The purpose of this study was to evaluate intrafraction prostate motion in patients treated with proton therapy and an endorectal balloon or a hydrogel spacer using orthogonal x‐rays acquired before and after each treatment field. This study evaluated 10 patients (662 fields throughout treatment) treated daily with an endorectal balloon (ERB) and 16 patients (840 fields throughout treatment) treated with a hydrogel spacer (GEL) without an ERB. Patient shifts were recorded before and after each treatment field, correlated with a treatment time, using x‐ray imaging and implanted fiducial alignment. For each shift, recorded in X, Y, and Z, a 3D vector was calculated to determine the positional change. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean vector shift between ERB (0.06 cm) and GEL (0.09 cm), (P < 0.001). The mean includes a large number of zero shifts, but the smallest non‐zero shift recorded was 0.2 cm. The largest shifts were, on average, in the Z direction (anterior to posterior). The average Z shift was +0.02 cm for both ERB and GEL. There was no statistical difference between ERB and GEL for shifts greater than 0.3 cm (P = 0.13) or greater than 0.5 cm (P = 0.36). For treatment times between 5 and 9 min, a majority of shifts were less than 0.2 cm, 85.9% for ERB and 73.2% for GEL. There was a significant positive correlation between the vector shifts and field time for both ERB (r = 0.2, P < 0.001) and GEL (r = 0.07, P < 0.04). We have shown that prostate motion is clinically comparable between an ERB and a hydrogel spacer, and the time dependencies are similar. A large majority of shifts for both ERB and hydrogel are well within a typical robust planning margin. For GEL patients, we chose to maintain slightly larger planning margins than for ERB due to already improved rectal sparing with GEL.

In this study, we investigated computationally and experimentally a hexagonal-pattern array of spatially fractionated proton minibeams produced by proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) technique. Spatial fractionation of dose delivery with millimeter or submillimeter beam size has proven to be a promising approach to significantly increase the normal tissue tolerance. Our goals are to obtain an optimized minibeam design and to show that it is feasible to implement the optimized minibeams at the existing proton clinics. Methods: An optimized minibeam arrangement is one that would produce high peak-to-valley dose ratios (PVDRs) in normal tissues and a PVDR approaching unity at the Bragg peak. Using Monte Carlo (MC) code TOPAS we simulated proton pencil beams that mimic those available at the existing proton therapy facilities and obtained a hexagonal-pattern array of minibeams by collimating the proton pencil beams through the 1-3 mm diameter pinholes of a collimator. We optimized the minibeam design by considering different combinations of parameters including collimator material and thickness (t), center-to-center (c-t-c) distance, and beam size. The optimized minibeam design was then evaluated for normal tissue sparing against the uniform pencil beam scanning (PBS) by calculating the therapeutic advantage (TA) in terms of cell survival fraction. Verification measurements using radiochromic films were performed at the Emory proton therapy center (EPTC). Results: Optimized hexagonal-pattern minibeams having PVDRs of >10 at phantom surface and of >3 at depths up to 6 cm were achieved with 2 mm diameter modulated proton minibeams (with proton energies between 120 and 140 MeV) corresponding to a spread-out-Bragg-peak (SOBP) over the depth of 10-14 cm. The results of the film measurements agree with the MC results within 10%. The TA of the 2 mm minibeams against the uniform PBS is >3 from phantom surface to the depth of 5 cm and then smoothly drops to~1.5 as it approaches the proximal edge of the SOBP. For 2 mm minibeams and 6 mm c-t-c distance, we delivered 1.72 Gy at SOBP for 7.2 9 7.2 9 4 cm 3 volume in 48 s. Conclusions: We conclude that it is feasible to implement the optimized hexagonal-pattern 2 mm proton minibeam radiotherapy at the existing proton clinics, because desirable PVDRs and TAs are achievable and the treatment time is reasonable.

