Dosimetric optimization for dynamic mixed beam arc therapy (DYMBARC).

Non-coplanarity and mixed beam modality could be combined to further enhance dosimetric treatment plan quality. We introduce dynamic mixed beam arc therapy (DYMBARC) as an innovative technique that combines non-coplanar photon and electron arcs, dynamic gantry and collimator rotations, and intensity modulation with photon multileaf collimator (MLC). However, finding favorable beam directions for DYMBARC is challenging due to the large solution space, machine component constraints, and optimization parameters, posing a highly non-convex optimization problem. To establish DYMBARC and solve the pathfinding challenge by employing direct aperture optimization (DAO) to determine the table angles and gantry angle ranges of photon and electron arcs for different clinically motivated cases. The method starts by generating a grid of beam directions based on user-defined resolutions along the gantry and table angle axes for each beam quality considered. Beam directions causing collisions or entering through the end of CT are excluded. For electrons, a fixed source-to-surface distance of 80 cm is used to reduce in-air scatter. Electron beam energies with insufficient range to reach the target or beam directions impinging on the table before reaching the patient are excluded. The remaining beam directions form the pathfinding solution space. Promising photon and electron MLC-defined apertures, with associated monitor unit (MU) weights, are iteratively added using a hybrid-DAO algorithm. This algorithm combines column generation to add apertures and simulated annealing to further refine aperture shapes and weights. Apertures are added until the requested number of paths are formed and the user-defined maximum total gantry angle range is reached. Paths are resampled to a finer gantry angle resolution and subject to DAO for simultaneous optimization of beam intensities along the photon/electron arcs. Subsequent final dose calculation and MU weight reoptimization result in a deliverable DYMBARC plan. DYMBARC plans are created for three clinically motivated cases (brain, breast, and pelvis) and compared to DYMBARC variants: colli-DTRT (dynamic collimator trajectory radiotherapy) using non-coplanar photon arcs; and Arc-MBRT (mixed beam radiotherapy) using photons and electrons but restricted to coplanar setup. Additionally, a manually defined volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) setup serves as a reference clinical technique. Dose distributions, dose-volume histograms, and dosimetric endpoints are evaluated. Dosimetric validation with radiochromic film measurements (gamma evaluation, 3% / 2 mm (global), 10% dose threshold) is performed on a TrueBeam system in developer mode for one case. While maintaining similar target coverage and homogeneity, DYMBARC reduced mean doses to organs-at-risk compared to VMAT by an average of 3.2, 0.5, and 2.9 Gy for the brain, breast, and pelvis cases, respectively. Similar or smaller mean dose reductions were observed for Arc-MBRT or colli-DTRT, compared to VMAT. Electron contributions to the mean planning target volume dose ranged from 2% to 34% for DYMBARC and from 11% to 40% for Arc-MBRT. Measurement validation showed >99.7% gamma passing rate. DYMBARC was successfully established using a dosimetrically optimized pathfinding approach, combining non-coplanarity with mixed beam modality. DYMBARC facilitated the determination of photon and electron contributions on a case-by-case basis, enhancing more personalized treatment modalities.

Zhu C ，Guyer G ，Bertholet J ，Mueller S ，Loebner HA ，Volken W ，Arnold J ，Aebersold DM ，Stampanoni MFM ，Fix MK ，Manser P ... -  《-》

Robust optimization and assessment of dynamic trajectory and mixed-beam arc radiotherapy: a preliminary study.

Objective.Dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) and dynamic mixed-beam arc therapy (DYMBARC) exploit non-coplanarity and, for DYMBARC, simultaneously optimized photon and electron beams. Margin concepts to account for set-up uncertainties during delivery are ill-defined for electron fields. We develop robust optimization for DTRT&DYMBARC and compare dosimetric plan quality and robustness for both techniques and both optimization strategies for four cases.Approach.Cases for different treatment sites and clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margins,m, were investigated. Dynamic gantry-table-collimator photon paths were optimized to minimize PTV/organ-at-risk (OAR) overlap in beam's-eye-view and minimize potential photon multileaf collimator (MLC) travel. For DYMBARC plans, non-isocentric partial electron arcs or static fields with shortened source-to-surface distance (80 cm) were added. Direct aperture optimization (DAO) was used to simultaneously optimize MLC-based intensity modulation for both photon and electron beams yielding deliverable PTV-based DTRT&DYMBARC plans. Robust-optimized plans used the same paths/arcs/fields. DAO with stochastic programming was used for set-up uncertainties with equal weights in all translational directions and magnitudeδsuch thatm= 0.7δ. Robust analysis considered random errors in all directions with or without an additional systematic error in the worst 3D direction for the adjacent OARs.Main results.Electron contribution was 7%-41% of target dose depending on the case and optimization strategy for DYMBARC. All techniques achieved similar CTV coverage in the nominal (no error) scenario. OAR sparing was overall better in the DYMBARC plans than in the DTRT plans and DYMBARC plans were generally more robust to the considered uncertainties. OAR sparing was better in the PTV-based than in robust-optimized plans for OARs abutting or overlapping with the target volume, but more affected by uncertainties.Significance.Better plan robustness can be achieved with robust optimization than with margins. Combining electron arcs/fields with non-coplanar photon trajectories further improves robustness and OAR sparing.

Bertholet J ，Guyer G ，Mueller S ，Loebner HA ，Volken W ，Aebersold DM ，Manser P ，Fix MK ... -  《-》

Dosimetrically motivated beam-angle optimization for non-coplanar arc radiotherapy with and without dynamic collimator rotation.

