An anthropomorphic spine phantom for proton beam approval in NCI-funded trials

Abstract

As part of the approval process for the use of scattered or uniform scanning proton therapy in National Cancer Institute (NCI)-sponsored clinical trials, the Radiological Physics Center (RPC) mandates irradiation of two RPC anthropomorphic proton phantoms (prostate and spine). The RPC evaluates these irradiations to ensure that they agree with the institutions' treatment plans within criteria of the NCI-funded cooperative study groups. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of an anthropomorphic spine phantom for proton matched-field irradiation, and to assess its use as a credentialing tool for proton therapy beams. We used an anthropomorphic spine phantom made of human vertebral bodies embedded in a tissue substitute material called Muscle Substitute/Solid Rigid Number 4 (MS/SR4) comprising three sections: a posterior section containing the posterior surface and the spinous processes, and left and right (L/R) sections containing the vertebral bodies and the transverse processes. After feasibility studies at three institutions, the phantom, containing two thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) for absolute dose measurements and two sheets of radiochromic film for relative dosimetry, was shipped consecutively to eight proton therapy centers participating in the approval study. At each center, the phantom was placed in a supine or prone position (according to the institution's spine treatment protocol) and imaged with computed tomography (CT). The images then were used with the institution's treatment planning system (TPS) to generate two matched fields, and the phantom was irradiated accordingly. The irradiated phantom was shipped to the RPC for analysis, and the measured values were compared with the institution's TPS dose and profiles using criteria of ± 7% for dose agreement and 5 mm for profile distance to agreement. All proton centers passed the dose criterion with a mean agreement of 3% (maximum observed agreement, 7%). One center failed the profile distance-to-agreement criterion on its initial irradiation, but its second irradiation passed the criterion. Another center failed the profile distance-to-agreement criterion, but no repeat irradiation was performed. Thus, seven of the eight institutions passed the film profile distance-to-agreement criterion with a mean agreement of 1.2 mm (maximum observed agreement 5 mm). We conclude that an anthropomorphic spine phantom using TLD and radiochromic film adequately verified dose delivery and field placement for matched-field treatments.

Figure 1

Anthropomorphic spine phantom evaluated for use in the Radiological Physics Center's proton approval process for National Cancer Institute‐funded clinical trials: (a) left section of the phantom; (b) right section of the phantom; (c) the combined L/R section of the phantom (bottom) and the posterior section of the phantom (top); (d) configuration of the posterior section combined with the combined L/R section. When the posterior section is collapsed, the phantom is completely combined.

Figure 2

Feasibility study treatment setups. According to the formula of similar triangles, 1 mm uncertainty in gap causes 13.5 mm uncertainty in field match depth (diagram not to scale).

Figure 3

Feasibility study — sagittal plane: (a) proton isodose distribution in the sagittal plane from the treatment planning system (TPS) calculation overlaid on the computed tomography (CT) image; (b) sagittal film‐measured isodose distribution overlaid on the CT image where the two red lines represent the two locations where superior/inferior (S/I) profiles were obtained; (c) dose profile comparison between the TPS calculation and the film measurement across the S/I profile (left red line) at a depth of 2.7 cm; (d) comparison at a depth of 4 cm (right red line).

Figure 4

Feasibility study — coronal plane: (a) proton isodose distribution from the TPS calculation in the coronal plane overlaid on the CT image; (b) coronal film‐measured isodose distribution overlaid on the CT image in which the blue line represents the location where the S/I profile was obtained; (c) proton dose profile comparison between the TPS calculation and the film measurement across the S/I profile (blue line).

Figure 5

Approval study — sagittal plane: (a) TPS‐calculated proton isodose distribution in the sagittal plane overlaid on the CT image; (b) the sagittal film‐measured isodose distribution overlaid on the CT image where the red lines indicate the region of the anterior/posterior (A/P) and two S/I profile measurements; (c) dose profile comparison between the TPS calculation and the sagittal film measurement in the S/I direction at a depth of 3.9 cm; (d) dose profile comparison between the TPS calculation and the film measurement in the S/I direction at a depth of 9.3 cm; (e) dose profile comparison between the TPS calculation and the film measurement in the A/P direction.

Figure 6

Approval study — coronal plane: (a) TPS‐calculated proton isodose distribution in the coronal plane overlaid on the CT image; (b) coronal film‐measured isodose distribution overlaid on the CT image with green lines indicating the region of the left/right (L/R) profile measurements for the superior and inferior fields; (c) proton dose profile comparison between the TPS calculation and the film measurement across the superior L/R green line; (d) proton dose profile comparison between the TPS calculation and the film measurement across the inferior L/R green line.