Citations

Abstract Purpose Modeling relative biological effectiveness (RBE) is central to carbon ion radiotherapy treatment planning. The modified Microdosimetric Kinetic Model (mMKM) is a clinically established RBE framework that has guided treatment protocols at many existing carbon centers, while the Mayo Clinic Florida Microdosimetric Kinetic Model (MCF MKM) is a recently developed alternative. This work aims to implement the MCF MKM in the open‐source treatment planning system matRad and to quantitatively compare its RBE‐weighted dose predictions with those of the clinically established mMKM using identical physical dose distributions across multiple disease sites. These findings will help assess their dosimetric equivalence and inform protocol development for carbon ion radiotherapy at MCF. Methods Monte Carlo simulations of the MCF carbon beamline were performed to generate physical (IDD, LET, lateral spread) and biological base data for integration of each RBE model into matRad . Treatment plans were generated for six patients, each corresponding to a different disease site, using clinical beam configurations with carbon‐reference dose prescriptions, and plans were optimized using the MCF MKM. To isolate differences attributable solely to the RBE model, the resulting physical dose distributions were held fixed and RBE‐weighted doses were recalculated using the mMKM. Dose volume histogram (DVH) metrics and spatial dose‐difference maps were used to compare target coverage and organ‐at‐risk doses between the two models. Results Across patient cases, RBE‐weighted dose distributions from MCF MKM and mMKM showed strong agreement. Differences in target coverage were small, with CTV D95% differing by less than 1.6% across all disease sites and maximum target dose differences not exceeding 0.88%. Organ‐at‐risk dose deviations were limited, with differences of 3.0% or less across evaluated DVH metrics. Spatial dose‐difference maps showed that the largest discrepancies occurred in regions of steep dose gradients near target to organ‐at‐risk interfaces, while overall dose conformity and plan quality remained comparable between the two models. Conclusions: This study served as the first systematic model comparison of the MCF MKM and mMKM within a treatment planning environment. These findings suggest that the MCF MKM and mMKM produce dosimetrically consistent RBE‐weighted dose predictions under realistic planning conditions using carbon‐reference parameters. Accordingly, the fractionation schemes developed from years of clinical experience with mMKM implementations may serve as a practical foundation for protocol development at MCF.

Abstract Purpose This study investigates a novel optimization framework that integrates the newly developed MCF MKM relative biological effectiveness (RBE) model into intensity modulated particle therapy (IMPT) planning for carbon ion therapy. Unlike conventional RBE models such as MKM or LEM, the MCF MKM provides detailed microdosimetric information, which improves predictive accuracy of cell survival but elevates both memory and time requirement in the optimization process. Furthermore, to the implicit nature of the MCF MKM, the gradient information, which is essential in inverse planning, is hardly accessible. In response, a randomized gradient‐free optimization method (RGFM) was developed to mitigate the computational challenge and achieve improved RBE dose distributions. Materials and Methods An RBE dose optimization problem was formulated based on the discretized MCF MKM, known as the Abridged Microdosimetry Distribution Model (AMDM). The RGFM was derived to find feasible and high‐quality settings of monitor unit for IMPT plans without the need for explicit gradient calculations. To verify the clinical plausibility of the proposed method, it was tested on two clinical scenarios—prostate and brain cases in comparison with benchmark plans derived solely from physical dose optimization. Computational times and dose‐volume histograms (DVHs) for both physical and RBE doses were evaluated. Results The RGFM algorithm successfully optimized the MCF MKM‐based IMPT plans. Compared to the benchmark, the RBE dose distributions showed improved coverage of the target and reduced hot spots. Such improvements were observed to coincide with trade‐offs in physical dose distributions. The complexity of the MCF MKM extended the computational time, yet high‐quality solutions were attainable in a clinically reasonable timeframe. Multi‐field optimization (MFO) further enhanced target coverage and critical organ sparing over single‐field optimization (SFO). Conclusions This proof‐of‐principle study confirmed the feasibility of using a randomized gradient‐free method to optimize RBE dose based on the MCF MKM in IMPT planning for carbon ion therapy. The approach provides a pathway for clinical adoption of advanced RBE models, potentially leading to more biologically informed and effective carbon ion therapy treatments. Future work involves refining algorithms, incorporating parallel computing, and performing additional case studies to improve computational efficiency and generalizability.

