Literature DB >> 10435518

Dosimetric verification of two commercially available three-dimensional treatment planning systems using the TG 23 test package.

C R Ramsey1, I L Cordrey, K M Spencer, A L Oliver.   

Abstract

The Task Group 23 (TG-23) radiation treatment planning dosimetry verification package was used to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of two commercially available treatment planning systems. The TG-23 test package contains experimentally measured beam data for two x-ray beams (4 and 18 MV) that can be used as input for 3D-RTP (three-dimensional radiation treatment planning) systems. Once the beam data is entered and modeled, a series of test cases are performed that isolate different aspects of the dose computational process. The computed values from the 3D-RTP system are compared against the measured dosimetry data, included in the package, for a set of comparison points within each test case. Both of the treatment planning systems that were studied provided excellent agreement between computed and measured doses. The cumulative 4 and 18 MV TG-23 test results for the convolution/superposition based planning system indicates that 96% of the dosimetric test points are within +/-2%, and 98% are within +/-3% of the tabulated TG-23 values. The dosimetric TG-23 test results for the pencil beam kernel based planning system are similar, with 96% of the test points falling within +/-2%, and 99% falling within +/-3% of the TG-23 measurements.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10435518     DOI: 10.1118/1.598614

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  6 in total

1.  Dosimetric evaluation of a three-dimensional treatment planning system.

Authors:  Appasamy Murugan; Xavier Sidonia Valas; Kuppusamy Thayalan; Velayudham Ramasubramanian
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2011-01

2.  A comparison of two commercial treatment-planning systems to IMRT.

Authors:  M Peter Petric; Brenda G Clark; James L Robar
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2005-08-12       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Comparison of monitor unit calculations performed with a 3D computerized planning system and independent "hand" calculations: results of three years clinical experience.

Authors:  Jackson Chan; David Russell; Victor G Peters; Thomas J Farrell
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Experimental validation of the Eclipse AAA algorithm.

Authors:  Karen Breitman; Satyapal Rathee; Chris Newcomb; Brad Murray; Donald Robinson; Colin Field; Heather Warkentin; Sherry Connors; Marc Mackenzie; Peter Dunscombe; Gino Fallone
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2007-05-10       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Verification of tangential breast treatment dose calculations in a commercial 3D treatment planning system.

Authors:  C T Baird; G Starkschall; H H Liu; T A Buchholz; K R Hogstrom
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Optimization of photon beam energy in aperture-based inverse planning.

Authors:  Jason St-Hilaire; Caroline Sévigny; Frédéric Beaulieu; Luc Gingras; Daniel Tremblay; Luc Beaulieu
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2009-09-03       Impact factor: 2.102

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.