Results for “protocol” — Page 93

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-434: Fixed Margin Or Online Adaptation for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy? A Dosimetric Study

Purpose: To investigate the choice of fixed margin or online adaptation when treating intermediate-risk prostate cancer including seminal vesicles (SV) using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Methods: 9 prostate SBRT patients were retrospectively studied. All patients were implanted with fiducial markers in the prostate for daily localization and verification. Each patient had 5 pairs of pre-treatment and post-treatment cone-beam CT (CBCT) per protocol. SVs were contoured on planning CT and all CBCTs by one attending physician. Simultaneous integral boost (SIB) IMRT plans were developed to deliver 25Gy/5fx to the SV while delivering 37Gy/5fx to the prostate. A 3mm isotropic margin was added to the prostate while a 5 mm isotropic margin was used for the SV. The planning CT was registered to daily pre-treatment and post-treatment CBCT based on fiducial markers in the prostate to mimic online prostate localization; and the SV on daily CBCT was transferred to the CT structure set after the prostates were aligned. Daily pre-treatment and post-treatment SV dose coverage and the organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing were evaluated for the SIB regimen. At least 95% of the SV need to receive the prescription dose (5Gy per fraction). Results: For the total of 90 daily SVs analyzed (ten CBCTs for each of nine patients), only 45 daily SVs (50%) were able to meet the coverage that 95% of the SV received 25Gy. The OAR sparing performance was acceptable for most of the dosimetric constraints in low-risk prostate SBRT protocol with only two exceptions in bladder V100 (cc). Conclusion: A fixed 5mm margin for SV is not sufficient to provide consistent daily dose coverage due to SV’s substantial inter- and intra-fractional motion relative to the prostate. This finding calls for innovative strategies in margin design as well as online treatment adaptation. This work is partially supported a master research grant from Varian Medical Systems.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-578: On Definition of Minimum and Maximum Dose for Target Volume

Purpose: This study aims to investigate the impact of different minimum and maximum dose definitions in radiotherapy treatment plan quality evaluation criteria by using tumor control probability (TCP) models. Methods: Dosimetric criteria used in RTOG 1308 protocol are used in the investigation. RTOG 1308 is a phase III randomized trial comparing overall survival after photon versus proton chemoradiotherapy for inoperable stage II-IIIB NSCLC. The prescription dose for planning target volume (PTV) is 70Gy. Maximum dose (Dmax) should not exceed 84Gy and minimum dose (Dmin) should not go below 59.5Gy in order for the plan to be “per protocol” (satisfactory).A mathematical model that simulates the characteristics of PTV dose volume histogram (DVH) curve with normalized volume is built. The Dmax and Dmin are noted as percentage volumes Dη% and D(100-δ)%, with η and d ranging from 0 to 3.5. The model includes three straight line sections and goes through four points: D95%= 70Gy, Dη%= 84Gy, D(100-δ)%= 59.5 Gy, and D100%= 0Gy. For each set of η and δ, the TCP value is calculated using the inhomogeneously irradiated tumor logistic model with D50= 74.5Gy and γ50=3.52. Results: TCP varies within 0.9% with η; and δ values between 0 and 1. With η and η varies between 0 and 2, TCP change was up to 2.4%. With η and δ variations from 0 to 3.5, maximum of 8.3% TCP difference is seen. Conclusion: When defined maximum and minimum volume varied more than 2%, significant TCP variations were seen. It is recommended less than 2% volume used in definition of Dmax or Dmin for target dosimetric evaluation criteria. This project was supported by NIH grants U10CA180868, U10CA180822, U24CA180803, U24CA12014 and PA CURE Grant.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-603: PBS Prostate Plan Robustness: A Tool for Patient Specific Setup Tolerance

