{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.035677352637021716, 'fraction_numerical': 0.021199586349534644, 'mean_word_length': 4.674486803519062, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
SU-E-T-73: Commissioning of a Treatment Planning System for Proton Spot Scanning.

PURPOSE
A treatment planning system (TPS) was commissioned for clinical use with a fixed beam line proton delivery system. An outline of the data collection, modeling, and verification is provided.


METHODS
Beam data modeling for proton spot scanning in CMS Xio TPS requires the following measurements: (i) integral depth dose curves (IDDCs); (ii) absolute dose calibration; and (iii) beam spot characteristics. The IDDCs for 18 proton energies were measured using an integrating detector in a single spot field in a water phantom. Absolute scaling of the IDDCs were performed based on ion chamber measurements in mono-energetic 10×10 cm2 fields in water. Beam spot shapes were measured in air using a flat panel scintillator detector at multiple planes. For beam model verification, more than 45 uniform dose phantom and patient plans were generated. These plans were used to measure range, point dose, and longitudinal and lateral profiles. Tolerances employed for verification are: point dose and longitudinal profiles, ±2%; range, ±1 mm; FWHM for lateral profiles, ±2 mm; and patient plan dose distribution, gamma index of >90% at 3%/3 mm criteria.


RESULTS
More than 97% of the point dose measurements out of 115 were within +/-2% with maximum deviation of 3%. 98% of the ranges measured were within 1 mm with maximum deviation of 1.4mm. The normalized depth doses were within 2% at all depths. The maximum error in FWHM of lateral profiles was found to be less than 2mm. For 5 patient plans representing different anatomic sites, a total of 38 planes for 12 beams were analyzed for gamma index with average value of 99% and minimum of 94%.


CONCLUSIONS
The planning system is successfully commissioned and can be safely deployed for clinical use. Measurements of IDDCs on user beam are highly recommended instead of using standard beam IDDCs.