FLASH in the Clinic Track (Oral Presentations) SHOOT-THROUGH PROTON FLASH FOR NEUROLOGICAL TUMORS LIMITS UNCERTAINTIES IN (BIOLOGICAL EFFECTIVE) DOSE

Kneepkens, E.; Wolfs, Claire; Wanders, R; Eekers, Daniëlle; Verhaegen, F.

doi:10.1016/s1120-1797(22)01466-1

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…26 Another study has also highlighted the TB plan's superior robustness in terms of LET and range uncertainty. 27 These findings suggest the potential use of the TB plan in specific situations. Consequently, a comparison between BP and TB FLASH plans is conducted to provide further evidence for future clinical decisions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Feasibility study of multiple‐energy Bragg peak proton FLASH on a superconducting gantry with large momentum acceptance

Zeng,

Li,

Wang

et al. 2024

Medical Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWhile the Bragg peak proton beam (BP) is capable of superior target conformity and organs‐at‐risk sparing than the transmission proton beam (TB), its efficacy in FLASH‐RT is hindered by both a slow energy switching process and the beam current. A universal range shifter (URS) can pull back the high‐energy proton beam while preserving the beam current. Meanwhile, a superconducting gantry with large momentum acceptance (LMA‐SC gantry) enables fast energy switching.PurposeThis study explores the feasibility of multiple‐energy BP FLASH‐RT on the LMA‐SC gantry.Method and MaterialsA simultaneous dose and spot map optimization algorithm was developed for BP FLASH‐RT treatment planning to improve the dose delivery efficiency. The URS was designed to be 0–27 cm thick, with 1 cm per step. BP plans using the URS were optimized using single‐field optimization (SFO) and multiple‐field optimization (MFO) for ten prostate cancer patients and ten lung cancer patients. The plan delivery parameters, dose, and dose rate metrics of BP plans were compared to those of TB plans using the parameters of the LMA‐SC gantry.ResultsCompared to TB plans, BP plans significantly reduced MUs by 42.7% (P < 0.001) with SFO and 33.3% (P < 0.001) with MFO for prostate cases. For lung cases, the reduction in MUs was 56.8% (P < 0.001) with SFO and 36.4% (P < 0.001) with MFO. BP plans also outperformed TB plans by reducing mean normal tissue doses. BP‐SFO plans achieved a reduction of 56.7% (P < 0.001) for prostate cases and 57.7% (P < 0.001) for lung cases, while BP‐MFO plans achieved a reduction of 54.2% (P < 0.001) for the prostate case and 40.0% (P < 0.001) for lung cases. For both TB and BP plans, normal tissues in prostate and lung cases received 100.0% FLASH dose rate coverage (>40 Gy/s).ConclusionsBy utilizing the URS and the LMA‐SC gantry, it is possible to perform multiple‐energy BP FLASH‐RT, resulting in better normal tissue sparing, as compared to TB plans.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Meanwhile, the TB plan is well‐suited for the SFPF treatment schedule 26 . Another study has also highlighted the TB plan's superior robustness in terms of LET and range uncertainty 27 . These findings suggest the potential use of the TB plan in specific situations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%