Purpose: Fiducial markers are commonly used for setup of prostate patients using orthogonal radiographs. After aligned with the markers, the displacement of the bony anatomy relative to the planned DRR can be up to 10 mm. Such offset can potentially have significant dosimetric effects because it changes the radiological path length of protons in differing amounts of bone. It is imperative to develop a method to evaluate its impact on target coverage and hence establish patient specific setup tolerance for prostate proton PBS treatment. Methods: Prostate patients were planned in RayStation according to the PCG protocol with bi-lateral beams. The primary planning objectives are: (1) 100% of CTV receives full prescription dose; (2) 98% of the prescription dose covers at least 98% of the PTV; (3) OARs meet criteria per protocol. For each patient 108 dose perturbations were automatically generated using an in-house script, which considered the isocenter shifting in S-I and A-P directions (up to ±15 mm with an interval of 6mm) as well as the range uncertainty (±3.5%). The target coverage was evaluated on the contour shifted along with prostate to mimic the daily treatment. Results: The minimum CTV coverage as a function of offsets in S-I and A-P directions is presented in a 2D contour map. The offsets along A-P direction generally have greater impact than along S-I direction. Both the CTV D98%>98% or CTV V98%>98% are achievable for most patients if the offset is <10 mm in either direction despite of range uncertainties. Conclusion: We developed a method to evaluate the plan robustness for proton PBS prostate treatment. It can provide patient specific setup tolerance of bony structure offset. For our current planning approach, a 1 cm displacement is acceptable. This approach can be generalized to other target structures that move relative to bony anatomy.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-661: Quantitative MRI Assessment of a Novel Direction-Modulated Brachytherapy Tandem Applicator for Cervical Cancer

Purpose: To quantitatively evaluate the MR image quality of a novel direction modulated brachytherapy (DMBT) tandem applicator for cervical cancer, using the clinical MRI scanning protocol for image guided brachytherapy. Methods: The tungsten alloy-based applicator was placed in a water phantom and clinical imaging protocol was performed. Axial images were acquired using 2D turbo-spin echo (TSE) T2-weighted sequence on a 1.5T GE 450w MR scanner and an 8-channel body coil. As multi-channel receiver coil was used, inhomogeneities in the B1 receive field must be considered before performing the quantification process. Therefore the applicator was removed from the phantom and the whole imaging session was performed again for the water phantom with the same parameters. Images from the two scans were then subtracted, resulting in a difference image that only shows the applicator with its surrounding magnetic susceptibility dipole artifact. Line profiles were drawn and plotted on the difference image at various angles and locations along the tandem. Full width at half maximum (FWHM) was measured at all the line profiles to quantify the extent of the artifact. Additionally, the extent of the artifact along the diameter of the tandem was measured at various angles and locations. Results: After removing the background inhomogeneities of the receiver coil, FWHM of the tandem measured 5.75 ± 0.35 mm (the physical tandem diameter is 5.4 mm). The average extent of the artifacts along the diameter of the tandem measured is 2.14 ± 0.56 mm. In contrast to CT imaging of the same applicator (not shown here), the tandem can be easily identified without additional correction algorithms. Conclusion: This work demonstrated that the novel DMBT tandem applicator has minimal susceptibility artifact in T2-weighted images employed in clinical practice for MRI-guided brachytherapy of cervical cancer.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-F-207-03: Dosimetric Effect of the Position of Arms in Torso CT Scan with Tube Current Modulation

Purpose: To evaluate the patient organ dose differences between the arms-raised and arms-lowered postures in Torso multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scan protocols with tube current modulation (TCM). Methods: Patient CT organ doses were simulated using the Monte Carlo method with human phantoms and a validated CT scanner model. A set of adult human phantoms with arms raised and arms lowered postures were developed using advanced BREP-based mesh surface geometries. Organ doses from routine Torso scan protocols such as chest, abdomen-pelvis, and CAP scans were simulated. The organ doses differences caused by two different posutres were investigated when tube current modulation (TCM) were applied during the CT scan. Results: With TCM applied, organ doses of all the listed organs of arms-lowered posture phantom are larger than those of arms raised phantom. The dose difference for most of the organs or tissues are larger than 50%, and the skin doses difference for abdomen-pelvis scan even reaches 112.03%. This is due to the fact that the tube current for patient with arms-lowered is much higher than for the arms raised posture. Conclusion: Considering CT scan with TCM, which is commonly applied clinically, patients who could not raise their arms will receive higher radiation dose than the arms raised patient, with dose differences for some tissues such as the skin being larger than 100%. This is due to the additional tube current necessary to penetrate the arms while maintaining consistent image quality. National Nature Science Foundation of China(No.11475047)

