UNASSIGNED: Radiotherapy delivery in the definitive management of lower gastrointestinal (LGI) tract malignancies is associated with substantial risk of acute and late gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary, dermatologic, and hematologic toxicities. Advanced radiation therapy techniques such as proton beam therapy (PBT) offer optimal dosimetric sparing of critical organs at risk, achieving a more favorable therapeutic ratio compared with photon therapy.
UNASSIGNED: The international Particle Therapy Cooperative Group GI Subcommittee conducted a systematic literature review, from which consensus recommendations were developed on the application of PBT for LGI malignancies.
UNASSIGNED: Eleven recommendations on clinical indications for which PBT should be considered are presented with supporting literature, and each recommendation was assessed for level of evidence and strength of recommendation. Detailed technical guidelines pertaining to simulation, treatment planning and delivery, and image guidance are also provided.
UNASSIGNED: PBT may be of significant value in select patients with LGI malignancies. Additional clinical data are needed to further elucidate the potential benefits of PBT for patients with anal cancer and rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This work introduces the first assessment of CT calibration following the ESTRO\'s consensus guidelines and validating the HLUT through the irradiation of biological material.
METHODS: Two electron density phantoms were scanned with two CT scanners using two CT scan energies. The stopping power ratio (SPR) and mass density (MD) HLUTs for different CT scan energies were derived using Schneider\'s and ESTRO\'s methods. The comparison metric in this work is based on the Water-Equivalent Thickness (WET) difference between the treatment planning system and biological irradiation measurement. The SPR HLUTs were compared between the two calibration methods. To assess the accuracy of using MD HLUT for dose calculation in the treatment planning system, MD vs SPR HLUT was compared. Lastly, the feasibility of using a single SPR HLUT to replace two different energy CT scans was explored.
RESULTS: The results show a WET difference of less than 3.5% except for the result in the Bone region between Schneider\'s and ESTRO\'s methods. Comparing MD and SPR HLUT, the results from MD HLUT show less than a 3.5% difference except for the Bone region. However, the SPR HLUT shows a lower mean absolute percentage difference as compared to MD HLUT between the measured and calculated WET difference. Lastly, it is possible to use a single SPR HLUT for two different CT scan energies since both WET differences are within 3.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report on calibrating an HLUT following the ESTRO\'s guidelines. While our result shows incremental improvement in range uncertainty using the ESTRO\'s guideline, the prescriptional approach of the guideline does promote harmonization of CT calibration protocols between different centres.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and hypofractionation using pencil-beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy (PBSPT) is an attractive option for thoracic malignancies. Combining the advantages of target coverage conformity and critical organ sparing from both PBSPT and SBRT, this new delivery technique has great potential to improve the therapeutic ratio, particularly for tumors near critical organs. Safe and effective implementation of PBSPT SBRT/hypofractionation to treat thoracic malignancies is more challenging than the conventionally fractionated PBSPT because of concerns of amplified uncertainties at the larger dose per fraction. The NRG Oncology and Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Thoracic Subcommittee surveyed proton centers in the United States to identify practice patterns of thoracic PBSPT SBRT/hypofractionation. From these patterns, we present recommendations for future technical development of proton SBRT/hypofractionation for thoracic treatment. Among other points, the recommendations highlight the need for volumetric image guidance and multiple computed tomography-based robust optimization and robustness tools to minimize further the effect of uncertainties associated with respiratory motion. Advances in direct motion analysis techniques are urgently needed to supplement current motion management techniques.

BACKGROUND: The first clinical trials to assess the feasibility of FLASH radiotherapy in humans have started (FAST-01, FAST-02) and more trials are foreseen. To increase comparability between trials it is important to assure treatment quality and therefore establish a standard for machine quality assurance (QA). Currently, the AAPM TG-224 report is considered as the standard on machine QA for proton therapy, however, it was not intended to be used for ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) proton beams, which have gained interest due to the observation of the FLASH effect.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to find consensus on practical guidelines on machine QA for UHDR proton beams in transmission mode in terms of which QA is required, how they should be done, which detectors are suitable for UHDR machine QA, and what tolerance limits should be applied.
METHODS: A risk assessment to determine the gaps in the current standard for machine QA was performed by an international group of medical physicists. Based on that, practical guidelines on how to perform machine QA for UHDR proton beams were proposed.
RESULTS: The risk assessment clearly identified the need for additional guidance on temporal dosimetry, addressing dose rate (constancy), dose spillage, and scanning speed. In addition, several minor changes from AAPM TG-224 were identified; define required dose rate levels, the use of clinically relevant dose levels, and the use of adapted beam settings to minimize activation of detector and phantom materials or to avoid saturation effects of specific detectors. The final report was created based on discussions and consensus.
CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was reached on what QA is required for UHDR scanning proton beams in transmission mode for isochronous cyclotron-based systems and how they should be performed. However, the group discussions also showed that there is a lack of high temporal resolution detectors and sufficient QA data to set appropriate limits for some of the proposed QA procedures.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

