Evaluation of the AAA Treatment Planning Algorithm for SBRT Lung Treatment: Comparison with Monte Carlo and Homogeneous Pencil Beam Dose Calculations
|
|
- Brooke Nash
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 43 (2012) Journal de l imagerie médicale et des sciences de la radiation Evaluation of the AAA Treatment Planning Algorithm for SBRT Lung Treatment: Comparison with Monte Carlo and Homogeneous Pencil Beam Dose Calculations Ermias Gete, PhD a *, Tony Teke, MSc b and William Kwa, PhD a a British Columbia Cancer Agency-Vancouver Center, Vancouver, BC, Canada b Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada ABSTRACT Purpose: To evaluate the dose calculation accuracy of the Varian Eclipse anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and to investigate the dosimetric consequences of not applying tissue heterogeneity correction on complex SBRT lung plans. Materials and Methods: Nine cases of non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that were previously treated with SBRT at our center were selected for this study. Following Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0236, the original plans were calculated using pencil beam without heterogeneity correction (PBNC). For this study, these plans were recalculated by applying tissue heterogeneity correction with the AAA algorithm and with the Monte Carlo (MC) method, keeping the number of monitor units the same as the original plans. Two kinds of plan comparison were made. First, the AAA calculations were compared with MC. Second, the treatment plans that were calculated with AAA were compared with the original PBNC calculations. The following dose-volume parameters were used for the comparison: V 100% ; V 90% ; the maximum, the minimum, and the mean planning target volume (PTV) doses (D max,d min, and D mean, respectively); V 20Gy, V 15Gy,V 10Gy,V 5Gy ;D mean for the lung; and D max for the critical organs. Results: Comparable results were obtained for AAA and MC calculations: except for Dmax, Dmin, and Dmean, the differences in the patient-average values of all of the PTV dose parameters were less than 2%. The largest average difference was observed for Dmin ( %). Average differences in all the lung dose parameters were under 0.2%, and average differences in normal tissue Dmax were under 0.3 Gy, except for the skin dose. There were appreciable differences in the PTV and normal tissue dosevolume parameters when comparing AAA and PBNC calculations. * Corresponding author: Ermias Gete, PhD, British Columbia Cancer Agency-Vancouver Center, 600 W. 10th Ave, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4E6, Canada. address: egete@bccancer.bc.ca (E. Gete). Except for V 100% and V 90%, PBNC calculations on average underestimated the dose to the PTV. The largest discrepancy was in the PTV maximum dose, with a patient-averaged difference of %. Conclusions: Based on our MC investigation, we conclude that the Eclipse AAA algorithm is sufficiently accurate for dose calculations of lung SBRT plans involving small 6-MV photon fields. Our results also demonstrate that, although dose calculations at the periphery of the PTV showed good agreement when comparing PBNC with both AAA and MC calculations, there is a potential to significantly underestimate the dose inside the PTV and doses to critical structures if tissue heterogeneity correction is not applied to lung SBRT plans. RESUME Objet: Evaluer l exactitude du calcul de la dose de l algorithme d analyse anisotrope (AAA) du systeme de traitement Eclipse de Varian pour le traitement de radiotherapie stereotaxique du corps (SBRT) et etudier les consequences dosimetriques de ne pas appliquer la correction d heterogeneite des tissus sur les plans de traitement SBRT pulmonaires complexes. Materiaux et methodologie: Neuf cas de cancer brochopulmonaire «non a petites cellules» traites anterieurement par SBRT a notre centre ont ete selectionnes pour cette etude. Conformement a RTOG 0236, les plans originaux ont ete calcules sans correction d heterogeneite a l aide de l algorithme de faisceau etroit Varian Eclipse (PBNC). Pour cette etude, les plans de traitement ont ete recalcules en appliquant la correction d heterogeneite des tissus selon l algorithme AAA et la methode Monte Carlo (MC), en conservant le m^eme nombre d unite de monitoring que dans les plans originaux. Deux types de comparaisons ont ete faits. Dans un premier temps, les calculs AAA ont ete compares a la methode MC. Par la suite, les plans de traitement calcules avec l algorithme AAA ont ete compares aux calculs originaux PB-NC. Les parametres de dose-volume suivant ont ete utilises pour la comparaison : V100%, V90%, Dmax, Dmin, Dmoyen et conformite de dose pour PTV; V20Gy, V15Gy, V10Gy, /$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi: /j.jmir
2 V5Gy et Dmoyen pour les poumons; et Dmax pour les organes critiques. Resultats: Des resultats comparables ont ete obtenus pour les calculs AAA et MC : sauf pour Dmax, Dmin et Dmoyen, la difference dans les valeurs moyenne des patients de tous les parametres de dose PTV etait inferieure a 2 %. La difference moyenne la plus importante a ete observee pour Dmin (3,85,4) %. Les differences moyennes pour tous les parametres de dose pour les poumons etaient inferieures 2 % et les differences moyennes dans la dose pulmonaire maximale (Dmax) etaient inferieures a 0,3 Gy, sauf pour la dose a la peau. Les differences dans les parametres PTV et les parametres de dosevolume pour les tissus normaux etaient appreciables dans les comparaisons entre les calculs AAA et PB-NC. En moyenne, sauf pour V100 % et V90 %, les calculs PB-NC sous-estiment la dose au PTV. L ecart le plus marque a ete constate dans la dose maximum au PTV avec un ecart moyen entre les patients de 11,14,6 %. Conclusion: A partir de notre etude Monte Carlo, nous concluons que l algorithme AAA Eclipse presente un degredeprecision suffisant pour le calcul de dose des plans de traitement SBRT des poumons avec de petits champs de photons de 6MV. Nos resultats demontrent aussi que, bien que les calculs de dose en peripherie du PTV affichent une bonne conformite dans la comparaison des calculs PB-NC avec les calculs AAA et MC, il existe un potentiel de sous-estimation importante de la dose au PTV et aux structures critiques si aucune correction d heterogeneite des tissus n est appliquee dans le cas des plans de traitement SBRT pulmonaires. Introduction Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has been established as an effective treatment modality for inoperable early stage non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [1 4]. At our clinic, the SBRT technique was implemented in September 2008, and more than 40 lung cancer patients have been treated with SBRT since the implementation of this technique. Our SBRT lung treatment protocol closely follows the guidelines set by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0236 (RTOG 0236) [5] for dose prescription, dose calculation, and for setting limits on doses to critical structures. Because of the limitation of the pencil beam algorithm for dose calculation in inhomogeneous media, and following the guideline of RTOG 0236 for dose calculation, tissue heterogeneity correction is not applied to dose calculation of the treatment plans. The limitation of conventional algorithms such as the Pencil Beam and the modified Batho path corrections methods for dose calculations in heterogeneous media is a wellknown problem [6]. The source of the limitation is the inability of these calculation methods to correctly account for the lack of lateral electronic equilibrium and secondary buildup. This problem is even more amplified for dose calculations involving small fields irradiating heterogeneous media, as is typically the case encountered in SBRT lung plans [7]. To address this issue, the authors of RTOG 0236 decided not to allow for tissue heterogeneity correction when calculating monitor unit settings and dose-volume histograms (DVH) that are used to evaluate the dose distribution for the planning target volume (PTV). The Monte Carlo (MC) method, considered to be the gold standard for dose calculation [6, 8], is the only dose calculation algorithm that can properly account for lack of electronic equilibrium and secondary buildup. The long calculation time required for MC calculations with present- day computers, however, makes it impractical for application in a clinical setting, and routine patient dose calculations are performed with model-based algorithms. Advanced model-based dose calculation algorithms such as the convolutionsuperposition method with collapsed cone approximation that is implemented in the Pinnacle planning system [9] and the anisotropic analytic algorithm (AAA) [10] method that is available in the recent versions of Varian Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems Inc., Palo Alto, CA) have been shown to have a more improved accuracy for dose calculation of small photon fields irradiating low density media [11 19]. For this reason, the