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-AB-BRA-04: Correct Identification of Low-Attenuation Intracranial Hemorrhage and Calcification Using Dual-Energy Computed Tomography in a Phantom System

Purpose: Intracranial hemorrhage and calcification with Single-Energy CT (SECT) attenuation below 100HU cannot be reliably identified using currently clinically available means. Calcification is typically benign but hemorrhage can carry a risk of intracranial bleeding and contraindicate use of anticoagulant therapies. A biologically-relevant phantom was used to investigate identification of unknown intracranial lesions using dual-energy CT (DECT) as a verification of prior lesion differentiation results. Methods: Prior phantom work investigating calcification and hemorrhage differentiation resulted in 3D-DECT raw data (water density, calcium density, 68keV) for a range of DECT protocol variations: image thicknesses (1.25, 2.5, 3.75, 5mm), CTDIvol (36.7 to 132.6mGy) and reconstruction algorithms (Soft, Standard, Detail). Acquisition-specific raw data were used to create a plane of optimal differentiation based on the geometric bisector of 3D-linear regression of the two lesion distributions. Verification hemorrhage and calcification lesions, ranging in size from 0.5 to 1.5cm, were created at varying attenuation from 50 to 100HU. Lesions were inserted into a biologically-relevant brain phantom and scanned using SECT (3.75mm images, Standard, 67mGy) and a range of DECT protocols (3.75mm images, Standard, [67, 105.6, 132.6mGy]). 3D-DECT data were collected and blinded for analysis. The 3D-DECT distribution of the lesion was then compared to the acquisition-matched geometric bisector plane and the mean lesion value’s position relative to the plane, indicating lesion identity, and the percentage of voxels on the identified side of the plane, indicating identification confidence, were derived. Results: 98% of the 120 lesions investigated were identified correctly as hemorrhage or calcification. 74% were identified with greater than 80% confidence. Increases in CTDIvol and lesion diameter were associated with increased identification confidence. Conclusion: Intracranial lesions of unknown etiology were identified with 80% confidence for 74% of lesions investigated. These phantom data suggest that the identification of intracranial lesions below 100HU is clinically feasible using DECT. This research was conducted at the MD Anderson Center for Advanced Biomedical Imaging in-part with equipment support from General Electric Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-B-BRD-02: 3D Printing in the Clinic

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-B-BRD-03: Principles, Pitfalls and Techniques of 3D Printing for Bolus and Compensators

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-B-BRD-04: Sterilization for 3D Printed Brachytherapy Applicators

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-B-BRD-00: Clinical Applications of 3D Printing

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-B-BRD-01: Creation of 3D Printed Phantoms for Clinical Radiation Therapy

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-DE-210-04: Repositioning and Monitoring of Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy with a New 4D Ultrasound Intra-Modality IGRT Device

