Proton beam range verification using proton activated fiducials and off-site PET AAPM Best in Physics, Indianapolis, August 7, 2013 Cho J1, Ibbott G1,

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Harvard Medical School Massachusetts General Hospital.

Advertisements

Results/Discussion cont’d. Excluding data past the depth of 10% dose, 91% of points passed. A trend towards over-response was noted in the BANG3-Pro2 dosimeter.

Implementing Technology to Improve Medication Safety and Efficiency in the Pharmacy Kelley Reece, Pharm.D. Assistant Manager MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Orthogonal and Least-Squares Based Coordinate Transforms for Optical Alignment Verification in Radiosurgery Ernesto Gomez PhD, Yasha Karant PhD, Veysi.

Ionization Chamber Array for External Beam Radiotherapy

Alexander Klyachko, IU Cyclotron, PTCOG51, Seoul, South Korea, May 17-19, 2012 A.V. Klyachko 1, D.F. Nichiporov 1, L. Coutinho 2, C.-W. Cheng 2, 3, M.

Algorithms used in heterogeneous dose calculations show systematic error as measured with the Radiological Physics Center’s anthropomorphic thorax phantom.

University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL

Interactions of charged particles with the patient I.The depth-dose distribution - How the Bragg Peak comes about - (Thomas Bortfeld) II.The lateral dose.

Design and Scheduling of Proton Therapy Treatment Centers Stuart Price, University of Maryland Bruce Golden, University of Maryland Edward Wasil, American.

Comparison of Rectal Dose Volume Histograms for Definitive Prostate Radiotherapy Among Stereotactic Radiotherapy, IMRT, and 3D-CRT Techniques Author(s):

Étienne Létourneau, Fabiola Vallejo Castaneda, Nancy El Bared, Danny Duplan, Martin Hinse Presented by: Étienne Létourneau 2015 Joint Congress, Montreal,

Proton Therapy for Chondrosarcomas of the Skull Base and Cervical Spine: Long-term Experience at Loma Linda University Medical Center D. Y. Kim 2, R. W.

Kerrington Smith, M.D. CTOS Nov 14, 2008

Evaluation of the Performance of the Fast Scanning Platform of an OCT System Malcolm Heard 1, Miguel Herrera 1, Geoffrey Ibbott 1 1 Department of Radiation.

Applications of Geant4 in Proton Radiotherapy at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Jerimy C. Polf Assistant Professor Department of Radiation.

Comparison of Clinical Parameters for Proton Therapy in the United States Paige Summers, MS.

Bragg Peak By: Megan Whitley. Bragg Peak  Bragg Peak is the characteristic exhibited by protons that makes them SO appealing for cancer treatment. 

ACRIN 6682 Phase II Trial of 64 Cu-ATSM PET/CT in Cervical Cancer Principal Investigator: Farrokh Dehdashti, MD 10/2/09.

ACRIN 6682 Phase II Trial of 64 Cu-ATSM PET/CT in Cervical Cancer Principal Investigator: Farrokh Dehdashti, MD 9/30/10.

ASNR 2012 Methodology for Imaging Genomics of Gliomas

Clinical variables, pathological factors, and molecular markers for enhanced soft tissue sarcoma prognostication G. Lahat, B. Wang, D. Tuvin, DA. Anaya,

1 A Comprehensive Study on the Heterogeneity Dose Calculation Accuracy in IMRT using an Anthropomorphic Thorax Phantom S Davidson 1, R Popple 2, G Ibbott.

Investigation of 3D Dosimetry for an Anthropomorphic Spine Phantom R. Grant 1,2, G. Ibbott 1, J. Yang 1, J. Adamovics 3, D Followill 1 (1)M.D. Anderson.

S Scarboro 1,2, D Cody 1,2, D Followill 1,2, P Alvarez 1, M McNitt-Gray 3, D Zhang 3, L Court 1,2, S Kry 1,2 * 1 UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,

Physics of carbon ions and principles of beam scanning G. Kraft Biophysik, GSI, Darmstadt, Germany PTCOG43 Educational Satellite Meeting: Principles of.

K. Pulliam, MS 1,2., D Followill, PhD 2., L Court, PhD 2., L Dong, PhD 3., M Gillin, PhD 2., K Prado, PhD 3., S Kry, PhD 2 1 The University of Texas Graduate.

Introduction The Radiological Physics Center (RPC) anthropomorphic quality assurance (QA) phantom program is one tool the RPC uses to remotely audit institutions.

ESTRO, Geneva 2003 The importance of nuclear interactions for dose calculations in proton therapy M.Soukup 1, M.Fippel 2, F. Nuesslin 2 1 Department of.

TLD POSTAL DOSE QUALITY AUDIT FOR 6MV AND 15MV PHOTON BEAMS IN RADIOTHERAPY CLINICAL PRACTICE Sonja Petkovska 1, Margarita Ginovska 2, Hristina Spasevska.

A Proton Therapy Overview Richard Eckart And David Turberville Richard Eckart And David Turberville.

The Optimization of Reconstruction Method Reducing Partial Volume Effect in PET/CT 3D Image Acquisition Department of Nuclear Medicine, Samsung Medical.

Clinical benefits: fixed beam line vs gantry? PD Dr. Alexandra Jensen, MSc mingham-Why-send-tourists-there.html.

A comparison between soft tissue and bone registration techniques for prostate radiotherapy Richard Small, Paul Bartley, Audrey Ogilvie, Nick West and.