authors of the AAPM Task Group 101 report [4] recommend that tissue heterogeneity correction be employed for dose calculation of SBRT lung plans. Moreover, two current RTOG trials for SBRT lung, RTOG 0813 [20] and RTOG 0915 [21], now require inhomogeneity correction, with the condition that the dose calculation method used is approved by the RTOG committee. There have been several studies to evaluate the accuracy of the AAA algorithm for dose calculation in low-density media [11 14]. These studies were either phantom-based or they were only focused on dose coverage of the PTV. Ding et al [11] performed MC simulation and measurement on a lung phantom to investigate the accuracy of the AAA algorithm, whereas Rønde and Hoffmann [13] conducted phantombased evaluation of the AAA algorithm with a particular focus on lung SBRT treatment plans. Sterpin et al [14] also used a heterogeneous multilayer phantom in their evaluation of the accuracy of AAA for IMRT and small field calculations. In the study by Ding et al [11] and by Xiao et al [12], the dosimetric consequences of applying tissue heterogeneity correction on PTV coverage had been investigated. However, normal tissue doses were not considered in any of these studies. Since the installation of the Eclipse V8.6 treatment planning software at our center, the AAA algorithm has been available and is undergoing testing before it can be released for clinical use. This study was conducted as part of the evaluation of the AAA dose calculation algorithm, with the following objectives: Evaluate the accuracy of the AAA algorithm for dose calculation of SBRT lung plans using the MC method. Study the dosimetric impact of introducing tissue heterogeneity correction on PTV coverage and on doses received by critical organs. This work presents the results of this evaluation. E. Gete et al./journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 43 (2012)
3 Materials and Methods Patient Selection and Treatment Planning Nine cases of NSCLC that were previously treated with SBRT at our center were selected for this replanning study. Our selection criteria for the treatment plans were based on the size of the PTV, and the selected patients were representative of the larger cohort with respect to the PTV volume. The original treatment involved the use of 6-MV static conformal fields on a Varian ix Linac (Varian Medical Systems Inc.). During treatment, patients were immobilized with an in-house immobilization system. The clinical target volumes were determined on four-dimensional computed tomography images. The internal target volumes were contoured using the maximum intensity projection images of the four-dimensional computed tomography scans. The PTVs were created by growing the internal target volumes by 5 mm in every direction to account for setup uncertainties. For the patients in this study, the PTV volumes ranged between 18.8 to 62.3 cm 3 with a median value of 40.1 cm 3. Only peripherally located lung tumors were treated (Table 1). In addition to the PTV, the following critical structures were contoured: ipsilateral bronchus, esophagus, trachea, brachial plexus, spinal cord, heart, and skin. The skin was defined as a shell with thickness of 5 mm inside the external contour. An artificial object (known as D2cm) was also created. This is a shell structure that is located at a distance 2 cm away from the PTV. This structure is used to monitor high-dose spillage outside the PTV and to ensure a rapid falloff beyond the PTV [5]. Treatment planning was performed using the Varian Eclipse software version 8.6. The planning technique involved forward planning with multiple static noncoplanar conformal fields. Conformation to the target volume was obtained using the Varian Millennium multileaf collimator, with the collimator leaves automatically fitted to have a 0-mm margin around the PTV. Care was taken not to have a field that enters or exits through either arm. In addition, the fields were spaced as equally as possible around the PTV, avoiding overlap of fields at their entrance and exit through the body. Typically, a plan consisted of seven to nine fields, and delivered a dose of 48 Gy in four fractions to the prescription isodose (note that the dose prescription scheme for RTOG 0236 was 60 Gy in three fractions). The prescription isodose typically varied between 72% and 80% of the dose at the normalization point (Table 1), which is chosen to be the geometric center of the PTV. The following dose-volume constraint set by the RTOG 0236 was followed as a guideline for the PTV coverage: 95% of the PTV should receive the prescription dose (V 100% ¼ 95%). 99% of the PTV should receive 90% of the prescription dose (V 90% ¼ 99%). Whenever it was not possible to meet all the dose-volume constraint criteria for the critical structures, the prescription Table 1 A List Showing the Prescription Dose, the Prescription Isodose, the PTV Volume and Tumor Location Patient No. Prescription Dose (Gy) Prescription Isodose PTV Volume (ml) Tumor Location Left upper lobe Right lower lobe Right upper lobe Left lower lobe Left upper lobe Left upper lobe Right lower lobe Right upper lobe Left lower lobe PTV, planning target volume. dose was lowered so as not to exceed the critical structure dose limits. Dose Calculation For this study, the original plans were copied, anonymized, and recalculated with the three calculation methods described in the following sections. Pencil Beam The original dose calculation was performed using the pencil beam algorithm without tissue heterogeneity correction (PBNC), as per RTOG 0236 recommendation [5]. AAA The original plans were recalculated with the AAA algorithm by applying heterogeneity correction. The number of monitor units for each field was kept the same as the number of monitor units for the original plan calculated with PBNC. MC MC calculations of the doses were performed on the same treatment plans. The BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc MC system [22, 23] was used to simulate dose to the patients. MC particle transport through the multileaf collimator was simulated using the code developed by Siebers et al [24]. The information required for the MC simulations was extracted from the TPS DICOM RT files using codes developed by Zavgorodni et al [25]. The following MC transport parameters were used: AP ¼ PCUT ¼ MeV and AE ¼ ECUT ¼ MeV [26]. This choice of electron transport cutoff energy for simulations in lung was also suggested by Ma et al [27]. The accelerator model simulated was a Varian Clinac ix, and the physical parameters were defined according to manufacturer specifications. Simulations were performed on a cluster of dedicated computers. A phase space above the jaws was obtained using initial electrons incident on the target and contains particles. The number of histories used in DOSXYZnrc was selected for each simulation, such that the statistical uncertainty in the high dose voxels was 1%. We used the MC simulation setup described by 28 E. Gete et al./journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 43 (2012) 26-33
4 Popescu et al [28], which allows a rigorous calculation of the absolute dose delivered to the patient for the planned number of monitor units. Dosimetric Comparison For each treatment plan, relevant dose volume quantities for the PTV, lung tissue, and critical organs were calculated using the three dose calculation methods. These dosimetric quantities were manually recorded from the DVH of the treatment plans and compared. The comparisons were based on the differences of the dosimetric quantities calculated with the different algorithms. The mean, maximum, and average of the differences over the nine patients were calculated for the comparison. PTV The PTV dose comparison was based on the two dose prescription parameters of RTOG 0236 (V 100% and V 90% ) as well as on the maximum, minimum, and mean PTV doses. In addition, target conformalities at the prescription dose (R 100% ), at 105% of the prescription dose (R 105% ), and at 50% of the prescription dose (R 50% ) were also evaluated. prescription iodose volume R 100% ¼ PTV volume 50% of prescription iodose volume R 50% ¼ PTV volume 150% of prescription iodose volume R 150% ¼ PTV volume Lung and Critical Organs Dose to the lungs was evaluated by calculating the absolute dose-volume parameters such as the V 20Gy,V 15Gy,V 10Gy, and V 5Gy as well as the mean lung dose. Doses to the critical structures are reported in accordance with the metrics set by the RTOG Results Two kinds of plan comparisons were made with different purpose. First, the plans that were calculated with AAA were compared with MC calculations. The purpose of this comparison was to evaluate the accuracy of the AAA dose calculation algorithm for lung SBRT plans. Second, the original plans that were calculated with PBNC were compared with the plans that were calculated with AAA. The purpose of this comparison was to investigate the dosimetric consequences of applying tissue heterogeneity correction to lung