Purpose: We report our clinical experience using a non-invasive transperineal (TP) ultrasound (US) probe dedicated to pre-positioning and monitoring of prostate cancer patients. The accuracy of pre-treatment positioning was compared to CBCT for prostate and post-prostatectomy patients. Intrafraction motions were recorded for both localizations. The dosimetric impact of these displacements was finally investigated on prostate patients. Methods: Differences between CBCT/CT and TP-US/TP-US registrations were analyzed on 427 and 453 sessions for 13 prostate and 14 post-prostatectomy patients, respectively. Ten prostate patients’ dosimetries were retrospectively planned using 2 different protocols: 80Gy in 40 fractions and 36.25Gy in 5 fractions with a 5mm CTV- to- PTV margin. The delivery time was measured in order to analyze ranges of intrafraction motions related to each protocol. Mean prostate displacements were calculated for each patient and applied to the treatment isocenter coordinates to evaluate the dosimetric impact of these motions. Results: CBCT and TP-US shifts agreements at ±5mm were 76.6%, 95.1%, 96.3% and 90.3%, 85.0%, 97.6% in anterior- posterior, superior- inferior and left-right directions, for prostate and post-prostatectomy patients, respectively. Intrafraction motions were analyzed considering delivery times of 140 and 290s with an additional time of 120s for patient installation for doses of 2 and 7.25Gy, respectively. Intrafraction motions were patient-dependent and were larger as the irradiation time increased. Larger displacements were observed for prostate compared to post-prostatectomy localizations. Shifts above 3mm were observed on 17.6% and 4.5% of the 2Gy sessions against 30.6% and 7.3% of the 7.25Gy sessions in the anterior-posterior direction for prostate and post-prostatectomy localizations, respectively. Preliminary dosimetric results showed that intrafraction motions mainly impact the PTV coverage. Conclusion: 4D TP-US modality is a promising alternative to irradiating and/or invasive IGRT modalities for both inter and intrafraction motions management. Preliminary dosimetric results show that intrafraction monitoring is mandatory especially for hypofractionated treatments. M Fargier-Voiron was supported by a PhD grant from Elekta.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-FG-303-02: BEST IN PHYSICS (THERAPY): Cherenkov Emission Dosimetry: Feasibility for Electron Radiotherapy

Purpose: To investigate from first principles, corroborated by Monte Carlo simulations and experimental measurements, the feasibility of developing a relative Cherenkov emission (CE) dosimetry protocol for electron beam radiotherapy. Methods: Monte Carlo (MC) simulations of mono-energetic electrons incident on water were carried out in Geant4. Percent depth Cherenkov emission (PDCE) and dose (PDD) distributions were scored for incidence energies of 4, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 MeV. PDCE-to-PDD analytical conversion models were developed from least-squares data fits generated for PDD as a function of PDCE at the same depth and at different depths. Experimental techniques for validation of these models are examined. Results: Same-depth PDD versus PDCE data fits indicate that although the relationship is linear to first order (correlation r > 0.9 for all energies), it is much more accurately approximated by separate linear and quadratic models for the build-up and drop-off regions, respectively (r > 0.999), which is theoretically underpinned. To understand the source of this relationship and its basis for developing robust conversion models, an approximate quadratic first-principles model was derived and found in agreement with MC/measured data (20% deviation at worst). Conversely, data fits of PDD versus different-depth PDCE unveiled a depth-invariant effective point of measurement of 1.5–2.1 mm downstream with 4–18 MeV incidence, respectively (r > 0.999 in the drop-off region). We present an analytical first-principles justification for this shift. This method led to errors of <1% in drop-off region PDD (<2% for PDD<20% with 4 MeV incidence) and <0.2 mm in practical range prediction. Conclusion: We present robust quantitative prediction models, derived from first-principles and supported by simulation and measurement, for relative dose from Cherenkov emission by high-energy electrons. This constitutes a major step towards development of protocols for routine clinical quality assurance as well as real-time in vivo Cherenkov dosimetry in radiotherapy. The authors acknowledge partial support by Fonds de recherche du Quebec - Nature et technologies (FRQNT), CREATE Medical Physics Research Training Network grant of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), CREATE Integrated Sensor Systems grant of NSERC, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and NSERC.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-EF-BRA-04: Evaluation of Dosimetric Uncertainties in Individualized Targeted Radionuclide Therapy (TRT) Treatment Planning Using Pre-Clinical Data

