The Development and Clinical Use of a Beam ON-LINE PET System Mounted on a Rotating Gantry Port in Proton Therapy

Nishio, Teiji; Miyatake, Aya; Ogino, Takashi; Nakagawa, Keiichi; Saijo, Nagahiro; Esumi, Hiroyasu

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.05.065

Cited by 182 publications

(165 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

164

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Noise reduction by decreasing the number of iterations from 3 to 1 (∆ 3,1 I t ) and by additionally enhancing the postreconstruction Gaussian filter from 5 to 8 mm (∆ 5,8 G F ) at 1 iteration. The alteration of the activity quantification by the PSFTOF algorithm within the first ten iterations, ∆A 1,10 , is given for the four investigated patients, as well.…”

Section: A Phantom Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At present, the only clinically implemented approach to monitor the delivery of single treatment fractions shortly after irradiation relies on the detection of irradiation-induced β + -emitters within the patient by means of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. [5][6][7][8][9] At the Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), 10,11 a commercial full-ring PET/x-ray computed tomography (CT) scanner [Biograph mCT, Siemens Molecular Imaging, Knoxville (Ref. 12)] has been installed next to the treatment rooms (offline) for this purpose.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Investigating the limits of PET/CT imaging at very low true count rates and high random fractions in ion‐beam therapy monitoring

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under the poor statistical conditions in PET-based treatment monitoring, improved results can be achieved by considering PSF and TOF information during image reconstruction and by applying less iterations than in conventional nuclear medicine imaging. Geometrical fidelity and image noise are mainly limited by the low number of true coincidences, not the high LSO-related random background. The retrieved results might also impact other emerging PET applications at low counting statistics.

show abstract

Section: A Phantom Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the limits of PET/CT imaging at very low true count rates and high random fractions in ion‐beam therapy monitoring

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Currently in-beam PET detectors for hardon therapy (including carbon beam and proton therapy) are installed or under development in several facilities around the world, such as the Gesellschaft für Schwerioneneforschung (GSI), Darmstadt, Germany 21, 22; the Heavy Ion Medical Accelerator (HIMA) in Chiba, Japan 23; the CATANA Protontherapy Center in Catana, Italy 24, and the National Cancer Center (NCC), Kashiwa, Japan 13-15. The most important advantage of in-beam detectors is the time course of PET acquisitions.…”

Section: Pet Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At GSI, the detectors are mounted above and below the patient couch 22. At HIMA, the detectors are mounted on a rotating gantry port 13. The limited angle configuration with in-complete angular data collection resulted in lower sensitivity, limited field of views and artifacts in reconstructed images.…”

Section: Pet Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Up to data two types of reference images have been used. In the clinical research conducted at HIMA, PET scan taken at an earlier treatment session was used as the reference images in fractionated therapy to confirm the activated volumes in later sessions 13. In most other studies, PET measurements were compared with predicted PET activity distributions calculated with Monte Carlo simulations or analytical methods.…”

Section: Prediction Of Pet Activity Distributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Proton Therapy Verification with PET Imaging

Zhu¹,

Fakhri²

2013

Theranostics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proton therapy is very sensitive to uncertainties introduced during treatment planning and dose delivery. PET imaging of proton induced positron emitter distributions is the only practical approach for in vivo, in situ verification of proton therapy. This article reviews the current status of proton therapy verification with PET imaging. The different data detecting systems (in-beam, in-room and off-line PET), calculation methods for the prediction of proton induced PET activity distributions, and approaches for data evaluation are discussed.

show abstract

Feasibility study of using fall‐off gradients of early and late PET scans for proton range verification

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose While positron emission tomography (PET) allows for the imaging of tissues activated by proton beams in terms of monitoring the therapy administered, most endogenous tissue elements are activated by relatively high energy protons. Therefore, a relatively large distance off-set exists between the dose fall-off and activity fall-off. However, 16O(p,2p,2n)13N has a relatively low energy threshold which peaks around 12 MeV and also a residual proton range that is approximately 1 to 2 mm. In this phantom study, we tested the feasibility of utilizing the 13N production peak as well as the differences in activity fall-off between early and late PET scans for proton range verification. One of the main purposes for this research was developing a proton range verification methodology that would not require Monte Carlo simulations. Methods and Materials Both mono-energetic and spread-out Bragg peak beams were delivered to two phantoms – a water-like gel and a tissue-like gel where the proton ranges came to be approximately 9.9 and 9.1 cm, respectively. After 1 min of post-irradiation delay, the phantoms were scanned for a period of 30 min using an in-room PET. Two separate (Early and Late) PET images were reconstructed using two different post-irradiation delays and acquisition times; Early PET: 1 min delay and 3 min acquisition, Late PET: 21 min delay and 10 min acquisition. The depth gradients of the PET signals were then normalized and plotted as functions of depth. The normalized gradient of the early PET images was subtracted from that of the late PET images, to observe the 13N activity distribution in relation to depth. Monte Carlo simulations were also conducted with the same set-up as the measurements stated previously. Results The subtracted gradients show peaks at 9.4 cm and 8.6 cm in water-gel and tissue-gel respectively for both pristine and SOBP beams. These peaks are created in connection with the sudden change of 13N signals with depth and consistently occur 2 mm upstream to where 13N signals were most abundantly created (9.6 cm and 8.8 cm in water-gel and tissue-gel, respectively). Monte Carlo simulations provided similar results as the measurements. Conclusions The subtracted PET signal gradient peaks and the proton ranges for water-gel and tissue-gel show distance off-sets of 4 to 5 mm. This off-set may potentially be used for proton range verification using only the PET measured data without Monte Carlo simulations. More studies are necessary to overcome various limitations, such as perfusion-driven washout, for the feasibility of this technique in living patients.

show abstract

The Development and Clinical Use of a Beam ON-LINE PET System Mounted on a Rotating Gantry Port in Proton Therapy

Cited by 182 publications

References 16 publications

Investigating the limits of PET/CT imaging at very low true count rates and high random fractions in ion‐beam therapy monitoring

Investigating the limits of PET/CT imaging at very low true count rates and high random fractions in ion‐beam therapy monitoring

Proton Therapy Verification with PET Imaging

Feasibility study of using fall‐off gradients of early and late PET scans for proton range verification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About