Welcome to our symposium - IBA Worldwide · 2016-12-06 · Sofie Gillis, Clinical Solutions...

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

1

Welcome to

our

symposium

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

2

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

3

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wThe Best in Proton Therapy Today and Tomorrow

Advanced PBS Quality AssuranceSimon Marcelis

Product Manager for Particle Therapy SolutionsIBA Dosimetry

4

Building the future of proton therapy

Sofie Gillis, Clinical Solutions Director

Damien Prieels, Research Director

IBA Proton Therapy

1

2

3

Treatment of Moving Targets with PBSVladimir Vondracek

Chief Medical Physicist, Proton Therapy Center Czech

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

PTCOG - Prague - 2016

Simon Marcelis

Product Manager Particle Therapy

IBA Dosimetry

Advanced PBS QA:Towards More Efficiency and Accuracy

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wDisclaimer

This presentation may contain forward-looking statementsconcerning industry outlook, including growth driver; thecompany’s future orders, revenues, backlog, or earnings growth;future financial results; market acceptance of or transition to newproducts or technology and any statements using the terms“could”, “believe”, “outlook”, or similar statements are forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties that couldcause the company’s actual results to differ materially from thoseanticipated. The company assumes no obligation to update orrevise the forward-looking statements in this release because ofnew information, future events, or otherwise.

6

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wIntroduction

How can we improve your QA ?

Methodology

Acquire statistics on current practices

Analyze frequencies, devices, tolerances, etc.

Involve clinical partners in early stage of the project

Fast release process

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wCurrent Practices

Extensive analysis of QA common practices

PT Site DS US PBS Frequence Test Tolerance Device Comment

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Dose Rate ± 30 % PPC05 + WP One field per option

Site A ✔ Yearly Field Size > 30×40 Film Largest Field Size > 30×40

Site B ✔ Monthly Test Pattern γ 2%/2mm 98% Lynx160MeV 5cm solid water, 226.7MeV

5cm solid water

Site A ✔ Monthly Spot Sigma < 10% or 0.5 mm Lynx< 10% or 0.5 mm, whichever is

smaller

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Modulation ± 3mm or ± 3% PPC05 + WP

Site A ✔ Daily Spot Sigma ± 20% I'mRT MatriXX + Buildup CPASS ± 10 %

Site F ✔ Daily Spot Sigma ± 10% Daily QA 3 4 spots (220 MeV), Field size diodes

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Snout Motion ≤ 5 mm Ruler

Site C ✔ ✔ Monthly Modulation± 3.0 mm or ± 3

%PPC05 + WP 2 ref field + 1 other field (rotation)

Site C ✔ ✔ Weekly Modulation± 3.0 mm or ± 3

%Zebra 2 ref field + 1 other field (rotation)

Site A ✔ Daily Modulation ± 3 mm I'mRT MatriXX + Buildup CPASS ± 2 mm

Site A ✔ Daily Flatness ± 3 % I'mRT MatriXX + Buildup CPASS ± 2 %

Site A ✔ Daily Symmetry ± 3 % I'mRT MatriXX + Buildup CPASS ± 2 %

Site D ✔ Daily Symmertry ± 3 % Daily QA 3 2 electron energy chambers @ mid-

Site A ✔ Daily Range ± 3 mm I'mRT MatriXX + Buildup • Distal, Proximal, Middle

• CPASS ± 2 mm

Site C ✔ ✔ Daily Output ± 3% Daily QA 3 + Buildup

Site D ✔ Daily Output ± 3 % Daily QA 3 + Buildup SOBP Mid

Site B ✔ Daily Output ± 2% MatriXX

Site C ✔ ✔ Monthly Symmetry ± 2 % MatriXX 2 ref field, 1 GTR angle

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Symmetry ± 2% MatriXX + Buildup Mid SOBP, one field per option

Site A ✔ DailyPPS Absolute

Position± 2 mm I'mRT MatriXX + Buildup

Goto Setup ⇒ X-ray ⇒ CV ⇒ Goto

Correction

Site A ✔ Monthly Snout Position ± 2 mm 2 Snouts

Site F ✔ Daily Output ± 2 % Daily QA 3 + Buildup 3cmx3cm, 159MeV, 1g/cm² buildup

Site B ✔ Monthly Snout ± 2 mm Ruler

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Output ± 2 % PPC05 + WP One field per option

Site E ✔ Monthly Symmetry 0.02 MatriXX 1 angle, 8 energies, 3 sizes

Site C ✔ ✔ Weekly First Scatterer ± 2 mm Range Verifier Compare range ‘all in’ to ‘all out’

Site D ✔ Daily Lasers ± 2 mm .

