95
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Performance of dose calculation algorithms from three generations in lung SBRT: comparison with full Monte Carlo‐based dose distributions

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The accuracy of dose calculation is a key challenge in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of the lung. We have benchmarked three photon beam dose calculation algorithms — pencil beam convolution (PBC), anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), and Acuros XB (AXB) — implemented in a commercial treatment planning system (TPS), Varian Eclipse. Dose distributions from full Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were regarded as a reference. In the first stage, for four patients with central lung tumors, treatment plans using 3D conformal radiotherapy (CRT) technique applying 6 MV photon beams were made using the AXB algorithm, with planning criteria according to the Nordic SBRT study group. The plans were recalculated (with same number of monitor units (MUs) and identical field settings) using BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc MC codes. The MC‐calculated dose distributions were compared to corresponding AXB‐calculated dose distributions to assess the accuracy of the AXB algorithm, to which then other TPS algorithms were compared. In the second stage, treatment plans were made for ten patients with 3D CRT technique using both the PBC algorithm and the AAA. The plans were recalculated (with same number of MUs and identical field settings) with the AXB algorithm, then compared to original plans. Throughout the study, the comparisons were made as a function of the size of the planning target volume (PTV), using various dose‐volume histogram (DVH) and other parameters to quantitatively assess the plan quality. In the first stage also, 3D gamma analyses with threshold criteria 3 % / 3 mm and 2 % / 2 mm were applied. The AXB‐calculated dose distributions showed relatively high level of agreement in the light of 3D gamma analysis and DVH comparison against the full MC simulation, especially with large PTVs, but, with smaller PTVs, larger discrepancies were found. Gamma agreement index (GAI) values between 95.5% and 99.6% for all the plans with the threshold criteria 3 % / 3 mm were achieved, but 2 % / 2 mm threshold criteria showed larger discrepancies. The TPS algorithm comparison results showed large dose discrepancies in the PTV mean dose ( D 50 % ) , nearly 60%, for the PBC algorithm, and differences of nearly 20% for the AAA, occurring also in the small PTV size range. This work suggests the application of independent plan verification, when the AAA or the AXB algorithm are utilized in lung SBRT having PTVs smaller than 20‐25 cc. The calculated data from this study can be used in converting the SBRT protocols based on type ‘a’ and/or type ‘b’ algorithms for the most recent generation type ‘c’ algorithms, such as the AXB algorithm.

          PACS numbers: 87.55.‐x, 87.55.D‐, 87.55.K‐, 87.55.kd, 87.55.Qr

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119.

          AAPM Task Group 119 has produced quantitative confidence limits as baseline expectation values for IMRT commissioning. A set of test cases was developed to assess the overall accuracy of planning and delivery of IMRT treatments. Each test uses contours of targets and avoidance structures drawn within rectangular phantoms. These tests were planned, delivered, measured, and analyzed by nine facilities using a variety of IMRT planning and delivery systems. Each facility had passed the Radiological Physics Center credentialing tests for IMRT. The agreement between the planned and measured doses was determined using ion chamber dosimetry in high and low dose regions, film dosimetry on coronal planes in the phantom with all fields delivered, and planar dosimetry for each field measured perpendicular to the central axis. The planar dose distributions were assessed using gamma criteria of 3%/3 mm. The mean values and standard deviations were used to develop confidence limits for the test results using the concept confidence limit = /mean/ + 1.96sigma. Other facilities can use the test protocol and results as a basis for comparison to this group. Locally derived confidence limits that substantially exceed these baseline values may indicate the need for improved IMRT commissioning.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A conformation number to quantify the degree of conformality in brachytherapy and external beam irradiation: application to the prostate.

            This article presents a method of quantitative assessment of the degree of conformality and its designation by a single numerical value. A conformation number is introduced to evaluate objectively the degree of conformality. A comparison is made between the conformation number as found for external beam treatment plans and ultrasonically guided 125I seed implants for localized prostate cancer. The conformation number in case of a planning target volume irradiated with two opposed open beams, three open beams, and three beams with customized blocks amounted to 0.17, 0.39, and 0.65, respectively. The conformation number as found for ultrasonically guided permanent prostate implants using 125I seeds averaged 0.72. The conformation number is a convenient instrument for indicating the degree of conformality by a single numerical value. Treatments with a conformation number greater than 0.60 might be termed conformal radiotherapy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              CERR: a computational environment for radiotherapy research.

              A software environment is described, called the computational environment for radiotherapy research (CERR, pronounced "sir"). CERR partially addresses four broad needs in treatment planning research: (a) it provides a convenient and powerful software environment to develop and prototype treatment planning concepts, (b) it serves as a software integration environment to combine treatment planning software written in multiple languages (MATLAB, FORTRAN, C/C++, JAVA, etc.), together with treatment plan information (computed tomography scans, outlined structures, dose distributions, digital films, etc.), (c) it provides the ability to extract treatment plans from disparate planning systems using the widely available AAPM/RTOG archiving mechanism, and (d) it provides a convenient and powerful tool for sharing and reproducing treatment planning research results. The functional components currently being distributed, including source code, include: (1) an import program which converts the widely available AAPM/RTOG treatment planning format into a MATLAB cell-array data object, facilitating manipulation; (2) viewers which display axial, coronal, and sagittal computed tomography images, structure contours, digital films, and isodose lines or dose colorwash, (3) a suite of contouring tools to edit and/or create anatomical structures, (4) dose-volume and dose-surface histogram calculation and display tools, and (5) various predefined commands. CERR allows the user to retrieve any AAPM/RTOG key word information about the treatment plan archive. The code is relatively self-describing, because it relies on MATLAB structure field name definitions based on the AAPM/RTOG standard. New structure field names can be added dynamically or permanently. New components of arbitrary data type can be stored and accessed without disturbing system operation. CERR has been applied to aid research in dose-volume-outcome modeling, Monte Carlo dose calculation, and treatment planning optimization. In summary, CERR provides a powerful, convenient, and common framework which allows researchers to use common patient data sets, and compare and share research results.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                jarkko.ojala@pshp.fi
                Journal
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                10.1002/(ISSN)1526-9914
                ACM2
                Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1526-9914
                06 March 2014
                March 2014
                : 15
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1002/acm2.2014.15.issue-2 )
                : 4-18
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Oncology Unit of Radiotherapy, Tampere University Hospital Tampere Finland
                [ 2 ] Department of Medical Physics Medical Imaging Center, Tampere University Hospital Tampere Finland
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] a Corresponding author: Jarkko Ojala, Department of Oncology, Unit of Radiotherapy, Tampere University Hospital (TAUH), P.O. Box 2000, 33521 Tampere, Finland; phone: +358 3 311 63212; fax: +358 3 311 63001; email: jarkko.ojala@ 123456pshp.fi

                Article
                ACM20004
                10.1120/jacmp.v15i2.4662
                5875463
                24710454
                3e69522f-dd36-4616-8946-290205cfbcff
                © 2014 The Authors.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 07 August 2013
                : 25 September 2013
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 2, References: 38, Pages: 15, Words: 8491
                Categories
                Radiation Oncology Physics
                Radiation Oncology Physics
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                acm20004
                March 2014
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.3.4 mode:remove_FC converted:29.03.2018

                monte carlo dose calculation,acuros,axb,sbrt,photon beam radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article