift or drift, and the gating efficiency of the synchrotron-based RGPT system according to the proton beam delivery machine log data. The mean actual beam delivery time was 7.1 min, and the simulated beam delivery time in an ideal environment with the same treatment plan was 2.9 min. The average difference between the actual and simulated beam delivery time per session was 4.3 min. The average frequency of intra-field adjustments corresponding to baseline shift or drift and beam delivery efficiency were 21.7% and 61.8%, respectively. Based on our clinical experience with a synchrotron-based RGPT system, we determined the frequency corresponding to baseline shift or drift and the beam delivery efficiency using the beam delivery machine log data. To maintain treatment accuracy within ± 2.0 mm, intra-field adjustments corresponding to baseline shift or drift were required in approximately 20% of cases. Further improvements in beam delivery efficiency may be realized by shortening the beam delivery time.

[Gastric phantom for training beginners in gastric segment (Stomap) recognition].

It is usually difficult for a beginner to understand precisely and quickly the three-dimensional (3D) construction of gastric lesions in a gastric X-ray examination with barium meal. In this study, a training-use stomach phantom was developed using the stomach segment to provide beginners with an understanding of 3D stomach construction. The hook-shaped phantom (the shape of the stomach when a patient is in the supine position) was formed by using styrene, wire, and clay. It was then coated with dental stiffening agent, and wires were attached along the stomach segment. After drying, the stomach phantom was cut off and the oil clay was removed. The phantom then was immersed in water and the oil clay was dried. After that, the phantom again was glued together with a dental stiffening agent. The usefulness of the phantom was determined by an evaluation experiment. Ten students, as observers, were selected randomly for evaluation from 40 students of the Department of Radiological Technology, College of Medical Technology, Hokkaido University. Eight films were shown to the observers, 4 films with segment and 4 films without segment. The observers checked 5 markers in different positions of the phantom and recorded the results on an answer sheet with segment picture. The significance of position recognition was identified by Wilcoxon's sign rank sum test (p=0.021) between the segment film and non-segment film.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of the stereotactic body frame in reducing respiratory intrafractional organ motion using the real-time tumor-tracking radiotherapy system.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the stereotactic body frame (SBF), with or without a diaphragm press or a breathing cycle monitoring device (Abches), in controlling the range of lung tumor motion, by tracking the real-time position of fiducial markers. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The trajectories of gold markers in the lung were tracked with the real-time tumor-tracking radiotherapy system. The SBF was used for patient immobilization and the diaphragm press and Abches were used to actively control breathing and for self-controlled respiration, respectively. Tracking was performed in five setups, with and without immobilization and respiration control. The results were evaluated using the effective range, which was defined as the range that includes 95% of all the recorded marker positions in each setup. RESULTS: The SBF, with or without a diaphragm press or Abches, did not yield effective ranges of marker motion which were significantly different from setups that did not use these materials. The differences in the effective marker ranges in the upper lobes for all the patient setups were less than 1mm. Larger effective ranges were obtained for the markers in the middle or lower lobes. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of controlling respiratory-induced organ motion by using the SBF+diaphragm press or SBF + Abches patient setups were highly dependent on the individual patient reaction to the use of these materials and the location of the markers. They may be considered for lung tumors in the lower lobes, but are not necessary for tumors in the upper lobes.