Intensity modulated proton therapy and its sensitivity to treatment uncertainties 2: the potential effects of inter-fraction and inter-field motions

Simple tools for studying the effects of inter-fraction and inter-field motions on intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans have been developed, and have been applied to both 3D and distal edge tracking (DET) IMPT plans. For the inter-fraction motion, we have investigated the effects of misaligned density heterogeneities, whereas for the inter-field motion analysis, the effects of field misalignment on the plans have been assessed. Inter-fraction motion problems have been analysed using density differentiated error (DDE) distributions, which specifically show the additional problems resulting from misaligned density heterogeneities for proton plans. Likewise, for inter-field motion, we present methods for calculating motion differentiated error (MDE) distributions. DDE and MDE analysis of all plans demonstrate that the 3D approach is generally more robust to both inter-fraction and inter-field motions than the DET approach, but that strong in-field dose gradients can also adversely affect a plan's robustness. An important additional conclusion is that, for certain IMPT plans, even inter-fraction errors cannot necessarily be compensated for by the use of a simple PTV margins, implying that more sophisticated tools need to be developed for uncertainty management and assessment for IMPT treatments at the treatment planning level.

[1]  A. Lomax,et al.  Intensity modulation methods for proton radiotherapy. , 1999, Physics in medicine and biology.

[2]  U Oelfke,et al.  Intensity modulated radiotherapy with charged particle beams: studies of inverse treatment planning for rotation therapy. , 2000, Medical physics.

[3]  Daniel W. Miller,et al.  Methodologies and tools for proton beam design for lung tumors. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  D. Yan,et al.  The influence of interpatient and intrapatient rectum variation on external beam treatment of prostate cancer. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  Christian P Karger,et al.  Influence of setup errors on spinal cord dose and treatment plan quality for cervical spine tumours: a phantom study for photon IMRT and heavy charged particle radiotherapy. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[6]  Karl-Axel Johansson,et al.  Systematic set-up errors for IMRT in the head and neck region: effect on dose distribution. , 2003, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[7]  Christian Hilbes,et al.  The PSI Gantry 2: a second generation proton scanning gantry. , 2004, Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik.

[8]  Gudrun Goitein,et al.  The clinical potential of intensity modulated proton therapy. , 2004, Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik.

[9]  Uwe Oelfke,et al.  Inverse planning of intensity modulated proton therapy. , 2004, Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik.

[10]  Hanne M Kooy,et al.  Target volume dose considerations in proton beam treatment planning for lung tumors. , 2005, Medical physics.

[11]  D L McShan,et al.  Inverse plan optimization accounting for random geometric uncertainties with a multiple instance geometry approximation (MIGA). , 2006, Medical physics.

[12]  Gábor Székely,et al.  Systematic errors in respiratory gating due to intrafraction deformations of the liver. , 2007, Medical physics.

[13]  P Boesiger,et al.  4D MR imaging of respiratory organ motion and its variability , 2007, Physics in medicine and biology.

[14]  A. Lomax,et al.  Intensity modulated proton therapy and its sensitivity to treatment uncertainties 1: the potential effects of calculational uncertainties , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.