Researcher profile

Philip E. Schaner

Philip E. Schaner contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 11 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
1works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Treatment Planning System for Electron FLASH Radiotherapy: Open-source for Clinical Implementation

Purpose: A Monte Carlo (MC) beam model and its implementation in a clinical treatment planning system (TPS, Varian Eclipse) are presented for a modified ultra-high dose-rate electron FLASH radiotherapy (eFLASH-RT) LINAC. Methods: The gantry head without scattering foils or targets, representative of the LINAC modifications, was modelled in Geant4. The energy spectrum (σE) and beam source emittance cone angle (θcone) were varied to match the calculated and Gafchromic film measured central-axis percent depth dose (PDD) and lateral profiles. Its Eclipse configuration was validated with measured profiles of the open field and nominal fields for clinical applicators. eFLASH-RT plans were MC forward calculated in Geant4 for a mouse brain treatment and compared to a conventional (Conv-RT) plan in Eclipse for a human patient with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Results: The beam model and its Eclipse configuration agreed best with measurements at σE=0.5 MeV and θcone=3.9+/-0.2 degrees to clinically acceptable accuracy (the absolute average error was within 1.5% for in-water lateral, 3% for in-air lateral, and 2% for PDD). The forward dose calculation showed dose was delivered to the entire mouse brain with adequate conformality. The human patient case demonstrated the planning capability with routine accessories in relatively complex geometry to achieve an acceptable plan (90% of the tumor volume receiving 95% and 90% of the prescribed dose for eFLASH and Conv-RT, respectively). Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first functional beam model commissioned in a clinical TPS for eFLASH-RT, enabling planning and evaluation with minimal deviation from Conv-RT workflow. It facilitates the clinical translation as eFLASH-RT and Conv-RT plan quality were comparable for a human patient. The methods can be expanded to model other eFLASH irradiators.