Studies have shown large variations in stopping-power ratio (SPR) prediction from computed tomography (CT) across European proton centres. To standardise this process, a step-by-step guide on specifying a Hounsfield look-up table (HLUT) is presented here.
The HLUT specification process is divided into six steps: Phantom setup, CT acquisition, CT number extraction, SPR determination, HLUT specification, and HLUT validation. Appropriate CT phantoms have a head- and body-sized part, with tissue-equivalent inserts in regard to X-ray and proton interactions. CT numbers are extracted from a region-of-interest covering the inner 70% of each insert in-plane and several axial CT slices in scan direction. For optimal HLUT specification, the SPR of phantom inserts is measured in a proton beam and the SPR of tabulated human tissues is computed stoichiometrically at 100 MeV. Including both phantom inserts and tabulated human tissues increases HLUT stability. Piecewise linear regressions are performed between CT numbers and SPRs for four tissue groups (lung, adipose, soft tissue, and bone) and then connected with straight lines. Finally, a thorough but simple validation is performed.
The best practices and individual challenges are explained comprehensively for each step. A well-defined strategy for specifying the connection points between the individual line segments of the HLUT is presented. The guide was tested exemplarily on three CT scanners from different vendors, proving its feasibility.
The presented step-by-step guide for CT-based HLUT specification with recommendations and examples can contribute to reduce inter-centre variations in SPR prediction.

Proton-to-photon comparative treatment planning is a current requirement of Australian Government funding for patients to receive proton beam therapy (PBT) overseas, and a future requirement for Medicare funding of PBT in Australia. Because of the fundamental differences in treatment plan creation and evaluation between PBT and conventional radiation therapy with x-rays (XRT), there is the potential for a lack of consistency in the process of comparing PBT and XRT treatment plans. This may have an impact on patient eligibility assessment for PBT. The objective of these guidelines is to provide a practical reference document for centres performing proton-to-photon comparative planning and thereby facilitate national uniformity.

Proton Beam Therapy (PBT)is a treatment option for select cancer patients. It is currently not available in Canada. Assessment and referral processes for out-of-country treatment for eligible patients vary by jurisdiction, leading to variability in access to this treatment for Canadian cancer patients. The purpose of this initiative was to develop a framework document to inform consistent and equitable PBT access for appropriate patients through the creation of pan-Canadian PBT access consensus recommendations.
A modified Delphiprocess was used to develop pan-Canadian recommendations with input from 22 PBT clinical and administrative experts across all provinces, external peer-review by provincial cancer and system partners, and feedback from a targeted community consultation. This was conducted by electronic survey and live discussion. Consensus threshold was set at 70% agreement.
Fourconsensus rounds resulted in a final set of 27 recommendations divided into three categories: patient eligibility (n = 9); program level (n = 10); and system level (n = 8). Patient eligibility included: anatomic site (n = 4), patient characteristics (n = 3), clinical efficacy (n = 2). Program level included: regulatory and staff requirements (n = 5), equipment and technologies (n = 4), quality assurance (n = 1). System level included: referral process (n = 5), costing, budget impact and quality adjusted life years (n = 2), eligible patient estimates (n = 1). Recommendations were released nationally in June 2021 and distributed to all 43 cancer programs in Canada.
A pan-Canadian consensus-building approach was successful in creating an evidence-based, peer-reviewed suite of recommendations thatsupportapplication of consistent clinical criteria to inform treatment options, facility set-up and access to high quality proton therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Proton minibeam radiation therapy (pMBRT) is a new radiotherapy approach that has shown a significant increase in the therapeutic window in glioma-bearing rats compared to conventional proton therapy. The dosimetry of pMBRT is challenging and error prone due to the submillimetric beamlet sizes used. The aim of this study was to perform a robustness analysis on the setup parameters utilized in current preclinical trials and provide guidelines for reproducible dosimetry. The results of this work are intended to guide upcoming implementations of pMBRT worldwide, as well as pave the way for future clinical implementations.
METHODS: Monte Carlo simulations and experimental data were used to evaluate the impact of variations in setup parameters and uncertainties in collimator specifications on lateral pMBRT dose distributions. The value of each parameter was modified individually to evaluate their effect on dose distributions. Experimental dosimetry was performed by means of high-resolution detectors, that is, radiochromic films, the IBA Razor and the Microdiamond detector. New guidelines were proposed to optimize the experimental setup in pMBRT studies and perform reproducible dosimetry.
RESULTS: The sensitivity of dose distributions to uncertainties and variations in setup parameters was quantified. Quantities that define pMBRT lateral profiles (i.e., the peak-to-valley dose ratio [PVDR], peak and valley doses, and peak width) are significantly influenced by small-scale fluctuations in several of those parameters. The setup implemented at the Orsay proton therapy center for pMBRT irradiation was optimized to increase PVDRs and peak symmetry. In addition, we proposed guidelines to perform accurate and reproducible dosimetry in preclinical studies.
CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed the importance of adopting guidelines and protocols tailored to the distinct dose delivery method and dose distributions in pMBRT. This new methodology leads to reproducible dosimetry, which is imperative in preclinical trials. The results and guidelines presented in this manuscript can ease the initiation of pMBRT investigations in other centers.