IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0288545.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of robust radiobiological optimization algorithms based on the mixed beam model for intensity-modulated carbon-ion therapy

Author

Listed:
  • Masashi Yagi
  • Toshiro Tsubouchi
  • Noriaki Hamatani
  • Masaaki Takashina
  • Naoto Saruwatari
  • Kazumasa Minami
  • Yushi Wakisaka
  • Shinichiro Fujitaka
  • Shusuke Hirayama
  • Hideaki Nihongi
  • Azusa Hasegawa
  • Masahiko Koizumi
  • Shinichi Shimizu
  • Kazuhiko Ogawa
  • Tatsuaki Kanai

Abstract

Currently, treatment planning systems (TPSs) that can compute the intensities of intensity-modulated carbon-ion therapy (IMCT) using scanned carbon-ion beams are limited. In the present study, the computational efficacy of the newly designed IMCT algorithms was analyzed for the first time based on the mixed beam model with respect to the physical and biological doses; moreover, the validity and effectiveness of the robust radiobiological optimization were verified. A dose calculation engine was independently generated to validate a clinical dose determined in the TPS. A biological assay was performed using the HSGc-C5 cell line to validate the calculated surviving fraction (SF). Both spot control (SC) and voxel-wise worst-case scenario (WC) algorithms were employed for robust radiobiological optimization followed by their application in a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group benchmark phantom under homogeneous and heterogeneous conditions and a clinical case for range and position errors. Importantly, for the first time, both SC and WC algorithms were implemented in the integrated TPS platform that can compute the intensities of IMCT using scanned carbon-ion beams for robust radiobiological optimization. For assessing the robustness, the difference between the maximum and minimum values of a dose–volume histogram index in the examined error scenarios was considered as a robustness index. The relative biological effectiveness (RBE) determined by the independent dose calculation engine exhibited a −0.6% difference compared with the RBE defined by the TPS at the isocenter, whereas the measured and the calculated SF were similar. Regardless of the objects, compared with the conventional IMCT, the robust radiobiological optimization enhanced the sensitivity of the examined error scenarios by up to 19% for the robustness index. The computational efficacy of the novel IMCT algorithms was verified according to the mixed beam model with respect to the physical and biological doses. The robust radiobiological optimizations lowered the impact of range and position uncertainties considerably in the examined scenarios. The robustness of the WC algorithm was more enhanced compared with that of the SC algorithm. Nevertheless, the SC algorithm can be used as an alternative to the WC IMCT algorithm with respect to the computational cost.

Suggested Citation

  • Masashi Yagi & Toshiro Tsubouchi & Noriaki Hamatani & Masaaki Takashina & Naoto Saruwatari & Kazumasa Minami & Yushi Wakisaka & Shinichiro Fujitaka & Shusuke Hirayama & Hideaki Nihongi & Azusa Hasegaw, 2023. "Validation of robust radiobiological optimization algorithms based on the mixed beam model for intensity-modulated carbon-ion therapy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-25, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0288545
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288545
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0288545
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0288545&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0288545?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0288545. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.