SBRT treatment plans that were calculated without tissue heterogeneity correction. The results of these comparisons are presented in the following sections. Comparison between AAA and MC Figure 1 shows a DVH comparison of calculations with MC (dashed lines) and AAA (solid lines) for patient 4. Patient 4 is chosen because the results are typical of the cohort. One could see from Figure 1 that there is a good agreement between MC and AAA calculations of the DVHs for the PTV as well as for the critical organs. It has been shown in this work that such an agreement was observed for all the patient plans that were analyzed in this study. Details of the analyses for PTV and the critical organ dose comparisons are given in the following section. PTV Coverage A list of patient-averaged dose parameters for the PTV calculated with AAA, MC, and PBNC is given in Table 2. These dose-volume parameters are: the volume of the PTV covered by the 100% and the 90% of the prescription isodose (V 100% and V 90%, respectively); the maximum, the minimum, and the mean PTV doses (D max,d min, and D mean, respectively); and PTV dose conformalities at three dose levels (R 100%,R 50%, and R 105% ). Comparisons between AAA and MC are given as the maximum, the minimum, and the average of the differences between AAA and MC calculations of these quantities (columns 5 to 7). As could be seen from Table 2, a good agreement was observed between AAA and MC calculations for V 100%,V 90%, the mean PTV dose, as well as for the dose conformalities at the 50%, 100%, and 105% isodose levels. However, larger differences were observed for the maximum and the minimum PTV doses. The largest difference observed was in the minimum PTV dose, where the AAA calculation gave 12.8% higher dose than MC for one patient plan. The average of the differences in the minimum and maximum PTV doses were % and %, respectively. Dose to Critical Organs A comparison of the maximum doses (in Gy) received by the critical organs calculated with AAA and MC are listed in Figure 1. Planning target volume (PTV) and normal tissue dose-volume histograms of patient #4 calculated with anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA; solid lines) and Monte Carlo (MC; dashed lines). Patient #4 is used because the treatment plan is typical of the cohort. E. Gete et al./journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 43 (2012)
5 Table 2 Dose-volume Parameters for the PTV Calculated with AAA, MC, and PBNC Planning Comparison AAA-MC AAA-PB (NC) PTV AAA avr MC avr PB avr Diff max Diff min Diff avr SD Diff max Diff min Diff avr SD V V D max D min D mean R R R AAA, anisotropic analytical algorithm; MC, Monte Carlo; PBNC, pencil beam without heterogeneity correction; PTV, planning target volume. Note that the doses are normalized with respect to the prescription isodose. columns 2 4 of Table 3. The comparisons are given in terms of the minimum, the maximum, and the average of the differences in the maximum doses the organs received (D max ) calculated over the nine patient plans. It could be seen from the third column of Table 3 that on average, there was a good agreement in the maximum normal tissue doses calculated, except for the dose to the skin where the difference was Gy. When looking at the differences in D max for individual patient plans, large differences were observed for some of the critical organs. For example, the largest difference observed for the maximum dose to the skin was 4.1 Gy. Dose to the Lung Table 4 (columns 2 4) lists comparisons of percent lung volumes irradiated to different dose levels (V 20Gy, V 15Gy, V 10Gy,andV 5Gy ), and the mean lung dose (D mean ) as calculated by AAA and MC. The comparison is presented in terms of the maximum, the minimum, and average of the differences of these values calculated over the nine patient plans. It can be seen from Table 4 that there was a very good agreement between the AAA and MC calculations for all of the lung dose parameters compared, where the patient-averaged Table 3 Differences in Maximum Doses to Critical Structures between AAA and MC (Columns 2 4) and between PBNC and AAA (Columns 5 7) Planning Comparison AAA-MC AAA-PB (NC) Critical organs Diff max (Gy) Diff min (Gy) Diff avr SD (Gy) Diff max (Gy) Diff min (Gy) Diff avr SD (Gy) Skin Spinal cord Heart Esophagus Brachial Plexus Trachea Ipsilateral bronchus AAA, anisotropic analytical algorithm; MC, Monte Carlo; PBNC, pencil beam without heterogeneity correction; PTV, planning target volume. The maximum, minimum, and average values are calculated over the nine patient plans. values of the differences between AAA and MC calculations were well within the statistical error of MC calculation (column 4). For individual patient plans, the largest observed difference was for V 5Gy (1.9%). Comparison of Calculations between AAA and PBNC PTV Coverage Figure 2a shows the dose distribution for the plan of patient 4 calculated on an axial isocentric slice with PBNC. Plots of dose profiles along a line in the AP direction (dashed vertical line in Figure 2a) calculated with PBNC, AAA, and MC are shown in Figure 2b. As can be seen from Figure 2b, the dose inside the PTV is underestimated by the PBNC calculation. This is to be expected since heterogeneity correction is not applied for the PB calculation. However, all the three calculation methods show a good agreement for the dose profiles near the edge of the PTV. A comparison of the following PTV dose-volume parameters between AAA and PBNC calculations is given in Table 2: the volume of the PTV covered by the 100% and the 90% of the prescription isodose (V 100% and V 90%, respectively); the maximum, minimum, and mean PTV doses (D max,d min, and D mean, respectively); and PTV dose conformalities at three dose levels (R 100%,R 50%, and R 105% ). The comparisons are given in terms of patient-averaged values (columns 1 and Table 4 A Comparison of Dose-volume Parameters for the Lung Tissue Planning Comparison AAA-MC AAA-PB (NC) Lung dose Diff max Diff min Diff avr SD Diff max Diff min Diff avr SD V V V V D mean (Gy) Gy AAA, anisotropic analytical algorithm; MC, Monte Carlo; PBNC, pencil beam without heterogeneity correction. Comparison between AAA and MC are listed in columns 2 4. Comparisons between AAA and PBNC are listed in columns 5 7. The comparisons are presented in terms of maximum, minimum, and average of the differences calculated over the nine patient plans. 30 E. Gete et al./journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 43 (2012) 26-33
6 Figure 2. (a) Dose distribution of the plan for patient 4 on an axial isocentric slice calculated with pencil beam without heterogeneity correction (PBNC). The planning target volume (PTV) is represented by the orange contour. (b) Dose profiles of the plan for patient 4 across a line in the anteroposterior direction (red dashed line shown in 2a) calculated with the three algorithms anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), Monte Carlo (MC), and PBNC. Note that a reasonable agreement in dose is observed at the planning target volume (PTV) edge for all the three calculations. 3), as well the maximum, the minimum, and the average of the differences between AAA and PBNC calculations of these quantities (columns 8 10). When looking at the patientaveraged values, a good agreement was observed between AAA and PBNC calculations for V 100% and V 90%. However, larger differences were observed for the mean, maximum, and minimum PTV doses. The largest difference observed was in the maximum PTV dose where the AAA calculation gave 18.3% higher dose than PBNC for one patient plan. The average of the differences in the maximum, minimum and mean PTV doses between AAA and PBNC calculations were %, %, and %, respectively. This observation is consistent with the plots of the PTV dose profiles shown in Figure 2b where the doses calculated with AAA and PBNC show a good agreement at the edge of the PTV, but show large discrepancies inside the PTV. Large differences were observed for the conformalities at the 50% and 100% prescription isodoses, where the averaged of the differences in R 100% and R 50% were and , respectively. Dose to Critical Organs Figures 3a and3b show DVHs for the critical organs of patient 4 calculated with AAA and PBNC. It can be seen from Figures 3a and 3b that doses calculated by AAA are consistently larger than PBNC calculations for all the organs shown. A comparison of the maximum doses (in Gy) received by the critical organs calculated with AAA and PBNC are listed in columns 5 7 of Table 3. The comparisons are given in terms of the minimum, maximum, and average of the differences in the maximum doses the organs received (D max ) calculated over the nine patient plans. When looking at the patient average differences of D max (last column of Table 3), one could see that AAA calculations gave consistently larger values for D max than the values calculated with PBNC for all the critical organs considered. When looking at differences in dose for individual patient