Inter-center comparison of proton range verification prototypes with an anthropomorphic head phantom

<i>Objective</i>. To compare in reproducible and equalized conditions the performance of two independent proton range verification systems based on prompt gamma-ray detectors from two different proton therapy centers.<i>Approach</i>. An anthropomorphic head phantom with calibrated stopping power, serving as ground truth, was irradiated with comparable treatment plans, spot positions and energies in both facilities. Clinical beam current, tumor contour and dose were used. The absolute range measurement was compared to the expected value according to the ground truth. The statistical precision was assessed by repeating each measurement ten times. Sensitivity to relative range shifts was evaluated by introducing 2 mm and 5 mm plastic slabs on half of the field.<i>Main results</i>. The resulting absolute range accuracy was within 2.4 mm in all cases. Relative range shifts were detected with deviations lower than 14%.<i>Significance</i>. The performance of both systems was deemed worthy of clinical application for the detection of range deviations. This study represents the first comparison of independent prompt gamma-ray-based proton range verification systems under equalized conditions with realistic treatment fields and beam currents.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Physics in Medicine and Biology
Published
2024-11-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ad8856
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.09

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Inter-center comparison of proton range verification prototypes with an anthropomorphic head phantom

Thomas Bortfeld, Melek Zarifi, Chirasak Khamfongkhruea, F. Hueso-González et al.
5 citations
Physics in Medicine and Biology
Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry
2.09
article

Inter-center comparison of proton range verification prototypes with an anthropomorphic head phantom

Thomas Bortfeld, Melek Zarifi, Chirasak Khamfongkhruea, F. Hueso-González, Christian Richter, Patrick Wohlfahrt, Jonathan Berthold, Sebastian Tattenberg, Joost Verburg
article en
5 citations

Abstract

<i>Objective</i>. To compare in reproducible and equalized conditions the performance of two independent proton range verification systems based on prompt gamma-ray detectors from two different proton therapy centers.<i>Approach</i>. An anthropomorphic head phantom with calibrated stopping power, serving as ground truth, was irradiated with comparable treatment plans, spot positions and energies in both facilities. Clinical beam current, tumor contour and dose were used. The absolute range measurement was compared to the expected value according to the ground truth. The statistical precision was assessed by repeating each measurement ten times. Sensitivity to relative range shifts was evaluated by introducing 2 mm and 5 mm plastic slabs on half of the field.<i>Main results</i>. The resulting absolute range accuracy was within 2.4 mm in all cases. Relative range shifts were detected with deviations lower than 14%.<i>Significance</i>. The performance of both systems was deemed worthy of clinical application for the detection of range deviations. This study represents the first comparison of independent prompt gamma-ray-based proton range verification systems under equalized conditions with realistic treatment fields and beam currents.

Physics in Medicine and BiologyVol. 69(22)
Harvard University (US), German Cancer Research Center (DE), University of Wollongong (AU), Heidelberg University (DE), Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (DE), Massachusetts General Hospital (US), Chulabhorn Hospital (TH), OncoRay (DE), University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus (DE)
Conselleria d'Educació, Investigació, Cultura i Esport
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry
2.09
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.