The Experts below are selected from a list of 3468 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Ranald I Mackay - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • modelling the Throughput Capacity of a single accelerator multitreatment room proton therapy centre
    British Journal of Radiology, 2012
    Co-Authors: A H Aitkenhead, D Bugg, Carl G Rowbottom, E Smith, Ranald I Mackay
    Abstract:

    Objective We describe a model for evaluating the Throughput Capacity of a single-accelerator multitreatment room proton therapy centre with the aims of (1) providing quantitative estimates of the Throughput and waiting times and (2) providing insight into the sensitivity of the system to various physical parameters. Methods A Monte Carlo approach was used to compute various statistics about the modelled centre, including the Throughput Capacity, fraction times for different groups of patients and beam waiting times. A method of quantifying the saturation level is also demonstrated. Results Benchmarking against the MD Anderson Cancer Center showed good agreement between the modelled (140±4 fractions per day) and reported (133±35 fractions per day) Throughputs. A sensitivity analysis of that system studied the impact of beam switch time, the number of treatment rooms, patient set-up times and the potential benefit of having a second accelerator. Finally, scenarios relevant to a potential UK facility were st...

  • Modelling the Throughput Capacity of a single-accelerator multitreatment room proton therapy centre
    The British journal of radiology, 2012
    Co-Authors: A H Aitkenhead, D Bugg, Carl G Rowbottom, E Smith, Ranald I Mackay
    Abstract:

    We describe a model for evaluating the Throughput Capacity of a single-accelerator multitreatment room proton therapy centre with the aims of (1) providing quantitative estimates of the Throughput and waiting times and (2) providing insight into the sensitivity of the system to various physical parameters. A Monte Carlo approach was used to compute various statistics about the modelled centre, including the Throughput Capacity, fraction times for different groups of patients and beam waiting times. A method of quantifying the saturation level is also demonstrated. Benchmarking against the MD Anderson Cancer Center showed good agreement between the modelled (140 ± 4 fractions per day) and reported (133 ± 35 fractions per day) Throughputs. A sensitivity analysis of that system studied the impact of beam switch time, the number of treatment rooms, patient set-up times and the potential benefit of having a second accelerator. Finally, scenarios relevant to a potential UK facility were studied, finding that a centre with the same four-room, single-accelerator configuration as the MD Anderson Cancer Center but handling a more complex UK-type caseload would have a Throughput reduced by approximately 19%, but still be capable of treating in excess of 100 fractions per 16-h treatment day. The model provides a useful tool to aid in understanding the operating dynamics of a proton therapy facility, and for investigating potential scenarios for prospective centres. The model helps to identify which technical specifications should be targeted for future improvements.

Steven J. Frank - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • quantitative analysis of treatment process time and Throughput Capacity for spot scanning proton therapy
    Medical Physics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Kazumichi Suzuki, Matthew B. Palmer, Narayan Sahoo, Xiaodong Zhang, Falk Poenisch, Dennis Mackin, Steven J. Frank, Amy Y Liu, Ronald X Zhu, Michael Gillin
    Abstract:

    Purpose: To determine the patient Throughput and the overall efficiency of the spot scanning system by analyzing treatment time, equipment availability, and maximum daily Capacity for the current spot scanning port at Proton Therapy Center Houston and to assess the daily Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical spot scanning proton therapy center. Methods: At their proton therapy center, the authors have been recording in an electronic medical record system all treatment data, including disease site, number of fields, number of fractions, delivered dose, energy, range, number of spots, and number of layers for every treatment field. The authors analyzed delivery system downtimes that had been recorded for every equipment failure and associated incidents. These data were used to evaluate the patient census, patient distribution as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, and equipment clinical availability. The duration of each treatment session from patient walk-in to patient walk-out of the spot scanning treatment room was measured for 64 patients with head and neck, central nervous system, thoracic, and genitourinary cancers. The authors retrieved data for total target volume and the numbers of layers and spots for all fields from treatment plans for a total of 271 patients (including the above 64 patients). A sensitivity analysis of daily Throughput Capacity was performed by varying seven parameters in a Throughput Capacity model. Results: The mean monthly equipment clinical availability for the spot scanning port in April 2012–March 2015 was 98.5%. Approximately 1500 patients had received spot scanning proton therapy as of March 2015. The major disease sites treated in September 2012–August 2014 were the genitourinary system (34%), head and neck (30%), central nervous system (21%), and thorax (14%), with other sites accounting for the remaining 1%. Spot scanning beam delivery time increased with total target volume and accounted for approximately 30%–40% of total treatment time for the total target volumes exceeding 200 cm3, which was the case for more than 80% of the patients in this study. When total treatment time was modeled as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, the model overestimated total treatment time by 12% on average, with a standard deviation of 32%. A sensitivity analysis of Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical four-room spot scanning proton therapy center identified several priority items for improvements in Throughput Capacity, including operation time, beam delivery time, and patient immobilization and setup time. Conclusions: The spot scanning port at our proton therapy center has operated at a high performance level and has been used to treat a large number of complex cases. Further improvements in efficiency may be feasible in the areas of facility operation, beam delivery, patient immobilization and setup, and optimization of treatment scheduling.