plans, the differences observed ranged from 1.8 Gy (trachea and ipsilateral bronchus) to 6.0 Gy (esophagus). Dose to the Lung A comparison of the lung volumes irradiated to different dose levels (V 20Gy,V 15Gy,V 10Gy, and V 5Gy ), and the mean lung dose for AAA and PBNC calculation are listed in the last three columns of Table 4. The comparisons are presented in terms of the maximum, minimum, and average of the differences between AAA and PBNC calculations. Similar to the critical organ dose comparisons, it could be seen from Table 4 that AAA calculations gave consistently larger values than PBNC calculation for all the lung dose volume parameters considered. The largest difference observed was in the value of V 5Gy with patient-averaged difference of % and largest difference (5.6%). The average and maximum difference in the mean lung dose were Gy and 0.91 Gy, respectively. Discussion Comparison between AAA and MC Agreements between the AAA and MC dose calculations for the PTV were generally good. With the exception of the minimum and the maximum PTV doses, AAA calculations slightly underestimated all the PTV dose quantities that were compared, with the average of the differences ranging between 0.2% and 2.6%. These findings are in agreement with the results of the study by Sterpin et al [14] in which they compared AAA and MC calculations for a single plan involving a small lung tumor. In their study, they report a difference in the mean PTV dose of 2.1% between MC and AAA calculations. Our results are also consistent with the findings of previous phantom based studies by Ding et al [11] and by Rønde and Hoffmann [14] that were able to E. Gete et al./journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 43 (2012)
7 Figure 3. (a) Normal tissue dose-volume histograms (skin, lung, esophagus, and D2cm ) of patient 4 calculated with anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA; solid lines) and pencil beam without heterogeneity correction (PBNC; dashed lines). AAA calculations in general gave larger normal tissue doses when compared with PBNC values. (b) Normal tissue dose-volume histograms (heart, spinal cord, brachial plexus, and trachea) of patient 4 calculated with AAA (solid lines) and PBNC (dashed lines). AAA calculations in general gave larger normal tissue doses when compared with PBNC values. demonstrate the accuracy of AAA for dose calculation of small 6-MV photon beams irradiating inhomogeneous media. A good agreement was observed in the shape of the DVHs for normal tissue between AAA and MC calculations, as illustrated in Figure 1. However, larger differences were observed when comparing the maximum critical organ doses (Table 3). For example, differences as large as 3.3 Gy and 4.1 Gy were observed for the maximum doses received by the spinal cord and the skin, respectively. These differences are significant, and one possible source of the discrepancy could be the inability of AAA to accurately calculate doses for materials with high atomic number such as bone, as reported by Bush et al [29]. There was a good agreement between AAA and MC calculations for all the lung dose parameters that were compared, and the differences observed were well within the statistical uncertainty of MC calculations (1%). Comparison of Dose Calculation between AAA and PBNC When comparing PBNC with AAA calculations for PTV dose-volume parameters, the following was observed consistently. First, the maximum dose to the PTV increased significantly (by as large as 18%) when tissue heterogeneity correction was applied, showing that PBNC calculation underestimates the dose inside the PTV. Second, there was a good agreement between AAA and PBNC calculations for the volume of the PTV covered by the prescription isodose V 100% : The patient averaged values of V 100% for the AAA and PBNC plans were very close (95.6% and 95.7%), respectively, whereas the largest observed difference in V 100% was 2.7%. The implication of this second observation is that, the calculated number of monitor units (which is directly related to the magnitude of the prescription dose), does not change significantly when inhomogeneity correction is applied to lung SBRT plans calculated with AAA. Another consequence of applying inhomogeneity correction is an increase in the PTV dose conformalities at 100% and 50% isodose. As a consequence of this, the PTV dose conformality constraints set by RTOG 0236 can no longer be satisfied when tissue heterogeneity correction is applied, and dose conformality constraints published by RTOG 0915 should be used [21] when evaluating the quality of a plan calculated with tissue heterogeneity correction. As shown in Figures 3a and b, critical organ and lung doses calculated with AAA were generally higher than PBNC calculation. This is expected because the PBNC calculation does not account for the reduction of attenuation of the photon beam because of the presence of lung as a beam is exiting through the critical organ considered. The increase in dose to critical organs varied significantly from patient to patient (Table 3), and it is difficult to predict because it depends on the beam arrangement, location of the tumor, and the location of the normal tissue considered. As far as we are aware, there is no publication to- date that has investigated the dosimetric consequences of applying tissue inhomogeneity correction on normal tissue doses for lung SBRT plans. A rigorous statistical analysis of the data was not performed in this study because the sample size used is too small for performing such an analysis. We had to limit the sample size to nine mainly because of the scarcity of resources to perform MC simulation. We do not expect the dosimetric results obtained for the PTV to be different if we used a larger sample size. However, a larger sample size could reveal a more complete picture on the differences in normal tissue doses since significant variation was observed in the normal tissue dose comparisons. Conclusion We have conducted a retrospective treatment planning study to evaluate the accuracy of the AAA algorithm, and to investigate the dosimetric consequences of applying tissue heterogeneity correction to lung SBRT treatment plans that were originally calculated without tissue heterogeneity correction. 32 E. Gete et al./journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 43 (2012) 26-33
8 Comparison of AAA calculations with MC shows that the AAA algorithm is capable of accounting for inhomogeneities accurately for lung SBRT plans, confirming findings by other studies [11, 13, 14]. Appreciable differences were observed between PBNC and AAA calculations on the PTV and normal tissue doses. Except for V 100% and V 90%, PBNC calculations on average underestimated the dose to the PTV. The largest discrepancy was in the PTV maximum dose with an average difference of %. Normal tissue doses were also underestimated by PBNC calculations, and difference in dose that is as large as 6 Gy was observed for individual patient plans. This highlights the fact that if tissue heterogeneity correction is not applied, there is a potential for underestimating the dose given to normal tissue. In light of these findings, it is recommended that tissue heterogeneity correction be applied for SBRT lung treatment plans that are calculated with a treatment planning system which employs a dose calculation algorithm that account for lateral electronic disequilibrium and secondary buildup. References [1] Timmerman, R., Papiez, L., & McGarry, R., et al. (2003). Extracranial stereotactic radioablation: results of a phase I study in medically inoperable stage I nonsmall cell lung cancer. Chest 124, [2] Onishi, H., Shirato, H., & Nagata, Y., et al. (2007). Hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (hypofxsrt) for stage I non-small cell lung cancer: updated results of 257 patients in a Japanese multiinstitutional study. J Thorac Oncol 2, S94 S100. [3] Onishi, H., Araki, T., & Shirato, H., et al. (2004). Stereotactic hypofractionated high-dose irradiation for stage I non-small cell lung carcinoma: clinical outcomes in 245 subjects in a Japanese multi-institutional study. Cancer 101, [4] Benedict, S. H., Yenice, K. M., & Followill, D., et al. (2010). Stereotactic body radiation therapy: the report of AAPM Task Group 101. Med Phys 37, [5] Timmerman R, Choy H, Galvin JM, et al. RTOG 0236: A Phase II Trial of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy SBRT in the Treatment of Patients with Medically Inoperable Stage I/II Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, Philadelphia, PA: RTOG [6] Papanikolaou N, Battista J, Boyer AL, et al. (2004). Tissue inhomogeneity corrections for Megavoltage Photon Beams. The report of Task Group No. 65 of the Radiation Therapy committee of the AAPM. [7] Moiseenko, V., Liu, M., & Bergman, A. M., et al. (2010). Monte Carlo calculation of dose distribution in early stage NSCLC patients planned for accelerated hypofractionated radiation therapy in the NCIC-Br25 protocol. Phys Med Biol 55, [8] Rogers, D. W. O. (2006). Fifty years of Monte Carlo simulations for medical physics. Phys Med Biol 51, R287 R301. [9] Ahnesjo, A. (1989). Collapsed cone convolution of radiant energy for photon dose calculation in heterogeneous media. Med Phys 16, [10] Ulmer, W., & Harder, D. (1996). Applications of a triple Gaussian pencil beam model for photon beam treatment planning. Z Med Phys 6, [11] Ding, G. X., Duggan, D., & Lu, B., et al. (2007). Impact of inhomogeneity corrections on dose coverage in the treatment of lung cancer using stereotactic body radiation therapy. Med Phys 34, [12] Xiao, Y., Papiez, L., & Paulus, R., et al. (2009). Dosimetric evaluation of heterogeneity corrections for RTOG0236: stereotactic body therapy of inoperable stage I-II non-small cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 73, [13] Rønde, H. S., & Hoffmann, L. (2009). Validation of Varian s AAA algorithm with focus on lung treatments. Acta Oncol. 