5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Study of out‐of‐field dose in photon radiotherapy: A commercial treatment planning system versus measurements and Monte Carlo simulations

      other

      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

          Purpose

          An accurate assessment of out‐of‐field dose is necessary to estimate the risk of second cancer after radiotherapy and the damage to the organs at risk surrounding the planning target volume. Although treatment planning systems (TPSs) calculate dose distributions outside the treatment field, little is known about the accuracy of these calculations. The aim of this work is to thoroughly compare the out‐of‐field dose distributions given by two algorithms implemented in the Monaco TPS, with measurements and full Monte Carlo simulations.

          Methods

          Out‐of‐field dose distributions predicted by the collapsed cone convolution (CCC) and Monte Carlo (MC Monaco) algorithms, built into the commercially available Monaco version 5.11 TPS, are compared with measurements carried out on an Elekta Axesse linear accelerator. For the measurements, ion chambers, thermoluminescent dosimeters, and EBT3 film are used. The BEAMnrc code, built on the EGSnrc system, is used to create a model of the Elekta Axesse with the Agility collimation system, and the space phase file generated is scored by DOSXYZnrc to generate the dose distributions (MC EGSnrc). Three different irradiation scenarios are considered: (a) a 10 × 10 cm 2 field, (b) an IMRT prostate plan, and (c) a three‐field lung plan. Monaco's calculations, experimental measurements, and Monte Carlo simulations are carried out in water and/or in an ICRP110 phantom.

          Results

          For the 10 × 10 cm 2 field case, CCC underestimated the dose, compared to ion chamber measurements, by 13% (differences relative to the algorithm) on average between the 5% and the ≈2% isodoses. MC Monaco underestimated the dose only from approximately the 2% isodose for this case. Qualitatively similar results were observed for the studied IMRT case when compared to film dosimetry. For the three‐field lung plan, dose underestimations of up to ≈90% for MC Monaco and ≈60% for CCC, relative to MC EGSnrc simulations, were observed in mean dose to organs located beyond the 2% isodose.

          Conclusions

          This work shows that Monaco underestimates out‐of‐field doses in almost all the cases considered. Thus, it does not describe dose distribution beyond the border of the field accurately. This is in agreement with previously published works reporting similar results for other TPSs. Analytical models for out‐of‐field dose assessment, MC simulations or experimental measurements may be an adequate alternative for this purpose.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

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

          Assessing the risk of second malignancies after modern radiotherapy.

          Recent advances in radiotherapy have enabled the use of different types of particles, such as protons and heavy ions, as well as refinements to the treatment of tumours with standard sources (photons). However, the risk of second cancers arising in long-term survivors continues to be a problem. The long-term risks from treatments such as particle therapy have not yet been determined and are unlikely to become apparent for many years. Therefore, there is a need to develop risk assessments based on our current knowledge of radiation-induced carcinogenesis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            AAPM TG 158: Measurement and calculation of doses outside the treated volume from external-beam radiation therapy.

            The introduction of advanced techniques and technology in radiotherapy has greatly improved our ability to deliver highly conformal tumor doses while minimizing the dose to adjacent organs at risk. Despite these tremendous improvements, there remains a general concern about doses to normal tissues that are not the target of the radiation treatment; any "nontarget" radiation should be minimized as it offers no therapeutic benefit. As patients live longer after treatment, there is increased opportunity for late effects including second cancers and cardiac toxicity to manifest. Complicating the management of these issues, there are unique challenges with measuring, calculating, reducing, and reporting nontarget doses that many medical physicists may have limited experience with. Treatment planning systems become dramatically inaccurate outside the treatment field, necessitating a measurement or some other means of assessing the dose. However, measurements are challenging because outside the treatment field, the radiation energy spectrum, dose rate, and general shape of the dose distribution (particularly the percent depth dose) are very different and often require special consideration. Neutron dosimetry is also particularly challenging, and common errors in methodology can easily manifest as errors of several orders of magnitude. Task Group 158 was, therefore, formed to provide guidance for physicists in terms of assessing and managing nontarget doses. In particular, the report: (a) highlights major concerns with nontarget radiation; (b) provides a rough estimate of doses associated with different treatment approaches in clinical practice; (c) discusses the uses of dosimeters for measuring photon, electron, and neutron doses; (d) discusses the use of calculation techniques for dosimetric evaluations; (e) highlights techniques that may be considered for reducing nontarget doses; (f) discusses dose reporting; and (g) makes recommendations for both clinical and research practice.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Accuracy of out-of-field dose calculations by a commercial treatment planning system.

              The dosimetric accuracy of treatment planning systems (TPSs) decreases for locations outside the treatment field borders. However, the true accuracy of specific TPSs for locations beyond the treatment field borders is not well documented. Our objective was to quantify the accuracy of out-of-field dose predicted by the commercially available Eclipse version 8.6 TPS (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) for a clinical treatment delivered on a Varian Clinac 2100. We calculated (in the TPS) and determined (with thermoluminescent dosimeters) doses at a total of 238 points of measurement (with distance from the field edge ranging from 3.75 to 11.25 cm). Our comparisons determined that the Eclipse TPS underestimated out-of-field doses by an average of 40% over the range of distances examined. As the distance from the treatment field increased, the TPS underestimated the dose with increasing magnitude--up to 55% at 11.25 cm from the treatment field border. These data confirm that accuracy beyond the treatment border is inadequate, and out-of-field data from TPSs should be used only with a clear understanding of this limitation. Studies that require accurate out-of-field dose should use other dose reconstruction methods, such as direct measurements or Monte Carlo calculations.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                bsanchez@fis.puc.cl
                Journal
                Med Phys
                Med Phys
                10.1002/(ISSN)2473-4209
                MP
                Medical Physics
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0094-2405
                2473-4209
                16 July 2020
                September 2020
                : 47
                : 9 ( doiID: 10.1002/mp.v47.9 )
                : 4616-4625
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Instituto de Física Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Santiago Chile
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: bsanchez@ 123456fis.puc.cl .

                Article
                MP14356
                10.1002/mp.14356
                7586840
                32583441
                54e2bc1f-82db-4849-9001-fc5632c4219e
                © 2020 The Authors. Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 21 February 2020
                : 12 June 2020
                : 16 June 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 6, Tables: 0, Pages: 10, Words: 11723
                Funding
                Funded by: FONDECYT REGULAR
                Award ID: N1181133
                Funded by: FONDECYT , open-funder-registry 10.13039/501100002850;
                Award ID: 11150561
                Categories
                Research Article
                COMPUTATIONAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DOSIMETRY
                Research Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                September 2020
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.9.3 mode:remove_FC converted:26.10.2020

                out‐of‐field dose,peripheral dose,second cancer,treatment planning systems

                Comments

                Comment on this article