Site A ✔ Monthly Test Pattern γ 1.5% 1.5mm Lynx G 1.5%/1.5mm for 95% of the points

Site C ✔ ✔ Monthly Range ± 1.5 mm PPC05 + WP 2 ref field + 1 other field (rotation)

Site C ✔ ✔ Monthly X-ray vs Proton ± 1.5 mm FilmDouble‐exposure x‐ray and proton

on film

Site A ✔ Daily Lasers ± 1.5 mm I'mRT MatriXX + Buildup

Site C ✔ ✔ Weekly X-ray vs LF ± 1.5 mm Crosshair + Aperture Different Snout sizes (rotation)

Site C ✔ ✔ Weekly X-ray vs Proton ± 1.5 mm Crosshair + Aperture Different Snout sizes (rotation)

Site C ✔ ✔ Monthly Alignment ± 1.5 mm Plastic box with bb’sSet up phantom at setup angle, go

to tx angle, verify

Site A ✔ Monthly PPS Isocentricity ± 1.5 mm

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Range ± 1.5 mm PPC05 + WP

Site F ✔ Daily Spot Position ± 1.5 mm Daily QA 3 • 4 spots (220 MeV)

• Field size diodes

Site A ✔ Monthly PPS Translation ± 1.5 mm

Site C ✔ ✔ Daily Range ± 1.5 mm Range Verifier

Site C ✔ ✔ Daily X-ray vs PPS ± 1.5 mm Daily QA 3 + index bar Drive PPS to predefined position

Site C ✔ ✔ Weekly PPS Isocentricity ± 1.5 mm Iso-AlignAlign target at rot 0, rotate to 90 and

check

Site C ✔ ✔ Weekly Range ± 1 mm Zebra 2 ref field + 1 other field (rotation)

Site G ✔ Daily X-ray vs Proton ± 1 mm . MatriXX align with X-rays

Site E ✔ Monthly PPS Translation 1 mm . Markings on PPS mount

Site E ✔ Monthly PPS Isocentricity 1 mm LF + Crosshair + Laser LF projection crosshair & pointer

Site E ✔ Monthly PPS Isocentricity 1 mm LF + Crosshair LF projection of crosshair

Site B ✔ Monthly PPS Translation ± 1 mm

Site E ✔ Monthly Snout Motion 1 mm LF + Crosshair LF projection of crosshair

Site C ✔ ✔ Daily Lasers ± 1 mm Markers on Daily QA 3

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Lasers ± 1 mm Iso-Align Iso-Align aligned with X-rays

Site B ✔ Daily Spot Position ± 1 mm MatriXX

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly X-ray vs Proton ± 1 mm Film • All snouts (4)

• 3 gantry angles per snout

Site D ✔ Daily Range ± 1 mm Daily QA 3 + Buildup SOBP Distal

Site D ✔ Daily X-ray vs PPS ± 1 mm .“4 metal bb’s in Daily QA 3 holder +

index to couch”

Site F ✔ Daily Range ± 1 mm Daily QA 3

“electron energy chambers, 187

MeV and 201 MeV, Different

buildup (entrance&distal fall‐off)”

Site D ✔ Daily Couch Motion ± 1 mm .

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Output ± 1 % Farmer Chamber + WP IAEA TRS 398 protocol

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly LF vs X-ray ± 1 mm Film

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Output vs Dose ± 1 % Farmer Chamber + WP 1 – 3 Gy/min

Site G ✔ Daily Range ± 1 mm MatriXX + Buildup SOBP Distal (cube)

Site A ✔ Monthly Spot Position ± 1 mm Lynx

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly PPS Movement ± 0.5 mm Ruler

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly PPS Isocentricity ≤0.5 mm Plastic Sphere • Plastic sphere and X‐ray system

• Rot center to iso: ≤0.5 mm

• Radius rot. center: ≤0.5 mm

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly GTR Angle ± 0.5 ° Digital Level .