Lung SBRT Implementation at the Regional Cancer Centre

5.5 Medical Applications Using Radioactivity

Characterization of proton-activated implantable markers for proton range verification using PET J. Cho1, G. Ibbott1, M. Kerr1, R. A. Amos2, F. Stingo1,

J Cho, G Ibbott, M Kerr, R Amos, and O Mawlawi

Methods & Materials (continued)

J Cho, G Ibbott, M Gillin, C Gonzalez-Lepera, U Titt and O Mawlawi

RHD-DoPET CNAO test beam result (may 2014)

Brief pain inventory. (Reproduced with permission from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Symptom Research, Houston, TX.

Verification for Ion Therapy

By: Matthew Kosch Advantages and Recent Implementation of Fiducials in Image-Guided Radiation Therapy.

Radiation therapy for Early Stage Prostate Cancer

Quantitative Nuclear Medicine Imaging

Proton range verification with PET: 68Zn, Cu and polycarbonate activation SNMMI Young Investigator Symposium, Vancouver, June 9, 2013 Cho J1, Ibbott.

Very High Energy Electron for Radiotherapy Studies

Therapy-Resistant Cancer Stem Cells Have Differing Sensitivity to Photon versus Proton Beam Radiation Xiaochun Zhang, MD, Steven H. Lin, MD, PhD, Bingliang.

Evaluation Of RTOG Guidelines For Monte Carlo Based Lung SBRT Planning

Left Posterior Superior Right Anterior Inferior

Comparison of carina- versus bony anatomy-based registration for setup verification in esophageal cancer image-guided radiotherapy Melanie Machiels* 1,

The Role of Cyberknife Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in the Treatment of Localized and Advanced Prostate Cancer David M. Spellberg M.D., FACS Naples.

Orthogonal and Least-Squares Based Coordinate Transforms for Optical Alignment Verification in Radiosurgery Ernesto Gomez PhD, Yasha Karant PhD, Veysi.

M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Houston, TX

AAPM Annual Meeting, Anaheim, California July 13, 2015

Reducing Treatment Time and MUs by using Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy for SBRT Breath-Hold Patients Timothy Miller, Sebastian Nunez Albermann, Besil Raju,

PET-utilized proton range verification using 13N signals

OPTICAL MONITORING OF PHOTOSENSITIZER DIFFUSION INTO TISSUE

Feasibility of using O-18 for PET proton range verification

Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) versus Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) for Anal Carcinoma Heather Ortega, BSRT(T), CMD, Kerry Hibbitts,

Therapy-Resistant Cancer Stem Cells Have Differing Sensitivity to Photon versus Proton Beam Radiation Xiaochun Zhang, MD, Steven H. Lin, MD, PhD, Bingliang.

Stability of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fiducial marker placement for esophageal cancer target delineation and image-guided radiation therapy Daniel.

Figure 2 Variations between planned and delivered doses of radiation

Images in Emergency Medicine

Improving Image Accuracy of ROI in CT Using Prior Image

Evaluation of Average CT to reduce the artifact in PET/CT

William Hartsell, M.D. Medical Director

Particle Therapy Cooperative Group North America Annual Conference

Average Dose-Volume Ratio

Presentation transcript:

Proton beam range verification using proton activated fiducials and off-site PET AAPM Best in Physics, Indianapolis, August 7, 2013 Cho J1, Ibbott G1, Gillin M1, Gonzalez-Lepera C2, Titt U1, and Mawlawi O3. Departments of 1 Radiation Physics, 2 Nuclear Medicine and 3 Imaging Physics University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX PET imaging for proton therapy verification. Please interrupt me anytime for questions.

Outline Background Purpose Measurements Future application Use of PET for proton range verification and its limitations Purpose Proton activated fiducial markers for range verification Measurements Activation comparison of 68Zn, Cu, and tissue- substitute materials Future application

Proton range uncertainty

Proton range verification by imaging tissue activation Dose Proton Tissue activation Limitations No or weak PET signal at the end of proton range PET Min et al, IJROBP 2013 PET Activity washout Short half-lives → Requires in-beam or on-site PET (additional cost !) Parodi et al, NIH public access 2007

Purpose: 68Zn and 63Cu as implantable markers Overcome limitations by High PET signal at the end of proton range Activated marker No activity washout Not activated marker Relatively long half-lives → Off-site PET utilized (already available !)

68Zn and Cu(70% 63Cu) activation (no background) 30 min PET scan after 50 min delay 12.5 Gy

68Zn and Cu activation (with background) 30 min PET scan after 48 min delay Signal reduced

68Zn and Cu activation in soft-tissue phantom 126 min delay, 30 min PET scan

68Zn and Cu activation in soft-tissue phantom Proton Range ??? Proton Range YES!

Limitation Point verification vs. Volume verification Invasive Fiducial migration Sensitivity (signal vs. fiducial volume) PET

Conclusion 68Zn / Cu foils were activated much stronger and at deeper depths than PC. 68Zn / Cu foils’ activation were stronger than background activation from balsa wood and meat phantom. 68Zn / Cu may be feasible as implantable fiducial markers for proton range verification.

Future application as a fiducial replacement Proton activated fiducial Non-activated fiducial

Thank you. Acknowledgement Reinhard Schulte at Loma Linda University Medical Center. Pablo Yepes at Rice University. Wen Hsi at ProCure Treatment Center. Francesco Stingo Lawrence Bronk Bryan Steward Kevin Casey Kevin Vredevoogd Richard Amos Matthew Kerr at UT MD Anderson Cancer Center.

68Zn and Cu activation with depth 12.5 Gy 50 min delay, 150 min PET scan

Sensitivity of 68Zn and Cu for different volumes

Purpose: 68Zn and 63Cu as implantable markers Overcome limitations by High PET signal at the end of proton range Activated marker No activity washout Not activated marker Relatively long half-lives → Off-site PET utilized (already available !)