48, [14] Sterpin, E., Tomsej, M., & De Smedt, B., et al. (2007). Monte Carlo evaluation of the AAA treatment planning algorithm in a heterogeneous multilayer phantom and IMRT clinical treatments for an Elekta linear accelerator. Med Phys 34, [15] Gagne, I. M., & Zavgorodni, S. (2007). Evaluation of the analytical anisotropic algorithm in an extreme water-lung interface phantom using Monte Carlo dose calculations. J Appl Clin Med Phys 8, [16] Aarup, L. R., Nahum, A. E., & Zacharatou, C., et al. (2009). The effect of different lung densities on the accuracy of various radiotherapy dose calculation methods: implications for tumor coverage. Radiother Oncol 91, [17] Chen, H., Lohr, F., & Fritz, P., et al. (2010). Stereotactic singledose irradiation of lung tumors: a comparison of absolute dose and dose distribution between pencil beam and Monte Carlo algorithms based on actual patient scans. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 78, [18] Jones, A. O., & Das, I. J. (2005). Comparison of inhomogeneity correction algorithms in small photon fields. Med Phys 32, [19] Martens, C., Reynaert, N., & De Wagter, C., et al. (2002). Underdosage of the upper-airway mucosa for small fields as used in intensitymodulated radiation therapy: a comparison between radiochromic film measurements, Monte Carlo simulations, and collapsed cone convolution calculations. Med Phys 29, [20] Bezjak A, Bradley J, Gaspar L, et al. RTOG: 0813Seameless Phase I/II Study of 2 Stereotactic Lung Radiotherapy (SBRT) for Early Stage, Centrally Located, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) In Medically Inoperable Patients. RTOG [21] Videtic GMM, Singh AK, Chang JY, et al. RTOG 0915: a randomized Phase II STUDY Comparing 2 Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) Schedules for Medically Inoperable Patients with Stage I Peripheral Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. RTOG [22] Rogers DWO, Walters B, Kawrakow I. BEAMnrc User Manual. National Research Council of Canada, Report PIRS [23] Walters B, Kawrakow I, Rogers DWO. DOSXYZnrc Users Manual. National Research Council of Canada, Report PIRS [24] Siebers, J. V., Keall, P. J., & Kim, J. O., et al. (2002). A method for photon beam Monte Carlo multileaf collimator particle transport. Phys Med Biol 47, [25] Zavgorodni S, Bush K, Locke C, et al. (2007). Vancouver Island Monte Carlo (VIMC) system for radiotherapy treatment planning dosimetry and research. 9th Biennial ESTRO Meeting on Physics and Radiation Technology for Clinical Radiotherapy (8 13 September 2007, Barcelona, Spain). Radiother Oncol. 84(Suppl. 1):S49. [26] Sheikh-Bagheri, D., & Rogers, D. W. O. (2002). Sensitivity of megavoltage photon beam Monte Carlo simulations to electron beam and other parameters. Med Phys 22, [27] Ma, C. M., Li, J. S., & Pawlicki, T., et al. (2002). Monte Carlo dose calculation tool for radiotherapy treatment planning. Phys Med Biol 47, [28] Popescu, I. A., Shaw, C. P., & Zavgorodni, S. F., et al. (2005). Absolute dose calculations for Monte Carlo simulations for radiotherapy beams. Phys Med Biol 50, [29] Bush, K., Gagne, I. M., & Zavgorodni, S., et al. (2011). Dosimetric validation of Acuros XB with Monte Carlo methods for photon dose calculations. Med Phys 38, E. Gete et al./journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 43 (2012)
Accuracy of the Small Field Dosimetry Using the Acuros XB Dose Calculation Algorithm within and beyond Heterogeneous Media for 6 MV Photon Beams *
International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology, 2012, 1, 78-87 Published Online November 2012 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ijmpcero) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ijmpcero.2012.13011
More informationstereotactic body radiation therapy Citation Journal of radiation research (2013 original work is properly cited
Differences in the dose-volume metr Titlecorrection status and its influence stereotactic body radiation therapy Ueki, Nami; Matsuo, Yukinori; Shibu Author(s) Mitsuhiro; Narabayashi, Masaru; Sak Norihisa,
More informationCommission, Ganakbari, Savar, Dhaka, Bangladesh
International Letters of Chemistry, Physics and Astronomy Submitted: 2016-05-17 ISSN: 2299-3843, Vol. 68, pp 54-60 Revised: 2016-07-08 doi:10.18052/www.scipress.com/ilcpa.68.54 Accepted: 2016-07-12 2016
More informationFeasibility of the partial-single arc technique in RapidArc planning for prostate cancer treatment
Chinese Journal of Cancer Original Article Feasibility of the partial-single arc technique in RapidArc planning for prostate cancer treatment Suresh Rana 1 and ChihYao Cheng 2 Abstract The volumetric modulated
More informationA dosimetric evaluation of VMAT for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 14, NUMBER 1, 2013 A dosimetric evaluation of VMAT for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer Caitlin E. Merrow, a Iris Z. Wang, Matthew B. Podgorsak
More informationNIH/NCI Varian Medical Systemss Philips HealthCare
Treatment Planning of Lung Cancer: Dosimetric Considerations Indrin J. Ch hetty, PhD Henry Ford Health System Disclo osure My department receives research support from: NIH/NCI Varian Medical Systemss
More informationDosimetric Comparison: Acuros XB vs AAA
Dosimetric Comparison: Acuros XB vs AAA Leo El Hage, Chris James, Jim Frantzis, Roger Li, Venkata Sheshadri Epworth Radiation Oncology Epworth HealthCare Excellence. Everywhere. Everyday Background Epworth
More informationQuality Assurance of TPS: comparison of dose calculation for stereotactic patients in Eclipse and iplan RT Dose
Petrovic B Comparison of dose calculation algorithms for stereotaxy Quality Assurance of TPS: comparison of dose calculation for stereotactic patients in and RT Dose Borislava Petrovic 1, Aleksandra Grządziel
More informationLinac or Non-Linac Demystifying And Decoding The Physics Of SBRT/SABR
Linac or Non-Linac Demystifying And Decoding The Physics Of SBRT/SABR PhD, FAAPM, FACR, FASTRO Department of Radiation Oncology Indiana University School of Medicine Indianapolis, IN, USA Indra J. Das,
More informationA comparative dosimetric analysis of the effect of heterogeneity corrections used in three treatment planning algorithms
The University of Toledo The University of Toledo Digital Repository Theses and Dissertations 2010 A comparative dosimetric analysis of the effect of heterogeneity corrections used in three treatment planning
More informationSBRT fundamentals. Outline 8/2/2012. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance Educational Session
Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance Educational Session J Perks PhD, UC Davis Medical Center, Sacramento CA SBRT fundamentals Extra-cranial treatments Single or small number (2-5) of
More informationAbdulhamid Chaikh 1,2, Jacques Balosso 1,2. Introduction
Original Article Statistical control process to compare and rank treatment plans in radiation oncology: impact of heterogeneity correction on treatment planning in lung cancer Abdulhamid Chaikh 1,2, Jacques
More informationVerification of performance of Acuros XB Algorithm (AXB) Implemented on Eclipse Planning System
Original Article Research in Oncology 2018; Vol. 14, No. 1: 34-38. DOI: 10.21608/resoncol.2018.3026.1047 Verification of performance of Acuros XB Algorithm (AXB) Implemented on Eclipse Planning System
More informationLeila E. A. Nichol Royal Surrey County Hospital
2 nd UK and Ireland Dosimetry Check User Meeting Symposium Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, 24 th October 2012 Leila E. A. Nichol Royal Surrey County Hospital Leila.Nichol@nhs.net *My experience with Dosimetry
More informationLung Spine Phantom. Guidelines for Planning and Irradiating the IROC Spine Phantom. MARCH 2014
Lung Spine Phantom Guidelines for Planning and Irradiating the IROC Spine Phantom. MARCH 2014 The study groups are requesting that each institution keep the phantom for no more than 2 week. During this
More informationDosimetric evaluation of heterogeneity corrections for RTOG 0236: stereotactic body radiotherapy of inoperable stage I-II non-small-cell lung cancer.