Site C ✔ ✔ YearlySymmetry

vs GTR Angle± 0.5 % MatriXX + Buildup Cardinal angles plus one inbetween

Site C ✔ ✔ YearlyFlatness

vs GTR Angle± 0.5 % MatriXX + Buildup Cardinal angles plus one inbetween

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Output ± 0.5 % PPC05 + WP

Site I ✔ Weekly Spot Sigma . Custom (Pyramid) 2 PX-2 + BC-100 + Motion Rail

Site B ✔ Monthly X-ray vs Proton Lynx

Site I ✔ Weekly Spot Direction . Custom (Pyramid) 2 PX-2 + BC-100 + Motion Rail

Site I ✔ Weekly Spot Shape . Custom (Pyramid) 2 PX-2 + BC-100 + Motion Rail

Site I ✔ Weekly Spot Position . Custom (Pyramid) 2 PX-2 + BC-100 + Motion Rail

Site C ✔ ✔ YearlySnout Motion

(perp. axis)≤0.5 mm X-ray

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Dose Linearity ±0.5 MU, ± 0.2 % Farmer Chamber + WP • Offset: ±0.5 MU

Site I ✔ Weekly Output . Custom (Pyramid) 2 PX-2 + BC-100 + Motion Rail

• Max diff from linear fit: ±0.2%, MU:

25, 50, 100,150, 200

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly GTR Isocentricity 0.5 mm Plastic Sphere • Plastic sphere and x‐ray system

• Radius cross plane: ≤0.5 mm.

• Variation inline: ±0.5mm

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly PPS Rotation ± 0.2 ° Level

Site B ✔ Monthly PPS Rotation ± 0.2° Level

Site H ✔ Daily Spot Sigma . Gafchromic Films

Site H ✔ Daily Spot Position . Gafchromic Films

Site F ✔ Daily X-ray vs PPS . Daily QA 3 + index bar

Site H ✔ Daily Range . Gafchromic Films Gafchromic set parallel to beam

Site A ✔ Yearly Test Pattern . Lynx 226 MeV, 146 MeV and 116 MeV

Site A ✔ Yearly Spots . Lynx 18 Energies, Iso ±10cm and ±20cm

Site A ✔ Yearly Spots Size . Lynx 18 Energies, Iso ±10cm and ±20cm

Site A ✔ Yearly SAD . Lynx Compared to TPS

Site A ✔ Yearly PDD Consistency . ZebraPDD curves compared with those

from TPS

Site A ✔ Yearly Range . Zebra 10×10 field, 18 energies

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly SOBP Flatness . PPC05 + WP

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly X-ray Quality . Leeds Phantom

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly X-ray Dose . kVp&mAs meter

Site G ✔ Daily Field Size . MatriXX .

Site B ✔ Monthly Symmetry MatriXX

Site B ✔ Monthly Flatness MatriXX

Site A ✔ Yearly Dose Linearity . MatriXX

Five scanned mono-energy 20cm x

20cm field were measured with

MatriXX at 5 cm depth

Site A ✔ Daily Output ± 3 % I'mRT MatriXX + Buildup Mid SOBP. CPASS ± 2 %

Site C ✔ ✔ Monthly Profile Flatness ± 3 % MatriXX 2 ref field, 1 GTR angle

Site B ✔ Monthly Range ZebraR20M10, R31M10, R12M10, R12M10

(with Range Shifter)

Site A ✔ Monthly Uniformity ± 3 % Lynx

Site G ✔ Daily Output ± 3 % MatriXX + Buildup Average of four central chambers

Site C ✔ ✔ Yearly Profile Flatness ± 3% MatriXX + Buildup Mid SOBP, one field per option

Site A ✔ Daily Spot Position ± 3 mm MatriXX + Buildup CPASS ± 2 mm

Site C ✔ ✔ Weekly Output ± 2.5 % Zebra 2 ref field + 1 other field (rotation)

Site C ✔ ✔ Monthly Output ± 2.5 % PPC05 + WP 2 ref field + 1 other field (rotation)

Site B ✔ Monthly Output ± 2% MatriXX• R20M10, R31M10, R12M10, R12M10

(with Range Shifter)

Site B ✔ Daily Flatness ± 2% MatriXX

Site E ✔ Monthly Profile Flatness 0.02 MatriXX 1 angle, 8 energies, 3 sizes

Site B ✔ Daily Range ± 2 mm MatriXX

Site E ✔ MonthlyOutpus

vs GTR Angle0.02 Farmer Chamber • 4 angles, 8 energies, 3 sizes

Site A ✔ MonthlySpot Position

(max)± 2 mm Lynx

Site A ✔ Monthly Output ± 2 % PPC05

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w3h

16h

Duration and Frequencies Analysis (PBS)