Bertholet J ，Zhu C ，Guyer G ，Mueller S ，Volken W ，Mackeprang PH ，Loebner HA ，Stampanoni MFM ，Aebersold DM ，Fix MK ，Manser P ... -  《-》

An orthogonal matching pursuit optimization method for solving minimum-monitor-unit problems: Applications to proton IMPT, ARC and FLASH.

The intensities (i.e., number of protons in monitor unit [MU]) of deliverable proton spots need to be either zero or meet a minimum-MU (MMU) threshold, which is a nonconvex problem. Since the dose rate is proportionally associated with the MMU threshold, higher-dose-rate proton radiation therapy (RT) (e.g., efficient intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and ARC proton therapy, and high-dose-rate-induced FLASH effect needs to solve the MMU problem with larger MMU threshold, which however makes the nonconvex problem more difficult to solve. This work will develop a more effective optimization method based on orthogonal matching pursuit (OMP) for solving the MMU problem with large MMU thresholds, compared to state-of-the-art methods, such as alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM), proximal gradient descent method (PGD), or stochastic coordinate descent method (SCD). The new method consists of two essential components. First, the iterative convex relaxation (ICR) method is used to determine the active sets for dose-volume planning constraints and decouple the MMU constraint from the rest. Second, a modified OMP optimization algorithm is used to handle the MMU constraint: the non-zero spots are greedily selected via OMP to form the solution set to be optimized, and then a convex constrained subproblem is formed and can be conveniently solved to optimize the spot weights restricted to this solution set via OMP. During this iterative process, the new non-zero spots localized via OMP will be adaptively added to or removed from the optimization objective. The new method via OMP is validated in comparison with ADMM, PGD and SCD for high-dose-rate IMPT, ARC, and FLASH problems of large MMU thresholds, and the results suggest that OMP substantially improved the plan quality from PGD, ADMM and SCD in terms of both target dose conformality (e.g., quantified by max target dose and conformity index) and normal tissue sparing (e.g., mean and max dose). For example, in the brain case, the max target dose for IMPT/ARC/FLASH was 368.0%/358.3%/283.4% respectively for PGD, 154.4%/179.8%/150.0% for ADMM, 134.5%/130.4%/123.0% for SCD, while it was <120% in all scenarios for OMP; compared to PGD/ADMM/SCD, OMP improved the conformity index from 0.42/0.52/0.33 to 0.65 for IMPT and 0.46/0.60/0.61 to 0.83 for ARC. A new OMP-based optimization algorithm is developed to solve the MMU problems with large MMU thresholds, and validated using examples of IMPT, ARC, and FLASH with substantially improved plan quality from ADMM, PGD, and SCD.

Zhu YN ，Zhang X ，Lin Y ，Lominska C ，Gao H ... -  《-》

Feasibility of volumetric-modulated arc therapy gating for cardiac radioablation using real-time ECG signal acquisition and a dynamic phantom.

Stereotactic arrythmia radioablation (STAR) is a noninvasive technique to treat ventricular tachycardia (VT). Management of cardiorespiratory motion plays an essential role in VT-STAR treatments to improve treatment outcomes by reducing positional uncertainties and increasing dose conformality. Use of an electrocardiogram (ECG) signal, acquired in real-time, as a surrogate to gate the beam has the potential to fulfil that intent. To investigate the gated delivery of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for STAR on a TrueBeam linear accelerator (linac) using a real-time acquired ECG signal and a dynamic cardiac phantom. Dosimetric characteristics of a 6 MV flattening filter free (FFF) beam from a Varian TrueBeam linac were initially evaluated under high-frequency gating scenarios relevant to cardiac rhythms with respect to dose linearity, beam output, and energy quality. A microcontroller board was used to interface and gate the linac, sending a beam on/off signal. For real-time cardiac gated measurements, an AD8232 Heart Monitor board was used to acquire the ECG signal and synchronize the VMAT delivery to an ArcCHECK detector to a specific phase of the cardiac cycle. Gated dose distributions were compared against those acquired for a non-gated delivery mode. An in-house dynamic cardiac phantom was developed to simulate cardiorespiratory motion that correlates target position with the signal to gate the beam. Measured dose distributions using gafchromic film were also compared against the static (reference) mode in different scenarios with and without gating. Maximum difference in dose per monitor unit (MU) was found to be no greater than 1% as compared to static mode with variation in the chamber response within 0.2% in the range of 50 MUs to 200 MUs. Maximum percentage differences for the beam output and beam qualiy index (TPR20,10) between gated and non-gated modes were 0.91% and -0.44%, respectively. Comparison of delivered dose distributions for the VMAT plan without gating versus ECG synchronized gating modes provided a passing rate 98% for the gamma analysis with 1% relative dose difference, 1 mm distance-to-agreement criteria. For the synchronization of dose delivery with target position, passing rates were 98%, 97%, and 99% for the axial, coronal, and sagittal planes, respectively, when gating the beam based on target position for cardiac motion only, for 3%, 3 mm tolerance as compared to static mode. Without gating the beam, passing rates of the respective plans are 97%, 94%, and 99% for the cardiac motion only, and 67%, 57%, and 55% when including respiratory component of motion. A 6 MV-FFF TrueBeam is stable for performing gating in STAR under high-frequency gate windows within typical cardiac cycles. Agreement between measured dose distributions for a VMAT plan in static and ECG-synchronized deliveries and between static and target-position gated modes shows that the proposed methodology is feasible and can be implemented on a TrueBeam platform.

Reis CQM ，Cross A ，Borsavage JM ，Berryhill G ，Karnas S ，Robar JL ，Gaede S ... -  《-》