Literature DB >> 11695771

Electron pencil-beam redefinition algorithm dose calculations in the presence of heterogeneities.

R A Boyd1, K R Hogstrom, G Starkschall.   

Abstract

The electron pencil-beam redefinition algorithm (PBRA) is currently being refined and evaluated for clinical use. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the accuracy of PBRA-calculated dose in the presence of heterogeneities and to benchmark PBRA dose accuracy for future improvements to the algorithm. The PBRA was evaluated using a measured electron beam dose algorithm verification data set developed at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. The data set consists of measurements made using 9 and 20 MeV beams in a water phantom with air gaps, internal air and bone heterogeneities, and irregular surfaces. Refinements to the PBRA have enhanced the speed of the dose calculations by a factor of approximately 7 compared to speeds previously reported in published data; a 20 MeV, 15 x 15 cm2 field electron-beam dose distribution took approximately 10 minutes to calculate. The PBRA showed better than 4% accuracy in most experiments. However, experiments involving the low-energy (9 MeV) electron beam and irregular surfaces showed dose differences as great as 22%, in albeit a small fractional region. The geometries used in this study, particularly those in the irregular surface experiments, were extreme in the sense that they are not seen clinically. A more appropriate clinical evaluation in the future will involve comparisons to Monte Carlo generated patient dose distributions using actual computed tomography scan data. The present data also serve as a benchmark against which future enhancements to the PBRA can be evaluated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11695771     DOI: 10.1118/1.1406521

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


  9 in total

1.  Preliminary comparison of helical tomotherapy and mixed beams of unmodulated electrons and intensity modulated radiation therapy for treating superficial cancers of the parotid gland and nasal cavity.

Authors:  Olivier Blasi; Jonas D Fontenot; Robert S Fields; John P Gibbons; Kenneth R Hogstrom
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2011-12-28       Impact factor: 3.481

2.  Evaluation of a mixed beam therapy for postmastectomy breast cancer patients: Bolus electron conformal therapy combined with intensity modulated photon radiotherapy and volumetric modulated photon arc therapy.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; David Heins; Mary Sanders; Beibei Guo; Kenneth Hogstrom
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-05-27       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Validation of an electron Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm in the presence of heterogeneities using EGSnrc and radiochromic film measurements.

Authors:  Jean-François Aubry; Hugo Bouchard; Igor Bessières; Frédéric Lacroix
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Clinical implementation of an electron monitor unit dosimetry system based on task group 71 report and a commercial calculation program.

Authors:  Huijun Xu; Mariana Guerrero; Shifeng Chen; Xiaocheng Yang; Karl Prado; Colleen Schinkel
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2016 Oct-Dec

5.  Planning and delivery of intensity modulated bolus electron conformal therapy.

Authors:  Elizabeth N Hilliard; Robert L Carver; Erin L Chambers; James A Kavanaugh; Kevin J Erhart; Andrew S McGuffey; Kenneth R Hogstrom
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil-beam redefinition algorithm.

Authors:  Michael J Price; Kenneth R Hogstrom; John A Antolak; R Allen White; Charles D Bloch; Robert A Boyd
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2007-04-19       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Is wax equivalent to tissue in electron conformal therapy planning? A Monte Carlo study of material approximation introduced dose difference.

Authors:  Ray R Zhang; Vladimir Feygelman; Eleanor R Harris; Nikhil Rao; Eduardo G Moros; Geoffrey G Zhang
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Modeling the head of PRIMUS linear accelerator for electron-mode at 10 MeV for different applicators.

Authors:  Hani Negm; Moamen M O M Aly; Walaa M Fathy
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-02-18       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Useful island block geometries of a passive intensity modulator used for intensity-modulated bolus electron conformal therapy.

Authors:  Erin L Chambers; Robert L Carver; Kenneth R Hogstrom
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-11-18       Impact factor: 2.102

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.