  • Quantitative analysis of treatment process time and Throughput Capacity for spot scanning proton therapy.
    Medical physics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Kazumichi Suzuki, Matthew B. Palmer, Narayan Sahoo, Xiaodong Zhang, Falk Poenisch, Dennis Mackin, Amy Liu, X. Ronald Zhu, Steven J. Frank
    Abstract:

    To determine the patient Throughput and the overall efficiency of the spot scanning system by analyzing treatment time, equipment availability, and maximum daily Capacity for the current spot scanning port at Proton Therapy Center Houston and to assess the daily Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical spot scanning proton therapy center. At their proton therapy center, the authors have been recording in an electronic medical record system all treatment data, including disease site, number of fields, number of fractions, delivered dose, energy, range, number of spots, and number of layers for every treatment field. The authors analyzed delivery system downtimes that had been recorded for every equipment failure and associated incidents. These data were used to evaluate the patient census, patient distribution as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, and equipment clinical availability. The duration of each treatment session from patient walk-in to patient walk-out of the spot scanning treatment room was measured for 64 patients with head and neck, central nervous system, thoracic, and genitourinary cancers. The authors retrieved data for total target volume and the numbers of layers and spots for all fields from treatment plans for a total of 271 patients (including the above 64 patients). A sensitivity analysis of daily Throughput Capacity was performed by varying seven parameters in a Throughput Capacity model. The mean monthly equipment clinical availability for the spot scanning port in April 2012-March 2015 was 98.5%. Approximately 1500 patients had received spot scanning proton therapy as of March 2015. The major disease sites treated in September 2012-August 2014 were the genitourinary system (34%), head and neck (30%), central nervous system (21%), and thorax (14%), with other sites accounting for the remaining 1%. Spot scanning beam delivery time increased with total target volume and accounted for approximately 30%-40% of total treatment time for the total target volumes exceeding 200 cm(3), which was the case for more than 80% of the patients in this study. When total treatment time was modeled as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, the model overestimated total treatment time by 12% on average, with a standard deviation of 32%. A sensitivity analysis of Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical four-room spot scanning proton therapy center identified several priority items for improvements in Throughput Capacity, including operation time, beam delivery time, and patient immobilization and setup time. The spot scanning port at our proton therapy center has operated at a high performance level and has been used to treat a large number of complex cases. Further improvements in efficiency may be feasible in the areas of facility operation, beam delivery, patient immobilization and setup, and optimization of treatment scheduling.

Kazumichi Suzuki - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • quantitative analysis of treatment process time and Throughput Capacity for spot scanning proton therapy
    Medical Physics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Kazumichi Suzuki, Matthew B. Palmer, Narayan Sahoo, Xiaodong Zhang, Falk Poenisch, Dennis Mackin, Steven J. Frank, Amy Y Liu, Ronald X Zhu, Michael Gillin
    Abstract:

