delaware valley 2010

25
Treatment time reduction for proton modulated scanning beams James Durgin, Derek Dolney, James McDonough University of Pennsylvania December 9, 2009 Delaware Valley AAPM Young Investigator Symposium

Upload: james-durgin

Post on 02-Jul-2015

244 views

Category:

Technology


4 download

DESCRIPTION

2009 Delaware Valley Young Investigators Symposium

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Delaware Valley 2010

Treatment time reduction for proton modulated scanning

beams

James Durgin, Derek Dolney, James McDonoughUniversity of Pennsylvania

December 9, 2009Delaware Valley AAPM Young Investigator Symposium

Page 2: Delaware Valley 2010

Treatment Options

Double Scattering Uniform Scanning Modulated Scanning

Distal Conformity ~Equal ~Equal ~EqualProximal Conformity Poor Poor Good

Lateral Conformity Depth dependent Depth dependent Depth dependentDose Uniformity Target dependent Target dependent BestTime Fastest Intermediate Slowest

Page 3: Delaware Valley 2010

Bragg Peak Stacking

Achieving a uniform dose requires many Bragg peaksAt lower energies, range straggling decreases resulting in sharper Bragg peaks

Page 4: Delaware Valley 2010

Beamline Transmission

Reducing proton energy in beam line reduces the rate of protons in nozzle~1% at 100MeV

Page 5: Delaware Valley 2010

Range Shifters, Ridge Filters

Current solution is a range shifterPulls back distal peakIncreases range stragglingNeutron production

Ridge filters could be used in conjunctionSpreads out Bragg peakMinimal degradation of penumbra possible

Page 6: Delaware Valley 2010

Designing a Ridge Filter

GoalsFlat ~1cm area at 100MeVPreserve distal falloffConserve penumbra

ConsiderationsFocused beamMLC, bolus exchangerDedicated nozzle

Page 7: Delaware Valley 2010

Geant4 Simulations

Commonly used for proton modelingSaves on development costsNo beam time issuesCode used for Eclipse commissioning available

Page 8: Delaware Valley 2010

Ridge Filter Shape

Page 9: Delaware Valley 2010

Depth Doses

Page 10: Delaware Valley 2010

Ridge Filter Penumbra

Page 11: Delaware Valley 2010

1-Dimensional Stacking

A simple algorithm was used to test stacking in 1 dimensionSpacing increasedNumber of energy levels decreased

Page 12: Delaware Valley 2010

Eclipse Commissioning

Real test is how Eclipse uses beam dataCommissioning requires depth dose in water, penumbra in air, other machine parameters

Page 13: Delaware Valley 2010

Preliminary Results

Tested a sphere target, d=1.5 cm, in Rando phantom at ~100MeVSimilar dose distrubtions with and without RF

Page 14: Delaware Valley 2010

Preliminary Results

Energy levels from 14 to 5Beam spots from 150 to 122MUs reduced by ~45%

Ridge filter

Unobstructed

Page 15: Delaware Valley 2010

Summary

Modulated scanning is slow at shallow depthsA range shifter is requiredA ridge filter can be constructed to decrease delivery time while preserving much of the beam qualityEclipse commissioning shows fewer energy levels, beam spots, and MUs with similar coverage

Page 16: Delaware Valley 2010

Future Work

Combine range shifter and ridge filterSite specific devicesRefine machine parameters for planningValidate Monte Carlo models

Page 17: Delaware Valley 2010

This work was supported by the US Army Medical Research and Material Command under Contract Agreement No. DAMD17-W81XWH-04-2-0022. Opinions, interpretations, conclusions and recommendations are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by the US Army.

AcknowledgementsJames McDonough

Derek Dolney

Page 18: Delaware Valley 2010

Additional Slides

Page 19: Delaware Valley 2010

Ridge Filter Material

Page 20: Delaware Valley 2010

Penumbra v. Distance of RF

Page 21: Delaware Valley 2010

Penumbra v. Thickness of RF

Page 22: Delaware Valley 2010

Depth Dose at Several Energies

Page 23: Delaware Valley 2010

Penumbra v. Depth

Page 24: Delaware Valley 2010

MLCs with Modulated Scanning

Page 25: Delaware Valley 2010

Penumbra v. Depth