Thomas Jefferson University Jefferson Digital Commons Department of Radiation Oncology Faculty Papers Department of Radiation Oncology 3-15-2009 Dosimetric evaluation of heterogeneity corrections for RTOG
More informationTreatment Planning for Lung. Kristi Hendrickson, PhD, DABR University of Washington Dept. of Radiation Oncology
Treatment Planning for Lung Kristi Hendrickson, PhD, DABR University of Washington Dept. of Radiation Oncology Outline of Presentation Dosimetric planning strategies for SBRT lung Delivery techniques Examples
More informationSilvia Pella, PhD, DABR Brian Doozan, MS South Florida Radiation Oncology Florida Atlantic University Advanced Radiation Physics Boca Raton, Florida
American Association of Medical Dosimetrists 2015 Silvia Pella, PhD, DABR Brian Doozan, MS South Florida Radiation Oncology Florida Atlantic University Advanced Radiation Physics Boca Raton, Florida Most
More informationBaotian Huang 1, Lili Wu 1, Peixian Lin 2 and Chuangzhen Chen 1*
Huang et al. Radiation Oncology (2015) 10:53 DOI 10.1186/s13014-015-0357-0 RESEARCH Open Access Dose calculation of Acuros XB and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm in lung stereotactic body radiotherapy
More informationStereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Lung Lesions using the CyberKnife of-the-art and New Innovations
Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Lung Lesions using the CyberKnife State-of of-the-art and New Innovations Chad Lee, PhD CK Solutions, Inc. and CyberKnife Centers of San Diego Outline Basic overview
More informationA Dosimetric Comparison of Whole-Lung Treatment Techniques. in the Pediatric Population
A Dosimetric Comparison of Whole-Lung Treatment Techniques in the Pediatric Population Corresponding Author: Christina L. Bosarge, B.S., R.T. (R) (T) Indiana University School of Medicine Department of
More informationPlan-Specific Correction Factors for Small- Volume Ion Chamber Dosimetry in Modulated Treatments on a Varian Trilogy
Plan-Specific Correction Factors for Small- Volume Ion Chamber Dosimetry in Modulated Treatments on a Varian Trilogy Vimal K. Desai, M.S. Under the supervision of Dr. Wesley Culberson NCCAAPM 2017 Fall
More informationAssessing Heterogeneity Correction Algorithms Using the Radiological Physics Center Anthropomorphic Thorax Phantom
Assessing Heterogeneity Correction Algorithms Using the Radiological Physics Center Anthropomorphic Thorax Phantom David Followill, Ph.D. Associate Director Radiological Physics Center RPC History Lesson
More informationEvaluation of Whole-Field and Split-Field Intensity Modulation Radiation Therapy (IMRT) Techniques in Head and Neck Cancer
1 Charles Poole April Case Study April 30, 2012 Evaluation of Whole-Field and Split-Field Intensity Modulation Radiation Therapy (IMRT) Techniques in Head and Neck Cancer Abstract: Introduction: This study
More informationTransition to Heterogeneity Corrections. Why have accurate dose algorithms?
Transition to Heterogeneity Corrections Eric E. Klein, M.S., Washington University, St. Louis, MO Craig Stevens, M.D., Ph.D., MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX Nikos Papinikolou, Ph.D., University
More informationEvaluation of Dosimetry Check software for IMRT patient-specific quality assurance
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 16, NUMBER 3, 2015 Evaluation of Dosimetry Check software for IMRT patient-specific quality assurance Ganesh Narayanasamy, Travis Zalman, Chul S. Ha,
More informationThe performance of the progressive resolution optimizer (PRO) for RapidArc planning in targets with low-density media
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 14, NUMBER 6, 2013 The performance of the progressive resolution optimizer (PRO) for RapidArc planning in targets with low-density media Monica W.K.
More informationJOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 17, NUMBER 4, 2016
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 17, NUMBER 4, 2016 Effect of the normalized prescription isodose line on the magnitude of Monte Carlo vs. pencil beam target dose differences for lung
More informationAutomated Plan Quality Check with Scripting. Rajesh Gutti, Ph.D. Clinical Medical Physicist
Automated Plan Quality Check with Scripting Rajesh Gutti, Ph.D. Clinical Medical Physicist Veera.Gutti@BSWHealth.org Outline Introduction - BSW Automation in Treatment planning Eclipse Scripting API Script
More informationThe Physics of Oesophageal Cancer Radiotherapy
The Physics of Oesophageal Cancer Radiotherapy Dr. Philip Wai Radiotherapy Physics Royal Marsden Hospital 1 Contents Brief clinical introduction Imaging and Target definition Dose prescription & patient
More informationInhomogeneity effect in Varian Trilogy Clinac ix 10 MV photon beam using EGSnrc and Geant4 code system
Journal of Physics: Conference Series PAPER OPEN ACCESS Inhomogeneity effect in Varian Trilogy Clinac ix 10 MV photon beam using EGSnrc and Geant4 code system To cite this article: S Yani et al 2016 J.
More informationVariable Dose Rate Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy (DCAT) for SABR Lung: From static fields to dynamic arcs using Monaco 5.10
Variable Dose Rate Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy (DCAT) for SABR Lung: From static fields to dynamic arcs using Monaco 5.10 Simon Goodall Radiation Oncology Physicist Genesis Care Western Australia Introduction
More informationThe Accuracy of 3-D Inhomogeneity Photon Algorithms in Commercial Treatment Planning Systems using a Heterogeneous Lung Phantom
The Accuracy of 3-D Inhomogeneity Photon Algorithms in Commercial Treatment Planning Systems using a Heterogeneous Lung Phantom Gary Fisher, B.S. David Followill, Ph.D. Geoffrey Ibbott, Ph.D. This investigation
More informationMonte Carlo Dose Calculation for Radiotherapy Treatment Planning
Monte Carlo Dose Calculation for Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Monte Carlo Dose Calculation for Radiotherapy Treatment Planning C-M M Charlie Ma, Ph.D. Department of Radiation Oncology Fox Chase Cancer
More informationChapters from Clinical Oncology
Chapters from Clinical Oncology Lecture notes University of Szeged Faculty of Medicine Department of Oncotherapy 2012. 1 RADIOTHERAPY Technical aspects Dr. Elemér Szil Introduction There are three possibilities
More informationOn the use of 4DCT derived composite CT images in treatment planning of SBRT for lung tumors
On the use of 4DCT derived composite CT images in treatment planning of SBRT for lung tumors Zhe (Jay) Chen, Ph.D. Department of Therapeutic Radiology Yale University School of Medicine and Yale-New Haven
More informationEvaluation of Monaco treatment planning system for hypofractionated stereotactic volumetric arc radiotherapy of multiple brain metastases
Evaluation of Monaco treatment planning system for hypofractionated stereotactic volumetric arc radiotherapy of multiple brain metastases CASE STUDY Institution: Odette Cancer Centre Location: Sunnybrook
More informationBorges C 1, Zarza- Moreno M 2, Teixeira N 2, Vaz P 3 1
Borges C 1, Zarza- Moreno M 2, Teixeira N 2, Vaz P 3 1 Medicalconsult SA, Lisboa, Portugal; 2 Escola Superior de Tecnologias da Saúde, Lisboa, Portugal; 3 InsEtuto Tecnológico e Nuclear, InsEtuto Superior
More informationEvaluation of three APBI techniques under NSABP B-39 guidelines
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 11, NUMBER 1, WINTER 2010 Evaluation of three APBI techniques under NSABP B-39 guidelines Daniel Scanderbeg, a Catheryn Yashar, Greg White, Roger Rice,
More informationCombination effects of tissue heterogeneity and geometric targeting error in stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer using CyberKnife
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 16, NUMBER 5, 2015 Combination effects of tissue heterogeneity and geometric targeting error in stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer using
More informationStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has been increasingly
original article Central versus Peripheral Tumor Location Influence on Survival, Local Control, and Toxicity Following Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Primary Non Small-Cell Lung Cancer Henry S. Park,
More information3D Pre-treatment Dose Verification for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Patients
3D Pre-treatment Dose Verification for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Patients G Asuni *1, T vanbeek 1, E VanUtyven 1, P McCowan 1,2, and B.M.C. McCurdy 1,2,3 1 Medical Physics Department, CancerCare
More informationActivity report from JCOG physics group
2013.5.9 Global Harmonization Group meeting ICCR2013 @ Melbourne Activity report from JCOG physics group 1 Hokkaido University, Graduate School of Medicine, 2 National Cancer Center, Center for Cancer
More informationWHOLE-BRAIN RADIOTHERAPY WITH SIMULTANEOUS INTEGRATED BOOST TO MULTIPLE BRAIN METASTASES USING VOLUMETRIC MODULATED ARC THERAPY
doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.03.029 Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol. Phys., Vol. 75, No. 1, pp. 253 259, 2009 Copyright Ó 2009 Elsevier Inc. Printed in the USA. All rights reserved 0360-3016/09/$ see front
More informationLung SBRT: dosimetric and delivery comparison of RapidArc, TomoTherapy, and IMRT
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 14, NUMBER 4, 2013 Lung SBRT: dosimetric and delivery comparison of RapidArc, TomoTherapy, and IMRT Ashleigh Weyh, 1a Andre Konski, 1,2 Adrian Nalichowski,
More informationDose distribution evaluation of various dose calculation algorithms in inhomogeneous media
Volume 14, No 4 International Journal of Radiation Research, October 2016 Dose distribution evaluation of various dose calculation algorithms in inhomogeneous media Y.L. Kim 1,2, T.S. Suh 1,2*, B.Y. Choe
More informationIMRT Planning Basics AAMD Student Webinar
IMRT Planning Basics AAMD Student Webinar March 12, 2014 Karen Chin Snyder, MS Senior Associate Physicist Department of Radiation Oncology Disclosures The presenter has received speaker honoraria from
More informationNormal tissue doses from MV image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) using orthogonal MV and MV-CBCT
Received: 28 September 2017 Revised: 17 November 2017 Accepted: 28 December 2017 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12276 RADIATION ONCOLOGY PHYSICS Normal tissue doses from MV image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) using
More informationEvaluation of Dynamic Delivery Quality Assurance Process for Internal Target Volume Based RapidArc
