Three‐dimensional MRI‐based treatment planning approach for non‐invasive ocular proton therapy. Issue 3 (17th January 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fleury, E.; Trnková, P.; Erdal, E.; Hassan, M.; Stoel, B.; Jaarma‐Coes, M.; Luyten, G.; Herault, J.; Webb, A.; Beenakker, J.‐W.; Pignol, J.‐P.; Hoogeman, M.
• Is Part Of: Medical physics. Volume 48:Issue 3(2021)
• Page Start: 1315
• Page End: 1326
• Publication Date: 2021-01-17
• Subjects: MRI -- proton therapy -- uveal melanoma; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Medical physics; Geneeskunde; Natuurkunde; Toepassingen; Biophysics; Periodicals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/mp.14665
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0094-2405

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: To develop a high‐resolution three‐dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)‐based treatment planning approach for uveal melanomas (UM) in proton therapy. Materials/methods: For eight patients with UM, a segmentation of the gross tumor volume (GTV) and organs‐at‐risk (OARs) was performed on T1‐ and T2‐weighted 7 Tesla MRI image data to reconstruct the patient MR‐eye. An extended contour was defined with a 2.5‐mm isotropic margin derived from the GTV. A broad beam algorithm, which we have called πDose, was implemented to calculate relative proton absorbed doses to the ipsilateral OARs. Clinically favorable gazing angles of the treated eye were assessed by calculating a global weighted‐sum objective function, which set penalties for OARs and extreme gazing angles. An optimizer, which we have named OPT'im‐Eye‐Tool, was developed to tune the parameters of the functions for sparing critical‐OARs. Results: In total, 441 gazing angles were simulated for every patient. Target coverage including margins was achieved in all the cases (V95% > 95%). Over the whole gazing angles solutions space, maximum dose (Dmax ) to the optic nerve and the macula, and mean doses (Dmean ) to the lens, the ciliary body and the sclera were calculated. A forward optimization was applied by OPT'im‐Eye‐Tool in three different prioritizations: iso‐weighted, optic nerve prioritized, and macula prioritized. In each, the function values were depicted in a selection tool to select the optimal gazing angle(s). For example, patient 4 had a T2 equatorial tumor. The optimization applied for the straight gazing angle resulted in objective function values of 0.46 (iso‐weighted situation), 0.90 (optic nerve prioritization) and 0.08 (macula prioritization) demonstrating the impact of that angle in different clinical approaches. Conclusions: The feasibility and suitability of a 3D MRI‐based treatment planning approach have been successfully tested on a cohort of eight patients diagnosed with UM. Moreover, a gaze‐angle trade‐off dose optimization with respect to OARs sparing has been developed. Further validation of the whole treatment process is the next step in the goal to achieve both a non‐invasive and a personalized proton therapy treatment. Abstract :