Benchmarking of a treatment planning system for spot scanning proton therapy: Comparison and analysis of robustness to setup errors of photon IMRT and proton SFUD treatment plans of base of skull meningioma. Issue 11 (21st October 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Harding, R.; Trnková, P.; Weston, S. J.; Lilley, J.; Thompson, C. M.; Short, S. C.; Loughrey, C.; Cosgrove, V. P.; Lomax, A. J.; Thwaites, D. I.
• Is Part Of: Medical physics. Volume 41:Issue 11(2014)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2014-10-21
• Subjects: brain -- radiation therapy -- tumours; Treatment planning; Radiation therapy; proton therapy -- IMRT -- setup errors -- robustness -- conformity; Intensity modulated radiation therapy -- Protons -- Error analysis -- Proton therapy -- Photons -- Dosimetry -- Anatomy -- Auditory system -- Medical treatment planning -- Radiation treatment; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Medical physics; Geneeskunde; Natuurkunde; Toepassingen; Biophysics; Periodicals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1118/1.4897571
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0094-2405

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: Base of skull meningioma can be treated with both intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and spot scanned proton therapy (PT). One of the main benefits of PT is better sparing of organs at risk, but due to the physical and dosimetric characteristics of protons, spot scanned PT can be more sensitive to the uncertainties encountered in the treatment process compared with photon treatment. Therefore, robustness analysis should be part of a comprehensive comparison between these two treatment methods in order to quantify and understand the sensitivity of the treatment techniques to uncertainties. The aim of this work was to benchmark a spot scanning treatment planning system for planning of base of skull meningioma and to compare the created plans and analyze their robustness to setup errors against the IMRT technique. Methods: Plans were produced for three base of skull meningioma cases: IMRT planned with a commercial TPS [Monaco (Elekta AB, Sweden)]; single field uniform dose (SFUD) spot scanning PT produced with an in‐house TPS (PSI‐plan); and SFUD spot scanning PT plan created with a commercial TPS [XiO (Elekta AB, Sweden)]. A tool for evaluating robustness to random setup errors was created and, for each plan, both a dosimetric evaluation and a robustness analysis to setup errors were performed. Results: It was possible to create clinically acceptable treatment plans for spot scanning proton therapy of meningioma with a commercially available TPS. However, since each treatment planning system uses different methods, this comparison showed different dosimetric results as well as different sensitivities to setup uncertainties. The results confirmed the necessity of an analysis tool for assessing plan robustness to provide a fair comparison of photon and proton plans. Conclusions: Robustness analysis is a critical part of plan evaluation when comparing IMRT plans with spot scanned proton therapy plans.