Abstract Increased demand to make medical linear accelerator acceptance testing procedures (ATP) more efficient exists while the technology being evaluated for clinical use has become increasingly complex. The most recent American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) task group giving guidelines to medical physicists on ATP was Task Group report 45, published in 1994. Several new technologies, enhanced machine performance, and possible future changes to ATP since that time require updated guidance from the AAPM. The goal of this task group is to empower the medical physicist to be meaningfully involved with the design and execution of comprehensive and effective linear accelerator ATP beginning with the purchasing contract negotiation to the contractual handover of the linear accelerator to the department for clinical use. Additionally, we discussed aspects related to beam matching, ATP at the time of replacing major linear accelerator's components as well as what we perceive as the future of the ATP process given the trends of standardizing linear accelerators.

Abstract Electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) have been in widespread clinical use for almost two decades due to favorable measurement characteristics such as fast image acquisition, high sensitivity and resolution, digital data format, long‐term stability, linear dose response, and large detection area. On‐board EPIDs are widely used as a quality assurance (QA) tool to monitor nearly every aspect of linear accelerator (linac) performance. In both the commercial QA equipment market and in clinical practice, there is a trend toward replacing conventional QA approaches with fully automated, EPID‐based QA tools. Despite widespread use, EPIDs are complex devices, and there has yet to be consensus or formal recommendations published by the AAPM for their use in routine linac QA. Task Group 330 (TG‐330) was, therefore, formed to provide guidelines and recommendations for physicists on the safe and appropriate use of EPIDs for linac QA. In particular, the report: (a) provides a comprehensive review of the characteristics and limitations of EPIDs as time‐resolved measurement devices and dosimeters; (b) summarizes the application of EPIDs for linac QA; (c) provides recommendations on efficient and effective implementations of EPID‐based QA techniques; (d) describes risks associated with the use of EPIDs for linac QA and provides examples of how risk analysis can be used to ensure the safe use of EPIDs for linac QA. Many of the guidelines in this report are drawn from the literature that is included in the references and from the collective experience of the task group members. This report does not provide recommendations on the implementation of EPID‐based patient‐specific IMRT or VMAT QA, which is the topic of AAPM's report from AAPM TG‐307.

Abstract Background Dose‐driven continuous scanning (DDCS) enhances the efficiency and precision of proton pencil beam delivery by reducing beam pauses inherent in discrete spot scanning (DSS). However, current DDCS optimization studies using traveling salesman problem (TSP) formulations often rely on fixed beam intensity and computationally expensive interpolation for move spot generation, limiting efficiency and methodological robustness. Purpose This study introduces a Break Spot‐Guided (BSG) method, combined with two acceleration strategies—dose rate skipping and bounding—to optimize beam intensity while minimizing beam delivery time (BDT). In addition, a ‐method is proposed for efficient move spot generation, aiming to balance computational efficiency and dose calculation accuracy. Methods The BSG framework simplifies the original mixed‐integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) problem by transforming it into a series of TSP evaluations using break‐spot dose rates. The two acceleration strategies are integrated to reduce computational complexity. The ‐method is introduced to efficiently generate move spots without compromising dose fidelity. The performance of the BSG method, with and without the acceleration strategies, and the ‐method, was evaluated across multiple clinical cases. Results By jointly optimizing the scan path and dose rate, the proposed BSG‐S‐B method offered the most efficient delivery, achieving a 64% reduction in BDT compared to DSS and a 57% reduction compared to Liu's method in the prostate case. These gains were consistently observed across all cases. Utilizing acceleration strategies, BSG‐S‐B significantly reduced computation time from hours to minutes (e.g., from 10 525.7 to 108.5 s in the prostate case, and from 6202.4 to 129.8 s in the head‐and‐neck case). When combined with the ‐method, it reduced the number of move spots by more than 50%, while still ensuring dosimetric quality. Conclusions The proposed framework significantly improves computational efficiency, making scan path optimization with dose rate selection feasible for clinical DDCS delivery. The ‐method effectively reduces computational complexity while maintaining dose calculation accuracy, demonstrating strong potential for clinical adoption in proton therapy treatment planning.

