Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
7.4
5.2
Journals
Cancers
Special Issues
Advances in Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Therapy
share announcement

Advances in Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Therapy

A special issue of Cancers (ISSN 2072-6694). This special issue belongs to the section "Methods and Technologies Development".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (1 June 2024) | Viewed by 1102

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Nicolas Depauw

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA
Interests: proton therapy; treatment planning; dosimetry; PBS
Dr. Sara St. James

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Huntsman Cancer Institute, 2000 Circle of Hope Dr, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
Interests: proton therapy; quality assurance; dosimetry; PBS; clinical trials

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Cancers is pleased to announce a new Special Issue, entitled “Advances in Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Therapy”. Proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) is a technology in which a narrow beam of charged particles is used to treat complex cancers with unparalleled precision. The beam is energized and deflected such that it mirrors the tumor's shape for maximum conformality. This reduces the risk of side effects that are associated with standard radiation therapy. This Special Issue will focus on the latest developments in PBS. 

Manuscripts reflecting original research, as well as critical review articles on current knowledge and future perspectives, will be welcome. The Special Issue will address topics such as improvements in beam delivery systems, selecting optimal PBS parameters for cancer treatment, clinical outcomes based on the dosimetric and biological modeling of proton therapy, and reductions in secondary cancer risks, among others. The Special Issue shall also report on the limitations and future directions of proton PBS.

This Special Issue will be an excellent resource for researchers and clinicians who are interested in learning about recent advancements in proton pencil beam scanning therapy for cancer treatment.

Dr. Nicolas Depauw
Dr. Sara St. James
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Cancers is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2900 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • proton therapy
  • pencil beam scanning
  • dosimetry
  • beam delivery
  • biological modelling
  • secondary cancer

Published Papers (2 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

10 pages, 1603 KiB  
Article
Beam Position Projection Algorithms in Proton Pencil Beam Scanning
by Konrad P. Nesteruk, Stephen G. Bradley, Hanne M. Kooy and Benjamin M. Clasie
Cancers 2024, 16(11), 2098; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/cancers16112098 - 31 May 2024
Abstract
Beam position uncertainties along the beam trajectory arise from the accelerator, beamline, and scanning magnets (SMs). They can be monitored in real time, e.g., through strip ionization chambers (ICs), and treatments can be paused if needed. Delivery is more reliable and accurate if [...] Read more.
Beam position uncertainties along the beam trajectory arise from the accelerator, beamline, and scanning magnets (SMs). They can be monitored in real time, e.g., through strip ionization chambers (ICs), and treatments can be paused if needed. Delivery is more reliable and accurate if the beam position is projected from monitored nozzle parameters to the isocenter, allowing for accurate online corrections to be performed. Beam position projection algorithms are also used in post-delivery log file analyses. In this paper, we investigate the four potential algorithms that can be applied to all pencil beam scanning (PBS) nozzles. For some combinations of nozzle configurations and algorithms, however, the projection uses beam properties determined offline (e.g., through beam tuning or technical commissioning). The best algorithm minimizes either the total uncertainty (i.e., offline and online) or the total offline uncertainty in the projection. Four beam position algorithms are analyzed (A1–A4). Two nozzle lengths are used as examples: a large nozzle (1.5 m length) and a small nozzle (0.4 m length). Three nozzle configurations are considered: IC after SM, IC before SM, and ICs on both sides. Default uncertainties are selected for ion chamber measurements, nozzle entrance beam position and angle, and scanning magnet angle. The results for other uncertainties can be determined by scaling these results or repeating the error propagation. We show the propagation of errors from two locations and the SM angle to the isocenter for all the algorithms. The best choice of algorithm depends on the nozzle length and is A1 and A3 for the large and small nozzles, respectively. If the total offline uncertainty is to be minimized (a better choice if the offline uncertainty is not stable), the best choice of algorithm changes to A1 for the small nozzle for some hardware configurations. Reducing the nozzle length can help to reduce the gantry size and make proton therapy more accessible. This work is important for designing smaller nozzles and, consequently, smaller gantries. This work is also important for log file analyses. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Therapy)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 13337 KiB  
Article
Proton PBS Planning Techniques, Robustness Evaluation, and OAR Sparing for the Whole-Brain Part of Craniospinal Axis Irradiation
by Witold P. Matysiak, Marieke C. Landeweerd, Agata Bannink, Hiska L. van der Weide, Charlotte L. Brouwer, Johannes A. Langendijk, Stefan Both and John H. Maduro
Cancers 2024, 16(5), 892; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/cancers16050892 - 22 Feb 2024
Viewed by 545
Abstract
Proton therapy is a promising modality for craniospinal irradiation (CSI), offering dosimetric advantages over conventional treatments. While significant attention has been paid to spine fields, for the brain fields, only dose reduction to the lens of the eye has been reported. Hence, the [...] Read more.
Proton therapy is a promising modality for craniospinal irradiation (CSI), offering dosimetric advantages over conventional treatments. While significant attention has been paid to spine fields, for the brain fields, only dose reduction to the lens of the eye has been reported. Hence, the objective of this study is to assess the potential gains and feasibility of adopting different treatment planning techniques for the entire brain within the CSI target. To this end, eight previously treated CSI patients underwent retrospective replanning using various techniques: (1) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) optimization, (2) the modification/addition of field directions, and (3) the pre-optimization removal of superficially placed spots. The target coverage robustness was evaluated and dose comparisons for lenses, cochleae, and scalp were conducted, considering potential biological dose increases. The target coverage robustness was maintained across all plans, with minor reductions when superficial spot removal was utilized. Single- and multifield optimization showed comparable target coverage robustness and organ-at-risk sparing. A significant scalp sparing was achieved in adults but only limited in pediatric cases. Superficial spot removal contributed to scalp V30 Gy reduction at the expense of lower coverage robustness in specific cases. Lens sparing benefits from multiple field directions, while cochlear sparing remains impractical. Based on the results, all investigated plan types are deemed clinically adoptable. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Therapy)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-2
Back to TopTop