Original Article PMP Progress in Medical Physics 28(4), December 217 https://doi.org/1.14316/pmp.217.28.4.181 pissn 258-4445, eissn 258-4453 Evaluation of Dynamic Delivery Quality Assurance Process for
More informationComparison of Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm Plan and Acuros XB Plan for Lung Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy Using Flattening Filter-Free Beams
Original Article PROGRESS in MEDICAL PHYSICS Vol. 25, No. 4, December, 2014 http://dx.doi.org/10.14316/pmp.2014.25.4.210 Comparison of Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm Plan and Acuros XB Plan for Lung Stereotactic
More informationThe bootstrap method to improve statistical analysis of dosimetric data for radiotherapy outcomes
The bootstrap method to improve statistical analysis of dosimetric data for radiotherapy outcomes Abdulhamid Chaikh1,2, Jean-Pierre Bresciani3,4, Jacques Balosso2,4 1Department of Radiation Oncology and
More informationTreatment Planning Evaluation of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) for Craniospinal Irradiation (CSI)
Treatment Planning Evaluation of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) for Craniospinal Irradiation (CSI) Tagreed AL-ALAWI Medical Physicist King Abdullah Medical City- Jeddah Aim 1. Simplify and standardize
More informationOn the impact of ICRU report 90 recommendations on k Q factors for high-energy photon beams
On the impact of ICRU report 90 recommendations on k Q factors for high-energy photon beams Ernesto Mainegra-Hing a) and Bryan R. Muir Measurement Science and Standards, National Research Council of Canada,
More informationStereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Primary Lung Cancers >3 Centimeters
Original Article Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Primary Lung Cancers >3 Centimeters John J. Cuaron, MD,* Ellen D. Yorke, PhD,* Amanda Foster, BA,* Meier Hsu, MS,* Zhigang Zhang, PhD,* Fan Liu,
More informationDosimetric evaluation of the Acuros XB algorithm for a 4 MV photon beam in head and neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 16, NUMBER 4, 2015 Dosimetric evaluation of the Acuros XB algorithm for a 4 MV photon beam in head and neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy Kimiko
More informationSpinal Cord Doses in Palliative Lung Radiotherapy Schedules
Journal of the Egyptian Nat. Cancer Inst., Vol. 8, No., June: -, 00 Spinal Cord Doses in Palliative Lung Radiotherapy Schedules HODA AL-BOOZ, FRCR FFRRCSI M.D.* and CAROL PARTON, Ph.D.** The Departments
More informationOPTIMIZATION OF COLLIMATOR PARAMETERS TO REDUCE RECTAL DOSE IN INTENSITY-MODULATED PROSTATE TREATMENT PLANNING
Medical Dosimetry, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 205-212, 2005 Copyright 2005 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists Printed in the USA. All rights reserved 0958-3947/05/$ see front matter doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2005.06.002
More informationDisclosures. Educational Objectives. Developing an SBRT Program? Basic Questions to Consider:
Establishing A Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) Clinical Program Part II: Clinical and Radiobiological Considerations 2009 AAPM National Meeting July 29, 2009 Anaheim California Disclosures UVA
More informationIndependent Dose Verification for IMRT Using Monte Carlo. C-M M Charlie Ma, Ph.D. Department of Radiation Oncology FCCC, Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA
Independent Dose Verification for IMRT Using Monte Carlo C-M M Charlie Ma, Ph.D. Department of Radiation Oncology FCCC, Philadelphia, PA 19111, USA Outline Why Monte Carlo for IMRT QA? Experimental verification
More informationA treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse
Peters et al. Radiation Oncology 2014, 9:153 RESEARCH Open Access A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse Samuel Peters
More informationBenchmarking treatment planning dose calculations using a Monte Carlo dose engine as a potential activity of a primary standard lab
Benchmarking treatment planning dose calculations using a Monte Carlo dose engine as a potential activity of a primary standard lab Nick Reynaert (LSDG, Belgium/Erasmus MC, The Netherlands) Hugo Palmans
More informationOutline. Clinical Implementation of Monte Carlo Methods for External Photon Therapy. Outline. Indrin J. Chetty Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit MI
Outline Clinical Implementation of Monte Carlo Methods for External Photon Therapy Indrin J. Chetty Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit MI A. Introduction to the Monte Carlo Method as applied to radiation transport
More informationInhomogeneity correction and the analytic anisotropic algorithm
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 9, NUMBER 2, SPRING 2008 Inhomogeneity correction and the analytic anisotropic algorithm Don Robinson a Department of Medical Physics, Cross Cancer Institution,
More informationComparison of CT images with average intensity projection, free breathing, and mid-ventilation for dose calculation in lung cancer
Received: 6 May 2016 Accepted: 6 December 2016 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12037 RADIATION ONCOLOGY PHYSICS Comparison of CT images with average intensity projection, free breathing, and mid-ventilation for dose
More informationHeterogeneity Corrections in Clinical Trials
Heterogeneity Corrections in Clinical Trials Niko Papanikolaou Departments of Radiology and Radiation Oncology U of TX Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX Eric Klein Department of Radiation Oncology
More informationOriginal Article. Teyyiba Kanwal, Muhammad Khalid, Syed Ijaz Hussain Shah, Khawar Nadeem
Original Article Treatment Planning Evaluation of Sliding Window and Multiple Static Segments Technique in Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy for Different Beam Directions Teyyiba Kanwal, Muhammad Khalid,
More informationAssessing the shift of radiobiological metrics in lung radiotherapy plans using 2D gamma index
Original Article Assessing the shift of radiobiological metrics in lung radiotherapy plans using 2D gamma index Abdulhamid Chaikh, Jacques Balosso,2 Department of Radiation Oncology and Medical Physics,
More informationIGRT Protocol Design and Informed Margins. Conflict of Interest. Outline 7/7/2017. DJ Vile, PhD. I have no conflict of interest to disclose
IGRT Protocol Design and Informed Margins DJ Vile, PhD Conflict of Interest I have no conflict of interest to disclose Outline Overview and definitions Quantification of motion Influences on margin selection
More informationEQUIVALENT DOSE FROM SECONDARY NEUTRONS AND SCATTER PHOTONS IN ADVANCE RADIATION THERAPY TECHNIQUES WITH 15 MV PHOTON BEAMS
PAPER EQUIVALENT DOSE FROM SECONDARY NEUTRONS AND SCATTER PHOTONS IN ADVANCE RADIATION THERAPY TECHNIQUES WITH 15 MV PHOTON BEAMS Isra Israngkul Na Ayuthaya *, Sivalee Suriyapee, Phongpheath Pengvanich
More informationEvaluation of Three-dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy and Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Techniques in High-Grade Gliomas
1 Carol Boyd Comprehensive Case Study July 11, 2013 Evaluation of Three-dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy and Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Techniques in High-Grade Gliomas Abstract: Introduction:
More informationThe Effects of DIBH on Liver Dose during Right-Breast Treatments: A Case Study Abstract: Introduction: Case Description: Conclusion: Introduction
1 The Effects of DIBH on Liver Dose during Right-Breast Treatments: A Case Study Megan E. Sullivan, B.S., R.T.(T)., Patrick A. Melby, B.S. Ashley Hunzeker, M.S., CMD, Nishele Lenards, M.S., CMD, R.T. (R)(T),
More informationA TREATMENT PLANNING STUDY COMPARING VMAT WITH 3D CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER USING PINNACLE PLANNING SYSTEM *
Romanian Reports in Physics, Vol. 66, No. 2, P. 394 400, 2014 A TREATMENT PLANNING STUDY COMPARING VMAT WITH 3D CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER USING PINNACLE PLANNING SYSTEM * D. ADAM 1,2,
More informationThe dosimetric effect of electron density overrides in 3DCRT Lung SBRT for a range of lung tumor dimensions
Received: 25 February 2018 Revised: 24 July 2018 Accepted: 4 August 2018 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12446 RADIATION ONCOLOGY PHYSICS The dosimetric effect of electron density overrides in 3DCRT Lung SBRT for a
More informationClinical Implementation of SRS/SBRT
Clinical Implementation of SRS/SBRT Anil Sethi, PhD, FAAPM Loyola University Medical Center November 4, 2017 Disclosures Speaker: BrainLAB Standard Imaging Research collaboration: RaySearch 2 Learning
More informationClinical Implications of High Definition Multileaf Collimator (HDMLC) Dosimetric Leaf Gap (DLG) Variations
Original Article PROGRESS in MEDICAL PHYSICS 27(3), Sept. 2016 http://dx.doi.org/10.14316/pmp.2016.27.3.111 pissn 2508-4445, eissn 2508-4453 Clinical Implications of High Definition Multileaf Collimator
More informationGeometric dose prediction model for hemithoracic intensity-modulated radiation therapy in mesothelioma patients with two intact lungs
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 17, NUMBER 3, 2016 Geometric dose prediction model for hemithoracic intensity-modulated radiation therapy in mesothelioma patients with two intact lungs
More informationMulti-Case Knowledge-Based IMRT Treatment Planning in Head and Neck Cancer. Shelby Mariah Grzetic. Graduate Program in Medical Physics Duke University
Multi-Case Knowledge-Based IMRT Treatment Planning in Head and Neck Cancer by Shelby Mariah Grzetic Graduate Program in Medical Physics Duke University Date: Approved: Joseph Y. Lo, Co-Supervisor Shiva
More informationbiij Initial experience in treating lung cancer with helical tomotherapy
Available online at http://www.biij.org/2007/1/e2 doi: 10.2349/biij.3.1.e2 biij Biomedical Imaging and Intervention Journal CASE REPORT Initial experience in treating lung cancer with helical tomotherapy
More informationClinical outcomes of patients with malignant lung lesions treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in five fractions
J Radiat Oncol (2012) 1:57 63 DOI 10.1007/s13566-012-0008-0 ORIGINAL RESEARCH Clinical outcomes of patients with malignant lung lesions treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in five fractions
More informationIs internal target volume accurate for dose evaluation in lung cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy?