Abstract Background Cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) is essential for image‐guided particle therapy (IGPT), providing daily patient positioning, anatomical monitoring, and treatment verification. However, conventional single‐detector CBCT suffers from poor soft‐tissue contrast, long acquisition times, and motion artifacts, reducing its effectiveness for adaptive radiotherapy workflows. Addressing these challenges requires an advanced CBCT reconstruction approach capable of enhancing image quality while reducing scan time and radiation exposure. Purpose This study introduces a Dual Detector Combined Scanning (DDCS) CBCT reconstruction algorithm to overcome conventional CBCT limitations. By integrating a dual‐source, orthogonal imaging setup, DDCS significantly reduces scanning time and imaging artifacts. A modified Parker‐weighting algorithm further improves image reconstruction accuracy, ensuring high‐fidelity visualization. The goal is to enhance adaptive radiotherapy by improving real‐time patient positioning, dose verification, and motion management. Methods A dual‐detector CBCT system was designed to acquire orthogonal projections simultaneously, reducing scan time and improving data completeness. A modified Parker‐weighting algorithm corrected angular overlap distortions, ensuring better reconstruction accuracy. The system was evaluated using numerical and physical phantom studies to assess spatial resolution, contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR), and artifact reduction. Additionally, a dynamic phantom simulated respiratory motion, validating motion robustness for adaptive radiotherapy. Performance was compared against single‐detector CBCT, focusing on image fidelity, noise suppression, and computational efficiency. Results DDCS‐CBCT demonstrated higher CNR, reduced motion artifacts, and improved spatial resolution, leading to more accurate anatomical visualization. The system's efficiency enables faster, more reliable patient setup in IGPT while maintaining a lower imaging dose. Conclusion The proposed DDCS‐CBCT approach significantly improves imaging accuracy, reduces scan time, and enhances real‐time volumetric guidance in IGRT/IGPT. These findings support the clinical feasibility of the DDCS system and its integration into online adaptive radiotherapy workflows.

This study evaluated the effectiveness of using a traditional computed tomography (CT) simulation scan in the Leksell Gamma Knife® Icon™ workflow for stereotactic radiosurgery. We compared two workflows, one involving a traditional CT simulation co-registered with the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cone-beam CT (CBCT) (MRI-CT-CBCT) and another without the CT scan, co-registering the MRI directly with CBCT (MRI-CBCT). The cohort included 50 frame-based (54 targets) and 55 frameless (124 targets) patients treated between August 2020 and December 2022. Target coverage was assessed by the percentage of each target covered by the prescription isodose line. The mean coverage differences for the frame-based and frameless cohorts were −1.20% ± 1.43% and −1.06% ± 1.51%, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals of −1.59, −0.81 and −1.32, −0.79. The MRI-CBCT workflow was deemed noninferior to the MRI-CT-CBCT workflow. Our data indicate that both workflows yield similar results, suggesting that a traditional CT simulation scan is unnecessary.

AbstractBackgroundAdaptive radiotherapy (ART) workflows have been increasingly adopted to achieve dose escalation and tissue sparing under shifting anatomic conditions, but the necessity of recontouring and the associated time burden hinders a real‐time or online ART workflow. In response to this challenge, approaches to auto‐segmentation involving deformable image registration, atlas‐based segmentation, and deep learning‐based segmentation (DLS) have been developed. Despite the particular promise shown by DLS methods, implementing these approaches in a clinical setting remains a challenge, namely due to the difficulty of curating a data set of sufficient size and quality so as to achieve generalizability in a trained model.PurposeTo address this challenge, we have developed an intentional deep overfit learning (IDOL) framework tailored to the auto‐segmentation task. However, certain limitations were identified, particularly the insufficiency of the personalized dataset to effectively overfit the model. In this study, we introduce a personalized hyperspace learning (PHL)‐IDOL segmentation framework capable of generating datasets that induce the model to overfit specific patient characteristics for medical image segmentation.MethodsThe PHL‐IDOL model is trained in two stages. In the first, a conventional, general model is trained with a diverse set of patient data (n = 100 patients) consisting of CT images and clinical contours. Following this, the general model is tuned with a data set consisting of two components: (a) selection of a subset of the patient data (m < n) using the similarity metrics (mean square error (MSE), peak signal‐to‐noise ratio (PSNR), structural similarity index (SSIM), and the universal quality image index (UQI) values); (b) adjust the CT and the clinical contours using a deformed vector generated from the reference patient and the selected patients using (a). After training, the general model, the continual model, the conventional IDOL model, and the proposed PHL‐IDOL model were evaluated using the volumetric dice similarity coefficient (VDSC) and the Hausdorff distance 95% (HD95%) computed for 18 structures in 20 test patients.ResultsImplementing the PHL‐IDOL framework resulted in improved segmentation performance for each patient. The Dice scores increased from 0.810.05 with the general model, 0.83 for the continual model, 0.83 for the conventional IDOL model to an average of 0.87 with the PHL‐IDOL model. Similarly, the Hausdorff distance decreased from 3.06 with the general model, 2.84 for the continual model, 2.79 for the conventional IDOL model and 2.36 for the PHL‐IDOL model. All the standard deviations were decreased by nearly half of the values comparing the general model and the PHL‐IDOL model.ConclusionThe PHL‐IDOL framework applied to the auto‐segmentation task achieves improved performance compared to the general DLS approach, demonstrating the promise of leveraging patient‐specific prior information in a task central to online ART workflows.

AbstractBackgroundIntensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) is a sophisticated radiation treatment allowing for precise dose distributions. However, conventional spot selection strategies in IMPT face challenges, particularly with minimum monitor unit (MU) constraints, affecting planning quality and efficiency.PurposeThis study introduces an innovative Two‐Stage Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) method to optimize spot intensity in IMPT with Lower Bound (LB) constraints. This method seeks to improve treatment planning efficiency and precision, overcoming limitations of existing strategies.MethodsOur approach evaluates prevalent IMPT spot selection strategies, identifying their limitations, especially concerning MU constraints. We integrated LB constraints into a MILP framework, using a novel three‐phase strategy for spot pool selection, to enhance performance over traditional heuristic methods and L1 + L∞ strategies. The method's efficacy was tested in eight study cases, using Dose‐Volume Histograms (DVHs), spot selection efficiency, and computation time analysis for benchmarking against established methods.ResultsThe proposed method showed superior performance in DVH quality, adhering to LB constraints while maintaining high‐quality treatment plans. It outperformed existing techniques in spot selection, reducing unnecessary spots and balancing precision with efficiency. Cases studies confirmed the method's effectiveness in producing clinically feasible plans with enhanced dose distributions and reduced hotspots, especially in cases with elevated LB constraints.ConclusionsOur Two‐Stage MILP strategy signifies a significant advancement in IMPT treatment planning. By incorporating LB constraints directly into the optimization process, it achieves superior plan quality and deliverability compared to current methods. This approach is particularly advantageous in clinical settings requiring minimum spot number and high MU LB constraints, offering the potential for improved patient outcomes through more precise and efficient radiation therapy plans.

AbstractPurposeSkin collimation is a useful tool in electron beam therapy (EBT) to decrease the penumbra at the field edge and minimize dose to nearby superficial organs at risk (OARs), but manually fabricating these collimation devices in the clinic to conform to the patient's anatomy can be a difficult and time intensive process. This work compares two types of patient‐specific skin collimation (in‐house 3D printed and vendor‐provided machined brass) using clinically relevant metrics.MethodsAttenuation measurements were performed to determine the thickness of each material needed to adequately shield both 6 and 9 MeV electron beams. Relative and absolute dose planes at various depths were measured using radiochromic film to compare the surface dose, flatness, and penumbra of the different skin collimation materials.ResultsClinically acceptable thicknesses of each material were determined for both 6 and 9 MeV electron beams. Field width, flatness, and penumbra results between the two systems were very similar and significantly improved compared to measurements performed with no surface collimation.ConclusionBoth skin collimation methods investigated in this work generate sharp penumbras at the field edge and can minimize dose to superficial OARs compared to treatment fields with no surface collimation. The benefits of skin collimation are greatest for lower energy electron beams, and the benefits decrease as the measurement depth increases. Using bolus with skin collimation is recommended to avoid surface dose enhancement seen with collimators placed on the skin surface. Ultimately, the appropriate choice of material will depend on the desire to create these devices in‐house or outsource the fabrication to a vendor.