BackgroundAlthough there are some controversies regarding whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT) due to its gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities, it is considered for patients with gynecological, rectal, and prostate cancer. To effectively spare organs-at-risk (OAR) doses using multi-leaf collimator (MLC)’s optimal segments, potential dosimetric benefits in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using a half-beam technique (HF) were investigated for WPRT.MethodsWhile the size of a fully opened field (FF) was decided to entirely include a planning target volume in all beam’s eye view across arc angles, the HF was designed to use half the FF from the isocenter for dose optimization. The left or the right half of the FF was alternatively opened in VMAT-HF using a pair of arcs rotating clockwise and counterclockwise. Dosimetric benefits of VMAT-HF, presented with dose conformity, homogeneity, and dose–volume parameters in terms of modulation complex score, were compared to VMAT optimized using the FF (VMAT-FF). Consequent normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) by reducing the irradiated volumes was evaluated as well as dose–volume parameters with statistical analysis for OAR. Moreover, beam-on time and MLC position precision were analyzed with log files to assess plan deliverability and clinical applicability of VMAT-HF as compared to VMAT-FF.ResultsWhile VMAT-HF used 60%–70% less intensity modulation complexity than VMAT-FF, it showed superior dose conformity. The small intestine and colon in VMAT-HF showed a noticeable reduction in the irradiated volumes of up to 35% and 15%, respectively, at an intermediate dose of 20–45 Gy. The small intestine showed statistically significant dose sparing at the volumes that received a dose from 15 to 45 Gy. Such a dose reduction for the small intestine and colon in VMAT-HF presented a significant NTCP reduction from that in VMAT-FF. Without sacrificing the beam delivery efficiency, VMAT-HF achieved effective OAR dose reduction in dose–volume histograms.ConclusionsVMAT-HF led to deliver conformal doses with effective gastrointestinal-OAR dose sparing despite using less modulation complexity. The dose of VMAT-HF was delivered with the same beam-on time with VMAT-FF but precise MLC leaf motions. The VMAT-HF potentially can play a valuable role in reducing OAR toxicities associated with WPRT.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the consistency of rectal sparing using multiple periodic quality assurance computerized tomography imaging scans (QACT) obtained during the course of proton therapy for patients with prostate cancer treated with a hydrogel spacer. Forty‐one low‐ and intermediate‐risk prostate cancer patients treated with image‐guided proton therapy with rectal spacer hydrogel were analyzed. To assess the reproducibility of rectal sparing with the hydrogel spacer, three to four QACTs were performed for each patient on day 1 and during weeks 1, 3, and 5 of treatment. The treatment plan was calculated on the QACT and the rectum V90%, V75%, V65%, V50%, and V40% were evaluated. For the retrospective analysis, we evaluated each QACT and compared it to the corresponding treatment planning CT (TPCT), to determine the average change in rectum DVH points. We were also interested in how many patients exceeded an upper rectum V90% threshold on a QACT. Finally, we were interested in a correlation between rectum volume and V90%. On each QACT, if the rectum V90% exceeded the upper threshold of 6%, the attending physician was notified and the patient was typically prescribed additional stool softeners or laxatives and reminded of dietary compliance. In all cases of the rectum V90% exceeding the threshold, the patient had increased gas and/or stool, compared to the TPCT. On average, the rectum V90% calculated on the QACT was 0.81% higher than that calculated on the TPCT. The average increase in V75%, V65%, V50%, and V40% on the QACT was 1.38%, 1.59%, 1.87%, and 2.17%, respectively. The rectum V90% was within ± 1% of the treatment planning dose in 71.2% of the QACTs, and within ± 5% in 93.2% of the QACTs. The 6% threshold for rectum V90% was exceeded in 7 out of 144 QACTs (4.8%), identified in 5 of the 41 patients. We evaluated the average rectum V90% across all QACTs for each of these patients, and it was found that the rectum V90% never exceeded 6%. 53% of the QACTs had a rectum volume within 5 cm3 of the TPCT volume, 68% were within 10 cm3. We found that patients who exceeded the threshold on one or more QACTs had a lower TPCT rectal volume than the overall average. By extrapolating patient anatomy from three to four QACT scans, we have shown that the use of hydrogel in conjunction with our patient diet program and use of stool softeners is effective in achieving consistent rectal sparing in patients undergoing proton therapy.

Purpose: Rectal hydrogel spacer has been shown to improve rectal sparing in prostate radiotherapy. The purpose of this study was to determine the reproducibility of rectal sparing throughout treatment in patients undergoing proton therapy. Methods: At our facility, prostate cancer patients are treated with pencil beam scanning proton therapy, utilizing an endorectal balloon (ERB) or rectal spacer hydrogel (Gel) “SpaceOAR” implant. All patients were treated with a full bladder and empty rectum (low residue diet and stool softeners). A quality assurance CT (QACT) was performed periodically throughout treatment to ensure rectal filling consistency and sparing in 41 patients treated with Gel. The treatment planning (TP) dose was calculated on each QACT and the rectum V90%, V75%, V65%, V50%, and V40% were recorded. QACT scans were acquired on day 0, week 1, week 3, and week 5. Results: 144 QACT scans were analyzed, each patient receiving 3–4 QACTs. Rectum V90% was within +/−1% of the TP dose in 70% of the QACTs and within +/−5% in 95% of scans. From previous data analyses, our ERB rectum V90% average is 6%. This value was used as an upper threshold for the Gel QACT analysis. 5 of the 41 patients (12%), corresponding to 7 QACTs, had a rectum V90% that exceeded 6% on one or more QACTs. However, the average rectal V90% measured over multiple QACTs never exceeded 6%. 55% of the QACTs had a rectum volume within 5cc of the TPCT volume, 68% were within 10cc. Conclusion: In this study, we have shown that a majority of our prostate patients can maintain consistent rectal sparing when treated with a hydrogel spacer. QACT rectal V90% exceeding our threshold was most often related to increased rectal filling and gas, which was addressed with improved dietary compliance and the intensification of stool softeners or laxatives.