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

QA Test Min Max Average

Daily 20 min 60 min ≈ 30 min

Monthly 2 hours 6 hours ≈ 3 hours

Yearly 1 day 3 days ≈ 2 days

1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

Yearly Working Days

Yearly

Daily

Mo

nth

ly

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w3h

16h


3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h

3h





1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

Yearly Working Days

Yearly

Daily

Mo

nth

ly

Total Daily QA • 125 h (≈ 16 days)

Total Monthly QA • 36 h

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

≈ 16 days






Yearly Working Days

1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

16h

Total Monthly QA • 36 h

Total Daily QA • 125 h (≈ 16 days)

Yearly

Daily

Mo

nth

ly

≈ 5 days

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wDEVICES

SUMMARYEnergy

Spots

Positions

Spots

Sizes

Spots

SymmetryOutput

Imaging

System

Beam vs

X-ray

Zebraor equivalent

Lynxor films

MatriXXor equivalent

PPC05+ solid water

Stingray+ water phantom

…

TODAY’S CURRENT PRACTICES: OR+ +

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

MatriXX: 32x32 (1 020) pixels

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wDEVICES

SUMMARYEnergy

Spots

Position

Spots

Size

Spots

SymmetryOutput

Imaging

System

Beam vs

X-ray

Zebraor equivalent

Lynxor films


PPC05+ solid water


…

TODAY’S CURRENT PRACTICES: OR+ +

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wDEVICES

SUMMARYEnergy

Spots

Position

Spots

Size

Spots

SymmetryOutput

Imaging

System

Beam vs

X-ray

Zebraor equivalent

Lynxor films


PPC05+ solid water


…

YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN QUALITY AND TIME

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wDEVICES

SUMMARYEnergy

Spots

Position

Spots

Size

Spots

SymmetryOutput

Imaging

System

Beam vs

X-ray

Zebraor equivalent

Lynxor films


PPC05+ solid water


…

OBJECTIVE 2 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wSUMMARY

OBJECTIVE 1:

REDUCE PBS DAILY QA BY 20 MIN/DAY (TARGET=10MIN)

OBJECTIVE 3:

… KEEPING CLOSE COLLABORATIONS WITH CLINICAL INSTITUTIONS

OBJECTIVE 2:

… WHILE MAINTAINING IMPROVING QUALITY

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

IN COLLABORATION WITH:

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

COMPLETE DAILY QA IN ONE SHOT Energy

Spots Size

Spots Position

Spots Symmetry

Absolute dose

X-ray vs Proton

Lasers

Uniformity

Imaging system

Couch translation

…

+ AAPM TG Compliant

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wBenchmarking: Cloud*

* Not released yet

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wWhat’s next ?

Apply similar process for:

Monthly Machine QA

Yearly Machine QA

Patient QA

Automation

Integration

Efficiency

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

Simon Marcelis

Product Manager Particle Therapy

IBA Dosimetry

Thank you!

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

IN COLLABORATION WITH:

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wAAPM TG-224 in preparation

Source:AAPM 2015

Poster SU-E-T 649

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

One shot

Sw

Validated by partners

Come at booth

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wFig 4

Energy

Measurement

Gray

B&W

Color

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wLynx vs. MatriXX Resolution

600x600 (Lynx) 32x32 (MatriXX)

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wLynx vs. MatriXX Resolution – PBS Spots

MatriXXLynx

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wLynx vs. MatriXX Resolution – Gaussian Fit

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wLynx vs MatriXX for PBS QA

MatriXX Lynx

EnergyYES (2 per image, ≈1mm

resolution)YES (4 per image, ≈0.4mm

resolution)

Spot Position and Sigma will be smoothed

Spot symmerty will be smoothed

Penumbra will be smoothed

Xray / Proton coincidence NO YES

Homogeneity/Flatness will be smoothed YES

Output YES NO (Sphinx PPC05)

Measurement surface 24x24 cm² 30x30 cm²

Pixel Size 7.6mm x 7.6 mm 0.5mm x 0.5mm

Pixel # 32x32 = 1024 600x600 = 360,000

Price same

Compact YES NO

Weight same (≈11kg)