Purpose: Dosimetry for targeted radionuclide therapy (TRT) is moving away from conventional model-based methods towards patient-specific approaches. To address this need, a Monte Carlo (MC) dosimetry platform was developed to estimate patient-specific therapeutic 3D dose distributions based on pre-treatment imaging. However, because a standard practice for patient-specific internal dosimetry has not yet been established, there are many sources of dosimetric uncertainties. The goal of this work was to quantify the sensitivity of various parameters on MC dose estimations. Methods: The ‘diapeutic’ agent, CLR1404, was used as a proof-of-principle compound in this work. CLR1404 can be radiolabeled with either {sup 124}I for PET imaging or {sup 131}I for radiotherapy or SPECT imaging. PET/CT images of 5 mice were acquired out to 240 hrs post-injection of {sup 124}I-CLR1404. The therapeutic {sup 131}I-CLR1404 absorbed dose (AD) distribution was calculated using a Geant4-based MC dosimetry platform. A series of sensitivity studies were performed. The variables that were investigated included the PET/CT voxel resolution, partial volume corrections (PVC), material segmentation, inter-observer contouring variability, and the pre-treatment image acquisition frequency. Results: Resampling the PET/CT voxel size between 0.2–0.8 mm resulted in up to a 13% variation in the mean AD. Application of the PVC increased the mean AD by 0.5–11.2%. Less than 1% differences in ROI mean AD were observed between the tissue segmentation schemes using 4 and 27 different material compositions. Inter-observer contouring variability led to up to a 20% CoV (stdev/mean) in the mean AD between the users. Varying the number and frequency of pre-treatment images used resulted in changes in mean AD up to 176% compared to the case using all 12 images. Conclusion: Voxel resolution, contour segmentation, the image acquisition protocol most significantly impacted patient-specific TRT dosimetry. Further work is needed to develop a standard protocol that optimizes accuracy and efficiency for patient-specific internal dosimetry. BT and JG are affiliated with Cellectar Biosciences which owns the licensing rights to CLR1404 and related compounds.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

Measuring retinal blood flow in rats using Doppler optical coherence tomography without knowing eyeball axial length

Purpose: Doppler optical coherence tomography (OCT) is widely used for measuring retinal blood flow. Existing Doppler OCT methods require the eyeball axial length, in which empirical values are usually used. However, variations in the axial length can create a bias unaccounted for in the retinal blood flow measurement. The authors plan to develop a Doppler OCT method that can measure the total retinal blood flow rate without requiring the eyeball axial length. Methods: The authors measured the retinal blood flow rate using a dual-ring scanning protocol. The small and large scanning rings entered the eye at different incident angles (small ring: 4°; large ring: 6°), focused on different locations on the retina, and detected the projected velocities/phase shifts along the probing beams. The authors calculated the ratio of the projected velocities between the two rings, and then used this ratio to estimate absolute flow velocity. The authors tested this method in both Intralipid phantoms and in vivo rats. Results: In the Intralipid flow phantom experiments, the preset and measured flow rates were consistent with the coefficient of determination as 0.97. Linear fitting between preset and measured flow rates determined the fitting slope as 1.07 and the intercept as −0.28. In in vivo rat experiments, the measured average total retinal blood flow was 7.02 ± 0.31μl/min among four wild-type rats. The authors’ measured flow rates were consistent with results in the literature. Conclusions: By using a dual-ring scanning protocol with carefully controlled incident angle difference between the two scanning rings in Doppler OCT, the authors demonstrated that it is feasible to measure the absolute retinal blood flow without knowing the eyeball axial length.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

Monte Carlo simulations of the dose from imaging with GE eXplore 120 micro-CT using GATE

Purpose: Small animals are increasingly used as translational models in preclinical imaging studies involving microCT, during which the subjects can be exposed to large amounts of radiation. While the radiation levels are generally sublethal, studies have shown that low-level radiation can change physiological parameters in mice. In order to rule out any influence of radiation on the outcome of such experiments, or resulting deterministic effects in the subjects, the levels of radiation involved need to be addressed. The aim of this study was to investigate the radiation dose delivered by the GE eXplore 120 microCT non-invasively using Monte Carlo simulations in GATE and to compare results to previously obtained experimental values. Methods: Tungsten X-ray spectra were simulated at 70, 80, and 97 kVp using an analytical tool and their half-value layers were simulated for spectra validation against experimentally measured values of the physical X-ray tube. A Monte Carlo model of the microCT system was set up and four protocols that are regularly applied to live animal scanning were implemented. The computed tomography dose index (CTDI) inside a PMMA phantom was derived and multiple field of view acquisitions were simulated using the PMMA phantom, a representative mouse and rat. Results: Simulated half-value layers agreed with experimentally obtained results within a 7% error window. The CTDI ranged from 20 to 56 mGy and closely matched experimental values. Derived organ doses in mice reached 459 mGy in bones and up to 200 mGy in soft tissue organs using the highest energy protocol. Dose levels in rats were lower due to the increased mass of the animal compared to mice. The uncertainty of all dose simulations was below 14%. Conclusions: Monte Carlo simulations proved a valuable tool to investigate the 3D dose distribution in animals from microCT. Small animals, especially mice (due to their small volume), receive large amounts of radiation from the GE eXplore 120 microCT, which might alter physiological parameters in a longitudinal study setup.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

