Definition of dose rate for FLASH pencil-beam scanning proton therapy: A comparative study.

BACKGROUND: FLASH proton therapy has the potential to reduce side effects of conventional proton therapy by delivering a high dose of radiation in a very short period of time. However, significant progress is needed in the development of FLASH proton therapy. Increasing the dose rate while maintaining dose conformality may involve the use of advanced beam-shaping technologies and specialized equipment such as 3D patient-specific range modulators, to take advantage of the higher transmission efficiency at the highest energy available. The dose rate is an important factor in FLASH proton therapy, but its definition can vary because of the uneven distribution of the dose over time in pencil-beam scanning (PBS). PURPOSE: Highlight the distinctions, both in terms of concept and numerical values, of the various definitions that can be established for the dose rate in PBS proton therapy. METHODS: In an in silico study, five definitions of the dose rate, namely the PBS dose rate, the percentile dose rate, the maximum percentile dose rate, the average dose rate, and the dose averaged dose rate (DADR) were analyzed first through theoretical comparison, and then applied to a head and neck case. To carry out this study, a treatment plan utilizing a single energy level and requiring the use of a patient-specific range modulator was employed. The dose rate values were compared both locally and by means of dose rate volume histograms (DRVHs). RESULTS: The PBS dose rate, the percentile dose rate, and the maximum percentile dose are definitions that are specifically designed to take into account the time structure of the delivery of a PBS treatment plan. Although they may appear similar, our study shows that they can vary locally by up to 10%. On the other hand, the DADR values were approximately twice as high as those of the PBS, percentile, and maximum percentile dose rates, since the DADR disregards the periods when a voxel does not receive any dose. Finally, the average dose rate can be defined in various ways, as discussed in this paper. The average dose rate is found to be lower by a factor of approximately 1/2 than the PBS, percentile, and maximum percentile dose rates. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that using different definitions for the dose rate in FLASH proton therapy can lead to variations in calculated values ranging from a few percent to a factor of two. Since the dose rate is a critical parameter in FLASH radiation therapy, it is essential to carefully consider the choice of definition. However, to make an informed decision, additional biological data and models are needed.

Real-time image-guided treatment of mobile tumors in proton therapy by a library of treatment plans: a simulation study.

PURPOSE: To improve target coverage and reduce the dose in the surrounding organs-at-risks (OARs), we developed an image-guided treatment method based on a precomputed library of treatment plans controlled and delivered in real-time. METHODS: A library of treatment plans is constructed by optimizing a plan for each breathing phase of a four dimensional computed tomography (4DCT). Treatments are delivered by simulation on a continuous sequence of synthetic computed tomographies (CTs) generated from real magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences. During treatment, the plans for which the tumor are at a close distance to the current tumor position are selected to deliver their spots. The study is conducted on five liver cases. RESULTS: We tested our approach under imperfect knowledge of the tumor positions with a 2 mm distance error. On average, compared to a 4D robustly optimized treatment plan, our approach led to a dose homogeneity increase of 5% (defined as 1 - D 5 - D 95 prescription $1-\frac{D_5-D_{95}}{\text{prescription}}$ ) in the target and a mean liver dose decrease of 23%. The treatment time was roughly increased by a factor of 2 but remained below 4 min on average. CONCLUSIONS: Our image-guided treatment framework outperforms state-of-the-art 4D-robust plans for all patients in this study on both target coverage and OARs sparing, with an acceptable increase in treatment time under the current accuracy of the tumor tracking technology.