MatriXX

Lynx

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wHandle with Care

• 50+ Lynx

• Use extensively during IBA PT calibration

• Never one Lynx was dropped (or if dropped, it did

not get damaged)

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

Lynx: 600x600 (360 000) pixels

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro




37




IBA Proton Therapy

1

2

3



The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

38

Vladimir Vondracek

Head of Medical Physics PTC Prague

[email protected]

Treatment of Moving Targets with PBS – Experience of PTC Czech

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wProton Therapy Center Prague

Cyclotron IBA Proteus 235

Four treatment rooms in operation in Pencil Beam Scanning

Possibility of 4D CT scanning

Treatment planning system XiO 4.80 (Elekta)

Gating devices via UBTI Position verification by Vision RT system

SDX Dyn´R system39

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wInterplay effect

With PBS dose is delivered spot by spot

delivery has time structure

Intrafractional movements Periodic – time structure

Irregular

Delivery of one layer has approx. same duration as periodic physiological movements (breathing, heart beat)

Interplay effect may cause unwanted under- or overdosage

40

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wHow to avoid interplay effect

Repainting Prolongation of layer delivery leads to

smearing of dose distribution – physiological movements are faster than dose delivery

For movements that cannot be handled other way like heart beating

Gating Treatment only in situation when target is in

the right position

Handling of breathing Treatment during free breathing

Deep inspiration breath hold

41

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wDyn´R strategy

Check if patient is eligible for this approach Overall patient status

Position of target volume

Testing phase of patient compliance Patient is breathing through spirometer

Patient is equipped with video glasses with breathing pattern visualisation

Deep inspiration breath hold level is defined

CT scan is done with breath hold according to previous coaching

Irradiation is performed only when correct breathing phase is reached Beam triggering interface is switched on

When optimal position is left, beam is automatically switched off

42

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wExperience

Diagnoses treated with this approach Lymphomas in thoracic area (combined sometimes with repainting)

See posters PTC16-0047 and PTC16-0409

Approx. 50 patients treated

Lung tumors Approx. 20 patients treated

Breast cancer patients (combined with Align RT) Started this year

More complex

Approx. 10 patients treated

Treatment duration Usual time for one breath hold – 20 seconds

Number of breath holds for one field – approx. 3 (with TCS rel. 8)

43

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wWorkflow

44

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wProblems to face

Patient status getting worse in course of treatment – patient is no longer able to hold the breath

Location of the tumor in lower mediastinum Less reproducible position - interfractional changes

Breathing can change from thorasic to abdominal

Change of diaphragm position and thus change of target volume position

Deployment of 4D CT and creation of

More robust plan – more beams to smear interplay effect

ITV concept – larger target volume

Expected higher doses to OARs

Positioning of equipment – not to interfere with treatment beam direction

45

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

46

Vladimir Vondracek

Head of Medical Physics PTC Prague

[email protected]

Thank you

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro




47




IBA Proton Therapy

1

2

3



The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

Building the future of Proton Therapy

48

Sofie Gillis & Damien Prieels

Clinical Solution & Research

IBA

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wDisclaimer

This presentation may contain forward-looking statementsconcerning industry outlook, including growth driver; thecompany’s future orders, revenues, backlog, or earnings growth;future financial results; market acceptance of or transition to newproducts or technology and any statements using the terms“could”, “believe”, “outlook”, or similar statements are forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties that couldcause the company’s actual results to differ materially from thoseanticipated. The company assumes no obligation to update orrevise the forward-looking statements in this release because ofnew information, future events, or otherwise.

49

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Current standard (IMRT

photons)Protons

Probability (%)

Complications Local tumour control

Proton Therapy has the potential to

50

Improvement

of local tumor

control

Prevention of

complications

Photons

Improve Local

Control

Reduce Normal

Tissue

Complications

Decrease integral

dose (secondary

cancer)

Retreatment

Graph Courtesy of Johannes A. Langendijk

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

Clinically relevant innovation

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

52

Approach

Product evolution to maximize the Bragg peak advantages

IMPTImaging

solutions

Intra-

fraction

motion

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wIMPT for highly conformal dose distributions

53

54.0Gy(RBE)

0.0Gy(RBE)

14.4Gy(RBE)

2.0Gy(RBE)

