Performance of the HIMAC beam control system using multiple-energy synchrotron operation

Mizushima, Kota; Furukawa, Takuji; Iwata, Y.; Hara, Yusuke; Sakamoto, Naoya; Saraya, Y.; Tansho, Ryohei; Sato, Shinji; Fujimoto, T.; Shirai, Tomoyuki; Noda, K.

doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2017.03.051

Cited by 26 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A disadvantage of synchrotrons is a pulsed beam extraction (spills). The acceleration time (which is typically used to switch the energy) can vary from 1 to 10 s. A new synchrotron solution developed at HIMAC [84] is capable of changing energy multiple times within one spill [47,76,42] resulting in continuous beam extraction and significant reduction of the total treatment time. In addition, Sato et al [100] has shown that the intensity control of a synchrotron [34] can be performed within less than 1 ms time.…”

Section: D Beam Deliverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical implementations of 4D pencil beam scanned particle therapy: Report on the 4D treatment planning workshop 2016 and 2017

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2016 and 2017, the 8th and 9th 4D treatment planning workshop took place in Groningen (the Netherlands) and Vienna (Austria), respectively. This annual workshop brings together international experts to discuss research, advances in clinical implementation as well as problems and challenges in 4D treatment planning, mainly in spot scanned proton therapy. In the last two years several aspects like treatment planning, beam delivery, Monte Carlo simulations, motion modeling and monitoring, QA phantoms as well as 4D imaging were thoroughly discussed.This report provides an overview of discussed topics, recent findings and literature review from the last two years. Its main focus is to highlight translation of 4D research into clinical practice and to discuss remaining challenges and pitfalls that still need to be addressed and to be overcome.

show abstract

Section: D Beam Deliverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical implementations of 4D pencil beam scanned particle therapy: Report on the 4D treatment planning workshop 2016 and 2017

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is due to an important difference between the two delivery systems. Using multiple energy operation, HIMAC can deliver an entire patient treatment in a single accelerator spill 25 . On the other hand, the ProBeatV is much more limited in the amount of deliverable charge in each accelerator spill, and by design the ProBeatV can only deliver a limited number of energy layers in a single accelerator spill using the MEE technique 24 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, unlike HIMAC the ProBeatV can only deliver a very limited number of energy layers with MEE due to limitations in the amount of deliverable charge per accelerator spill 24 . As a result, the version used at our proton center reduces beam delivery time by 35% compared to SEE, 24 which is not as much as the beam delivery time savings achieved at HIMAC by switching from hybrid depth scanning to MEE, which in some cases was as much as 75% 25 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Technical Note: Multiple energy extraction techniques for synchrotron‐based proton delivery systems may exacerbate motion interplay effects in lung cancer treatments

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The multiple energy extraction (MEE) delivery technique for synchrotron‐based proton delivery systems reduces beam delivery time by decelerating the beam multiple times during one accelerator spill, but this might cause additional plan quality degradation due to intrafractional motion. We seek to determine whether MEE causes significantly different plan quality degradation compared to single energy extraction (SEE) for lung cancer treatments due to the interplay effect. Methods Ten lung cancer patients treated with IMPT at our institution were nonrandomly sampled based on a representative range of tumor motion amplitudes, tumor volumes, and respiratory periods. Dose‐volume histogram (DVH) indices from single‐fraction SEE and MEE four‐dimensional (4D) dynamic dose distributions were compared using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test. Distributions of monitor units (MU) to breathing phases were investigated for features associated with plan quality degradation. SEE and MEE DVH indices were compared in fractionated deliveries of the worst‐case patient treatment scenario to evaluate the impact of fractionation. Results There were no clinically significant differences in target mean dose, target dose conformity, or dose to organs‐at‐risk between SEE and MEE in single‐fraction delivery. Three patients had significantly worse dose homogeneity with MEE compared to SEE (single‐fraction mean D5%‐D95% increased by up to 9.6% of prescription dose), and plots of MU distribution to breathing phases showed synchronization patterns with MEE but not SEE. However, after 30 fractions the patient in the worst‐case scenario had clinically acceptable target dose homogeneity and coverage with MEE (mean D5%–D95% increased by 1% compared to SEE). Conclusions For some patients with breathing periods close to the mean spill duration, MEE resulted in significantly worse single‐fraction target dose homogeneity compared to SEE due to the interplay effect. However, this was mitigated by fractionation, and target dose homogeneity and coverage were clinically acceptable after 30 fractions with MEE.

show abstract

“…CIRT treatment at the NIRS-QST today combines pencil-beam raster (re)scanning ( 64 – 66 ), a phase-controlled 3D scanning irradiation system ( 67 ), motion management incorporating fast rescanning with respiratory gating ( 64 , 68 ), and a superconducting gantry ( 69 ), enabling the conformal painting of heavy-ions voxel-by-voxel through a target and in theory the employment of combination dose- and LET-based treatment plans with LET/kill-painting of tumor tissue. Within this system, NIRS-QST plans to deploy helium, carbon, oxygen, and neon-ions for MIRT ( 70 ).…”

Section: Ongoing Development Of Mirtmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Emerging Potential of Multi-Ion Radiotherapy

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research into high linear energy transfer (LET) radiotherapy now spans over half a century, beginning with helium and deuteron treatment in 1952 and today ranging from fast neutrons to carbon-ions. Owing to pioneering work initially in the United States and thereafter in Germany and Japan, increasing focus is on the carbon-ion beam: 12 centers are in operation, with five under construction and three in planning. While the carbon-ion beam has demonstrated unique and promising suitability in laboratory and clinical trials toward the hypofractionated treatment of hypoxic and/or radioresistant cancer, substantial developmental potential remains. Perhaps most notable is the ability to paint LET in a tumor, theoretically better focusing damage delivery within the most resistant areas. However, the technique may be limited in practice by the physical properties of the beams themselves. A heavy-ion synchrotron may provide irradiation with multiple heavy-ions: carbon, helium, and oxygen are prime candidates. Each ion varies in LET distribution, and so a methodology combining the use of multiple ions into a uniform LET distribution within a tumor may allow for even greater treatment potential in radioresistant cancer.

show abstract

Performance of the HIMAC beam control system using multiple-energy synchrotron operation

Cited by 26 publications

References 9 publications

Clinical implementations of 4D pencil beam scanned particle therapy: Report on the 4D treatment planning workshop 2016 and 2017

Clinical implementations of 4D pencil beam scanned particle therapy: Report on the 4D treatment planning workshop 2016 and 2017

Technical Note: Multiple energy extraction techniques for synchrotron‐based proton delivery systems may exacerbate motion interplay effects in lung cancer treatments

The Emerging Potential of Multi-Ion Radiotherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About