/, Vol. 7, No. 16 Is internal target volume accurate for dose evaluation in lung cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy? Jiayuan Peng 1,2, Zhen Zhang 1,2, Jiazhou Wang 1,2, Jiang Xie 1,2, Weigang Hu 1,2
More informationFilm-based dose validation of Monte Carlo algorithm for Cyberknife system with a CIRS thorax phantom
Received: 4 August 2017 Revised: 1 January 2018 Accepted: 6 February 2018 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12314 RADIATION ONCOLOGY PHYSICS Film-based dose validation of Monte Carlo algorithm for Cyberknife system with
More informationDose-Guided Radiotherapy: Potential Benefit of Online Dose Recalculation for Stereotactic Lung Irradiation in Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer
International Journal of Radiation Oncology biology physics www.redjournal.org Physics Contribution Dose-Guided Radiotherapy: Potential Benefit of Online Dose Recalculation for Stereotactic Lung Irradiation
More informationJOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 17, NUMBER 6, 2016
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 17, NUMBER 6, 2016 Development and evaluation of a clinical model for lung cancer patients using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) within a knowledge-based
More informationDosimetric advantage of using 6 MV over 15 MV photons in conformal therapy of lung cancer: Monte Carlo studies in patient geometries
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 3, NUMBER 1, WINTER 2002 Dosimetric advantage of using 6 MV over 15 MV photons in conformal therapy of lung cancer: Monte Carlo studies in patient geometries
More informationIndependent absorbed-dose calculation using the Monte Carlo algorithm in volumetric modulated arc therapy
Haga et al. Radiation Oncology 2014, 9:75 RESEARCH Open Access Independent absorbed-dose calculation using the Monte Carlo algorithm in volumetric modulated arc therapy Akihiro Haga *, Taiki Magome, Shigeharu
More informationPotential systematic uncertainties in IGRT when FBCT reference images are used for pancreatic tumors
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 16, NUMBER 3, 2015 Potential systematic uncertainties in IGRT when FBCT reference images are used for pancreatic tumors Ahmad Amoush, May Abdel-Wahab,
More informationSunCHECK Patient Comprehensive Patient QA
The SunCHECK Platform SunCHECK Patient Comprehensive Patient QA SunCHECK Patient // Comprehensive Patient QA Automate Your Patient QA SunCHECK Patient automates all your Patient QA needs from Secondary
More informationRadiation Planning Index for dose distribution evaluation in stereotactic radiotherapy
Radiation Planning Index for dose distribution evaluation in stereotactic radiotherapy Krzysztof ŚLOSAREK, Aleksandra GRZĄDZIEL, Marta SZLAG, Joanna BYSTRZYCKA Received: 8.4.28 Accepted: 9.8.28 Subject:
More informationCPT code semantics 8/18/2011. SBRT Planning Case Studies. Spectrum of applications of SBRT. itreat
Spectrum of applications of SBRT EDUCATIONAL COURSE Physics and Dosimetry of SBRT Part III: Planning Case Studies Brian D. Kavanagh, MD, MPH Department of Radiation Oncology University of Colorado School
More informationDisclosures. Clinical Implementation of SRS/SBRT. Overview. Anil Sethi, PhD. Speaker: BrainLAB Standard Imaging Research collaboration: RaySearch
Clinical Implementation of SRS/SBRT Anil Sethi, PhD Loyola University Medical Center August 3, 2017 Disclosures Speaker: BrainLAB Standard Imaging Research collaboration: RaySearch 2 Overview Physics Considerations
More informationMONTE CARLO BASED DOSIMETRY OF HEAD-AND-NECK PATIENTS TREATED WITH SIB-IMRT
doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.09.049 Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol. Phys., Vol. 64, No. 3, pp. 968 977, 2006 Copyright 2006 Elsevier Inc. Printed in the USA. All rights reserved 0360-3016/06/$ see front
More informationA comprehensive dosimetric study on switching from a Type-B to a Type-C dose algorithm for modern lung SBRT
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Biological Systems Engineering: Papers and Publications Biological Systems Engineering 2017 A comprehensive dosimetric study
More informationJOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 16, NUMBER 4, 2015
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, VOLUME 16, NUMBER 4, 2015 Dosimetric comparison of Acuros XB with collapsed cone convolution/superposition and anisotropic analytic algorithm for stereotactic
More informationUse of Bubble Detectors to Characterize Neutron Dose Distribution in a Radiotherapy Treatment Room used for IMRT treatments
Use of Bubble Detectors to Characterize Neutron Dose Distribution in a Radiotherapy Treatment Room used for IMRT treatments Alana Hudson *1 1 Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Department of Medical Physics, 1331
More informationRPC Liver Phantom Highly Conformal Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy
RPC Liver Phantom Highly Conformal Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Guidelines for Planning and Irradiating the RPC Liver Phantom. Revised Dec 2005 Credentialing for this protocol requires four steps:
More informationRe irradiation volumetric modulated arc therapy optimization based on cumulative biologically effective dose objectives
Received: 29 June 2018 Revised: 24 August 2018 Accepted: 27 August 2018 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12481 TECHNICAL NOTE Re irradiation volumetric modulated arc therapy optimization based on cumulative biologically
More informationFollow this and additional works at: Part of the Medicine and Health Sciences Commons
Texas Medical Center Library DigitalCommons@TMC UT GSBS Dissertations and Theses (Open Access) Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences 8-2012 EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ANISOTROPIC ANALYTICAL ALGORITHM
More informationCase Study. Institution Farrer Park Hospital
Case Study Single isocenter high definition dynamic radiosurgery (HDRS) for multiple brain metastases HDRS with Monaco, Versa HD and HexaPOD allows multiple brain metastases treatment within standard 15-minute
More informationImplementing New Technologies for Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy
Implementing New Technologies for Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Implementation of radiosurgery and SBRT requires a fundamentally sound approach Errors don t blur out
More information