    Purpose: To determine the patient Throughput and the overall efficiency of the spot scanning system by analyzing treatment time, equipment availability, and maximum daily Capacity for the current spot scanning port at Proton Therapy Center Houston and to assess the daily Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical spot scanning proton therapy center. Methods: At their proton therapy center, the authors have been recording in an electronic medical record system all treatment data, including disease site, number of fields, number of fractions, delivered dose, energy, range, number of spots, and number of layers for every treatment field. The authors analyzed delivery system downtimes that had been recorded for every equipment failure and associated incidents. These data were used to evaluate the patient census, patient distribution as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, and equipment clinical availability. The duration of each treatment session from patient walk-in to patient walk-out of the spot scanning treatment room was measured for 64 patients with head and neck, central nervous system, thoracic, and genitourinary cancers. The authors retrieved data for total target volume and the numbers of layers and spots for all fields from treatment plans for a total of 271 patients (including the above 64 patients). A sensitivity analysis of daily Throughput Capacity was performed by varying seven parameters in a Throughput Capacity model. Results: The mean monthly equipment clinical availability for the spot scanning port in April 2012–March 2015 was 98.5%. Approximately 1500 patients had received spot scanning proton therapy as of March 2015. The major disease sites treated in September 2012–August 2014 were the genitourinary system (34%), head and neck (30%), central nervous system (21%), and thorax (14%), with other sites accounting for the remaining 1%. Spot scanning beam delivery time increased with total target volume and accounted for approximately 30%–40% of total treatment time for the total target volumes exceeding 200 cm3, which was the case for more than 80% of the patients in this study. When total treatment time was modeled as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, the model overestimated total treatment time by 12% on average, with a standard deviation of 32%. A sensitivity analysis of Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical four-room spot scanning proton therapy center identified several priority items for improvements in Throughput Capacity, including operation time, beam delivery time, and patient immobilization and setup time. Conclusions: The spot scanning port at our proton therapy center has operated at a high performance level and has been used to treat a large number of complex cases. Further improvements in efficiency may be feasible in the areas of facility operation, beam delivery, patient immobilization and setup, and optimization of treatment scheduling.

  • Quantitative analysis of treatment process time and Throughput Capacity for spot scanning proton therapy.
    Medical physics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Kazumichi Suzuki, Matthew B. Palmer, Narayan Sahoo, Xiaodong Zhang, Falk Poenisch, Dennis Mackin, Amy Liu, X. Ronald Zhu, Steven J. Frank
    Abstract:

    To determine the patient Throughput and the overall efficiency of the spot scanning system by analyzing treatment time, equipment availability, and maximum daily Capacity for the current spot scanning port at Proton Therapy Center Houston and to assess the daily Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical spot scanning proton therapy center. At their proton therapy center, the authors have been recording in an electronic medical record system all treatment data, including disease site, number of fields, number of fractions, delivered dose, energy, range, number of spots, and number of layers for every treatment field. The authors analyzed delivery system downtimes that had been recorded for every equipment failure and associated incidents. These data were used to evaluate the patient census, patient distribution as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, and equipment clinical availability. The duration of each treatment session from patient walk-in to patient walk-out of the spot scanning treatment room was measured for 64 patients with head and neck, central nervous system, thoracic, and genitourinary cancers. The authors retrieved data for total target volume and the numbers of layers and spots for all fields from treatment plans for a total of 271 patients (including the above 64 patients). A sensitivity analysis of daily Throughput Capacity was performed by varying seven parameters in a Throughput Capacity model. The mean monthly equipment clinical availability for the spot scanning port in April 2012-March 2015 was 98.5%. Approximately 1500 patients had received spot scanning proton therapy as of March 2015. The major disease sites treated in September 2012-August 2014 were the genitourinary system (34%), head and neck (30%), central nervous system (21%), and thorax (14%), with other sites accounting for the remaining 1%. Spot scanning beam delivery time increased with total target volume and accounted for approximately 30%-40% of total treatment time for the total target volumes exceeding 200 cm(3), which was the case for more than 80% of the patients in this study. When total treatment time was modeled as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, the model overestimated total treatment time by 12% on average, with a standard deviation of 32%. A sensitivity analysis of Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical four-room spot scanning proton therapy center identified several priority items for improvements in Throughput Capacity, including operation time, beam delivery time, and patient immobilization and setup time. The spot scanning port at our proton therapy center has operated at a high performance level and has been used to treat a large number of complex cases. Further improvements in efficiency may be feasible in the areas of facility operation, beam delivery, patient immobilization and setup, and optimization of treatment scheduling.

A H Aitkenhead - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • modelling the Throughput Capacity of a single accelerator multitreatment room proton therapy centre
    British Journal of Radiology, 2012
    Co-Authors: A H Aitkenhead, D Bugg, Carl G Rowbottom, E Smith, Ranald I Mackay
    Abstract:

    Objective We describe a model for evaluating the Throughput Capacity of a single-accelerator multitreatment room proton therapy centre with the aims of (1) providing quantitative estimates of the Throughput and waiting times and (2) providing insight into the sensitivity of the system to various physical parameters. Methods A Monte Carlo approach was used to compute various statistics about the modelled centre, including the Throughput Capacity, fraction times for different groups of patients and beam waiting times. A method of quantifying the saturation level is also demonstrated. Results Benchmarking against the MD Anderson Cancer Center showed good agreement between the modelled (140±4 fractions per day) and reported (133±35 fractions per day) Throughputs. A sensitivity analysis of that system studied the impact of beam switch time, the number of treatment rooms, patient set-up times and the potential benefit of having a second accelerator. Finally, scenarios relevant to a potential UK facility were st...

