{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01945364238410596, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0074503311258278145, 'mean_word_length': 5.411140583554377, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, '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}}
Comparative study of layered and volumetric rescanning for different scanning speeds of proton beam in liver patients

In recent years, particle therapy has become a widely accepted form of cancer treatment and technological advances in beam delivery technology (i.e. pencil beam scanning (PBS)) have enabled the application of highly conformal dose distributions to static targets. Current research focuses on the possibilities for the treatment of mobile targets with these techniques. Of different motion mitigation methods being investigated, rescanning is perhaps the easiest to apply clinically. In general however, different PBS delivery systems exhibit a different temporal parameter space between delivery and target motions, due to the system specific beam position adjustment times (BPATs). Depending on these BPATs, dosimetric effects appearing during irradiation of moving targets vary significantly. In this work, volumetric and layered rescanning were compared for four different scenarios—a combination of fast and slow BPATs laterally (4 ms and 10 ms) and in depth (80 ms and 1 s); and nine different treatment plan arrangements for two clinical liver cases. 4D dose calculations were performed assuming regular, sinusoidal rigid motion as a worst-case motion scenario to model interplay effects. Calculations were sampled over three different starting phases resulting in a total of 432 dose distributions. It was found that layered rescanning is the method of choice for slow scanning systems, both in terms of dose homogeneity (D5–95 values are lower by up to 16% with layered rescanning) and in the estimated treatment delivery times (reduction of up to 300 s with layered rescanning). Analysis of dose homogeneity showed that layered rescanning leads to a smoother decrease in dose inhomogeneity as a function of the number of rescans than volumetric rescanning, which shows larger fluctuations. However, layered rescanning appears to be more sensitive to the starting phase. When analyzing the performance of both approaches and different scanning speeds as a function of delivery time, layered rescanning appears to be the only viable approach for slow energy changing systems, even approaching the performance of fast energy changing systems, as long as lateral scanning speeds are kept high. Similar results were found for multiple field plans and when analyzing different field directions.