The SRT reconstruction algorithm for semiquantification in PET imaging

Purpose: The spline reconstruction technique (SRT) is a new, fast algorithm based on a novel numerical implementation of an analytic representation of the inverse Radon transform. The mathematical details of this algorithm and comparisons with filtered backprojection were presented earlier in the literature. In this study, the authors present a comparison between SRT and the ordered-subsets expectation–maximization (OSEM) algorithm for determining contrast and semiquantitative indices of {sup 18}F-FDG uptake. Methods: The authors implemented SRT in the software for tomographic image reconstruction (STIR) open-source platform and evaluated this technique using simulated and real sinograms obtained from the GE Discovery ST positron emission tomography/computer tomography scanner. All simulations and reconstructions were performed in STIR. For OSEM, the authors used the clinical protocol of their scanner, namely, 21 subsets and two iterations. The authors also examined images at one, four, six, and ten iterations. For the simulation studies, the authors analyzed an image-quality phantom with cold and hot lesions. Two different versions of the phantom were employed at two different hot-sphere lesion-to-background ratios (LBRs), namely, 2:1 and 4:1. For each noiseless sinogram, 20 Poisson realizations were created at five different noise levels. In addition to making visual comparisons of the reconstructed images, the authors determined contrast and bias as a function of the background image roughness (IR). For the real-data studies, sinograms of an image-quality phantom simulating the human torso were employed. The authors determined contrast and LBR as a function of the background IR. Finally, the authors present plots of contrast as a function of IR after smoothing each reconstructed image with Gaussian filters of six different sizes. Statistical significance was determined by employing the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results: In both simulated and real studies, SRT exhibits higher contrast and lower bias than OSEM at the cold lesions. This improvement is achieved at the expense of increasing the noise in the reconstructed images. For the hot lesions, SRT exhibits a small improvement in contrast and LBR over OSEM with 21 subsets and two iterations; however, this improvement is not statistically significant. As the number of iterations increases, the performance of OSEM improves over SRT but again without statistical significance. The curves of contrast and LBR as a function of IR after Gaussian blurring indicate that the advantage of SRT in the cold regions is maintained even after decreasing the noise level by Gaussian blurring. Conclusions: SRT, at the expense of slightly increased noise in the reconstructed images, reconstructs images of higher contrast and lower bias than the clinical protocol of OSEM. This improvement is particularly evident for images involving cold regions. Thus, it appears that SRT should be particularly useful for the quantification of low-count and cold regions.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

Accuracy and calibration of integrated radiation output indicators in diagnostic radiology: A report of the AAPM Imaging Physics Committee Task Group 190

Due to the proliferation of disciplines employing fluoroscopy as their primary imaging tool and the prolonged extensive use of fluoroscopy in interventional and cardiovascular angiography procedures, “dose-area-product” (DAP) meters were installed to monitor and record the radiation dose delivered to patients. In some cases, the radiation dose or the output value is calculated, rather than measured, using the pertinent radiological parameters and geometrical information. The AAPM Task Group 190 (TG-190) was established to evaluate the accuracy of the DAP meter in 2008. Since then, the term “DAP-meter” has been revised to air kerma-area product (KAP) meter. The charge of TG 190 (Accuracy and Calibration of Integrated Radiation Output Indicators in Diagnostic Radiology) has also been realigned to investigate the “Accuracy and Calibration of Integrated Radiation Output Indicators” which is reflected in the title of the task group, to include situations where the KAP may be acquired with or without the presence of a physical “meter.” To accomplish this goal, validation test protocols were developed to compare the displayed radiation output value to an external measurement. These test protocols were applied to a number of clinical systems to collect information on the accuracy of dose display values in the field.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