  • Modelling the Throughput Capacity of a single-accelerator multitreatment room proton therapy centre
    The British journal of radiology, 2012
    Co-Authors: A H Aitkenhead, D Bugg, Carl G Rowbottom, E Smith, Ranald I Mackay
    Abstract:

    We describe a model for evaluating the Throughput Capacity of a single-accelerator multitreatment room proton therapy centre with the aims of (1) providing quantitative estimates of the Throughput and waiting times and (2) providing insight into the sensitivity of the system to various physical parameters. A Monte Carlo approach was used to compute various statistics about the modelled centre, including the Throughput Capacity, fraction times for different groups of patients and beam waiting times. A method of quantifying the saturation level is also demonstrated. Benchmarking against the MD Anderson Cancer Center showed good agreement between the modelled (140 ± 4 fractions per day) and reported (133 ± 35 fractions per day) Throughputs. A sensitivity analysis of that system studied the impact of beam switch time, the number of treatment rooms, patient set-up times and the potential benefit of having a second accelerator. Finally, scenarios relevant to a potential UK facility were studied, finding that a centre with the same four-room, single-accelerator configuration as the MD Anderson Cancer Center but handling a more complex UK-type caseload would have a Throughput reduced by approximately 19%, but still be capable of treating in excess of 100 fractions per 16-h treatment day. The model provides a useful tool to aid in understanding the operating dynamics of a proton therapy facility, and for investigating potential scenarios for prospective centres. The model helps to identify which technical specifications should be targeted for future improvements.

Michael Gillin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • quantitative analysis of treatment process time and Throughput Capacity for spot scanning proton therapy
    Medical Physics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Kazumichi Suzuki, Matthew B. Palmer, Narayan Sahoo, Xiaodong Zhang, Falk Poenisch, Dennis Mackin, Steven J. Frank, Amy Y Liu, Ronald X Zhu, Michael Gillin
    Abstract:

    Purpose: To determine the patient Throughput and the overall efficiency of the spot scanning system by analyzing treatment time, equipment availability, and maximum daily Capacity for the current spot scanning port at Proton Therapy Center Houston and to assess the daily Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical spot scanning proton therapy center. Methods: At their proton therapy center, the authors have been recording in an electronic medical record system all treatment data, including disease site, number of fields, number of fractions, delivered dose, energy, range, number of spots, and number of layers for every treatment field. The authors analyzed delivery system downtimes that had been recorded for every equipment failure and associated incidents. These data were used to evaluate the patient census, patient distribution as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, and equipment clinical availability. The duration of each treatment session from patient walk-in to patient walk-out of the spot scanning treatment room was measured for 64 patients with head and neck, central nervous system, thoracic, and genitourinary cancers. The authors retrieved data for total target volume and the numbers of layers and spots for all fields from treatment plans for a total of 271 patients (including the above 64 patients). A sensitivity analysis of daily Throughput Capacity was performed by varying seven parameters in a Throughput Capacity model. Results: The mean monthly equipment clinical availability for the spot scanning port in April 2012–March 2015 was 98.5%. Approximately 1500 patients had received spot scanning proton therapy as of March 2015. The major disease sites treated in September 2012–August 2014 were the genitourinary system (34%), head and neck (30%), central nervous system (21%), and thorax (14%), with other sites accounting for the remaining 1%. Spot scanning beam delivery time increased with total target volume and accounted for approximately 30%–40% of total treatment time for the total target volumes exceeding 200 cm3, which was the case for more than 80% of the patients in this study. When total treatment time was modeled as a function of the number of fields and total target volume, the model overestimated total treatment time by 12% on average, with a standard deviation of 32%. A sensitivity analysis of Throughput Capacity for a hypothetical four-room spot scanning proton therapy center identified several priority items for improvements in Throughput Capacity, including operation time, beam delivery time, and patient immobilization and setup time. Conclusions: The spot scanning port at our proton therapy center has operated at a high performance level and has been used to treat a large number of complex cases. Further improvements in efficiency may be feasible in the areas of facility operation, beam delivery, patient immobilization and setup, and optimization of treatment scheduling.