PURPOSE: Ion beam radiotherapy offers enhances dose conformity to the tumor volume while better sparing healthy tissue compared to conventional photon radiotherapy. However, the increased dose gradient also makes it more sensitive to uncertainties. While the most important uncertainty source is the patient itself, the beam delivery is also subject to uncertainties. Most of the proton therapy centers used cyclotrons, which deliver typically a stable beam over time, allowing a continuous extraction of the beam. Carbon-ion beam radiotherapy (CIRT) in contrast uses synchrotrons and requires a larger and energy-dependent extrapolation of the nozzle-measured positions to obtain the lateral beam positions in the isocenter, since the nozzle-to-isocenter distance is larger than for cyclotrons. Hence, the control of lateral pencil beam positions at isocenter in CIRT is more sensitive to uncertainties than in proton radiotherapy. Therefore, an independent monitoring of the actual lateral positions close to the isocenter would be very valuable and provide additional information. However, techniques capable to do so are scarce, and they are limited in precision, accuracy and effectivity. METHODS: The detection of secondary ions (charged nuclear fragments) has previously been exploited for the Bragg peak position of C-ion beams. In our previous work, we investigated for the first time the feasibility of lateral position monitoring of pencil beams in CIRT. However, the reported precision and accuracy were not sufficient for a potential implementation into clinical practice. In this work, it is shown how the performance of the method is improved to the point of clinical relevance. To minimize the observed uncertainties, a mini-tracker based on hybrid silicon pixel detectors was repositioned downstream of an anthropomorphic head phantom. However, the secondary-ion fluence rate in the mini-tracker rises up to 1.5 × 105 ions/s/cm2 , causing strong pile-up of secondary-ion signals. To solve this problem, we performed hardware changes, optimized the detector settings, adjusted the setup geometry and developed new algorithms to resolve ambiguities in the track reconstruction. The performance of the method was studied on two treatment plans delivered with a realistic dose of 3 Gy (RBE) and averaged dose rate of 0.27 Gy/s at the Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT) in Germany. The measured lateral positions were compared to reference beam positions obtained either from the beam nozzle or from a multi-wire proportional chamber positioned at the room isocenter. RESULTS: The presented method is capable to simultaneously monitor both lateral pencil beam coordinates over the entire tumor volume during the treatment delivery, using only a 2-cm2 mini-tracker. The effectivity (defined as the fraction of analyzed pencil beams) was 100%. The reached precision of (0.6 to 1.5) mm and accuracy of (0.5 to 1.2) mm are in line with the clinically accepted uncertainty for QA measurements of the lateral pencil beam positions. CONCLUSIONS: It was demonstrated that the performance of the method for a non-invasive lateral position monitoring of pencil beams is sufficient for a potential clinical implementation. The next step is to evaluate the method clinically in a group of patients in a future observational clinical study.

Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology German Cancer Research Center Heidelberg 69120 Germany

Department of Radiation Oncology Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg 69120 Germany

Department of Research and Development ADVACAM s r o Prague 17000 Czech Republic

Faculty of Physics and Astronomy Heidelberg University Heidelberg 69120 Germany

Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology Heidelberg 69120 Germany

Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center Heidelberg 69120 Germany

Medical Faculty Heidelberg University Heidelberg 69120 Germany

See more in PubMed

Schulz-Ertner D, Tsujii H. Particle radiation therapy using proton and heavier ion beams. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:953-964.

Schardt D, Elsässer T, Schulz-Ertner D. Heavy-ion tumor therapy: physical and radiobiological benefits. Rev Mod Phys. 2010;82:383-425.

Pompos A, Durante M, Choy H. Heavy ions in cancer therapy. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2:1539.

Weber U, Kraft G. Comparison of carbon ions versus protons. Cancer J. 2009;15:325-332.

Uhl M, Herfarth K, Debus J. Comparing the use of protons and carbon ions for treatment. Cancer J. 2014;20:433-439.

Glowa C, Karger CP, Brons S, et al. Carbon ion radiotherapy decreases the impact of tumor heterogeneity on radiation response in experimental prostate tumors. Cancer Lett. 2016;378:97-103.

Hild S, Durante M, Bert C. Assessment of uncertainties in treatment planning for scanned ion beam therapy of moving tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;85:528-535.

Toramatsu C, Inaniwa T. Beam angle selection incorporation of anatomical heterogeneities for pencil beam scanning charged-particle therapy. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61:8664-8675.

Rizzoglio V, Adelmann A, Gerbershagen A, et al. Uncertainty quantification analysis and optimization for proton therapy beam lines. Physica Medica. 2020;75:11-18.

PTCOG, Facilities in operation. 2021. https://www.ptcog.ch/index.php/facilities-in-operation.

Haberer T, Becher W, Schardt D, Kraft G. Magnetic scanning system for heavy ion therapy. Nucl Instrum Meth Phys Res A. 1993;330:296-305.

Belosi MF, van der Meer R, de Acilu G, Laa P, et al. Treatment log files as a tool to identify treatment plan sensitivity to inaccuracies in scanned proton beam delivery. Radiother Oncol. 2017;125:514-519.

Gillin MT, Sahoo N, Bues M, et al. Commissioning of the discrete spot scanning proton beam delivery system at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Proton Therapy Center, Houston. Med Phys. 2010;37:154-163.

Langner UW, Eley JG, Dong L, Langen K. Comparison of multi-institutional Varian ProBeam pencil beam scanning proton beam commissioning data. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017;18:96-107.

Yasui K, Toshito T, Omachi C, et al. Evaluation of dosimetric advantages of using patient-specific aperture system with intensity-modulated proton therapy for the shallow depth tumor. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018;19:132-137.