Courtesy of

Pineal blastoma Rhabdosarcoma Boost

IBA rooms worldwide

treating with IMPT32

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wImaging without compromise

54

In-room CT

for

Adaptive treatment

CBCT

for

soft tissue visualisation

kV – imaging

for

Bony alignment

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wImaging without compromise - kV

55

Bony anatomy alignment as

base for any protocol

Straightforward

Fast

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wImaging without compromise - CBCT

56In collaboration with &

procedures in WKHS

since 2015+1000Alignment and follow-up of morphology

changes: among others H&N + Lung

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wImaging without compromise - In-room CT

57In collaboration with

Follow-up dose accumulation

and clinical monitoring since

2016

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wComplete toolset for motion management

58

Fast and complete

repainting capabilityGating interface

High speed irradiation

for breath-hold

techniques

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

59

Approach

IMPTImaging

solutions

Intra-

fraction

motion

Improving

targeting

TOMORROW

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

Intensity

correction

virtual CT

UPenn is using IBA’s CBCT for adaptive therapy

60

planning CTCBCT (180°)

deformed CT

DIR

repeated CT

Overranges

(beam-eye

view)

DoseP

AR

TN

ER

S

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

61

Decision to re-plan is based on multiple indicators

Patient-specific

indicators definition

PA

RT

NE

RS

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

62


Patient-specific


Indicators

computation

PA

RT

NE

RS

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

63


PA

RT

NE

RS

Patient-specific


Indicators

computation

Automatic reporting

for physicist review

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

64


* Veiga et al., “First clinical investigation of CBCT and deformable registration for adaptive proton therapy of lung cancer”,

International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 2016 + Poster #347 PTCOG 2016.

Patient-specific


Indicators

computation

Automatic reporting

for physicist reviewAutomatic reporting

for physician review

Evaluation completed on 20 lung patients*

CBCT & repeated CT provide equivalent triggers for re-planning*

PA

RT

NE

RS

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wCould Proton Radiography help reducing margins?

Each pixel =

Integral Depth Dose65

Range mixing effect

= information !

Error computation by comparison with simulations (TPS)

PA

RT

NE

RS

1 2

3

1

2

3

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wCT calibration improvement with Proton Radiography

66

Error map:

-2

0

2

mm

Anatomy modification Weight gain/loss

Tumor shrinkage

Cavity filling

Setup error during PR Alignment never perfect

CT calibration error Bad HU to RSP conversion

Implants

Confounding

factors

What we’re

Looking for

CT of the same day

PR-CT registration

0

1

2

3

4

5

-1000 1000 3000 5000

A B C

HU

mass d

en

sit

y

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

mm

A

B

C

Titanium implant

P. Farace et al 2016,

PMB 61, p 4078

Poster #192,

PTCOG 2016

PA

RT

NE

RS

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wPrompt Gamma Imaging allows real-time QA

67

PA

RT

NE

RS

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro


68

PA

RT

NE

RS

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro


69

PA

RT

NE

RS

110 MeV – 14.4 cm - 2e8 simulated protons (31cGy at peak)

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

wPrompt Gamma Camera prototype were delivered to two key partners: Oncoray & UPENN

70

PA

RT

NE

RS

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w1st Patient acquisition by Oncoray on August 17th, 2015

71

PA

RT

NE

RS

“Inter-fractional global range variations were in the range of ±2 mm for all evaluated fractions.” Richter et al. 2016.

Radiother. Oncol. 118(2):232

“In-vivo proton range verification is feasible using a 1D prompt gamma camera with a 2 mm range retrieval precision.” Xie

et al. 2016. ePoster AAPM 2016 (Washington)

M. Priegnitz, Poster #309

L. Nenoff, Poster #320

Next generation

Petzoldt et al., “Range verification under clinical conditions based on the Prompt Gamma timing method”, Oral presentation

72 PTCOG 2016.

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

72

Perfecting cancer care with our users

IMPTImaging

solutions

Intra-

fraction

motion

Improving

targeting

TOMORROW

The B

est in

Pro

ton T

hera

py T

oday a

nd T

om

orro

w

73

Sofie Gillis & Damien Prieels

Clinical Solution & Research

IBA

Thank you

Welcome to our symposium - IBA Worldwide · 2016-12-06 · Sofie Gillis, Clinical Solutions...

Documents

Transcript of Welcome to our symposium - IBA Worldwide · 2016-12-06 · Sofie Gillis, Clinical Solutions...