Grevillot L, Osorio Moreno J, Letellier V, et al. Clinical implementation and commissioning of the MedAustron Particle Therapy Accelerator for non-isocentric scanned proton beam treatments. Med Phys. 2020;47:380-392.

Tessonnier T, Marcelos T, Mairani A, et al. Phase space generation for proton and carbon ion beams for external users’ applications at the Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center. Front Oncol. 2016;5.

Jelen U, Bubula ME, Ammazzalorso F, et al. Dosimetric impact of reduced nozzle-to-isocenter distance in intensity-modulated proton therapy of intracranial tumors in combined proton-carbon fixed-nozzle treatment facilities. Radiat Oncol. 2013;8:218.

Piersimoni P, Rimoldi A, Riccardi C, et al. Optimization of a general-purpose, actively scanned proton beamline for ocular treatments: Geant4 simulations. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015;16:261-278.

Iwata Y, Fujimoto T, Matsuba S, et al. Beam commissioning of a superconducting rotating-gantry for carbon-ion radiotherapy. Nucl Instrum Meth Phys Res A. 2016;834:71-80.

Varasteh Anvar M, Attili A, Ciocca M, et al. Quality assurance of carbon ion and proton beams: a feasibility study for using the 2D MatriXX detector. Physica Medica. 2016;32:831-837.

Russo S, Mirandola A, Molinelli S, et al. Characterization of a commercial scintillation detector for 2-D dosimetry in scanned proton and carbon ion beams. Physica Medica. 2017;34:48-54.

Martišíková M, Hartmann B, Hesse B, et al. Characterization of a flat-panel detector for ion beam spot measurements. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57:485-497.

Devic S, Seuntjens J, Sham E, et al. Precise radiochromic film dosimetry using a flat-bed document scanner. Med Phys. 2005;32:2245-2253.

Martišíková M, Jäkel O. Study of Gafchromic® EBT film response over a large dose range. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:N281-N290.

Félix-Bautista R, Gehrke T, Ghesquière-Diérickx L, et al. Experimental verification of a non-invasive method to monitor the lateral pencil beam position in an anthropomorphic phantom for carbon-ion radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 2019;64:175019.

Gwosch K, Hartmann B, Jakubek J, et al. Non-invasive monitoring of therapeutic carbon ion beams in a homogeneous phantom by tracking of secondary ions. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58:3755-3773.

Piersanti L, Bellini F, Bini F, et al. Measurement of charged particle yields from PMMA irradiated by a 220 MeV/u12Cbeam. Phys Med Biol. 2014;59:1857-1872.

Rucinski A, Battistoni G, Collamati F, et al. Secondary radiation measurements for particle therapy applications: charged particles produced by4He and12C ion beams in a PMMA target at large angle. Phys Med Biol. 2018;63:055018.

Hofmann T, Pinto M, Mohammadi A, et al. Dose reconstruction from PET images in carbon ion therapy: a deconvolution approach. Phys Med Biol. 2019;64:025011.

Rutherford H, Chacon A, Mohammadi A, et al. Dose quantification in carbon ion therapy using in-beam positron emission tomography. Phys Med Biol. 2020;65:235052.

Mattei I, Bini F, Collamati F, et al. Secondary radiation measurements for particle therapy applications: prompt photons produced by 4He, 12C and 16O ion beams in a PMMA target. Phys Med Biol. 2017;62:1438-1455.

Dal Bello R, Magalhaes Martins P, Brons S, et al. Prompt gamma spectroscopy for absolute range verification of 12C ions at synchrotron-based facilities. Phys Med Biol. 2020;65:095010.

Richter C, Pausch G, Barczyk S, et al. First clinical application of a prompt gamma based in vivo proton range verification system. Radiother Oncol. 2016;118:232-237.

Ferrero V, Fiorina E, Morrocchi M, et al. Online proton therapy monitoring: clinical test of a Silicon-photodetector-based in-beam PET. Sci Rep. 2018;8:1-8.

Combs S, Jäkel O, Haberer T, Debus J. Particle therapy at the Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT) - Integrated research-driven university-hospital-based radiation oncology service in Heidelberg, Germany. Radiother Oncol. 2010;95:41-44.

Haberer T, Debus J, Eickhoff H, et al. The heidelberg ion therapy center. Radiother Oncol. 2004;73:S186-S190.

Alderson SW, Lanzl LH, Rollins M, Spira J. An instrumented phantom system for analog computation of treatment plans. Am J Roentgenol Rad Ther Nucl Med. 1962;87:185-195.

Mein S, Klein C, Kopp B, et al. Assessment of RBE-weighted dose models for carbon ion therapy toward modernization of clinical practice at HIT. In vitro, in vivo, and in patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020;108:779-791.

Poikela T, Plosila J, Westerlund T, et al. Timepix3: a 65K channel hybrid pixel readout chip with simultaneous ToA/ToT and sparse readout. J Instrum. 2014;9:C05013.

Soukup P, Jakubek J, Vykydal Z. 3D sensitive voxel detector of ionizing radiation based on Timepix device. J Instrum. 2011;6:C01060.

Gehrke T, Amato C, Berke S, Martišíková M. Theoretical and experimental comparison of proton and helium-beam radiography using silicon pixel detectors. Phys Med Biol. 2018;63:035037.

Marek L. Directional and spectrometric mapping of secondary radiation induced during hadron radiotherapy with miniaturized particle trackers. Diploma thesis, Prague, Czech Republic: Czech Technical University; 2020.

Jäkel O, Krämer M, Schulz-Ertner D, et al. Treatment planning for carbon ion radiotherapy in Germany: review of clinical trials and treatment planning studies. Radiother Oncol. 2004;73:S86-S91.

Experimental validation of a FLUKA Monte Carlo simulation for carbon-ion radiotherapy monitoring via secondary ion tracking