Literature DB >> 19671968

Calculated organ doses from selected prostate treatment plans using Monte Carlo simulations and an anatomically realistic computational phantom.

Bryan Bednarz1, Cindy Hancox, X George Xu.   

Abstract

There is growing concern about radiation-induced second cancers associated with radiation treatments. Particular attention has been focused on the risk to patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) due primarily to increased monitor units. To address this concern we have combined a detailed medical linear accelerator model of the Varian Clinac 2100 C with anatomically realistic computational phantoms to calculate organ doses from selected treatment plans. This paper describes the application to calculate organ-averaged equivalent doses using a computational phantom for three different treatments of prostate cancer: a 4-field box treatment, the same box treatment plus a 6-field 3D-CRT boost treatment and a 7-field IMRT treatment. The equivalent doses per MU to those organs that have shown a predilection for second cancers were compared between the different treatment techniques. In addition, the dependence of photon and neutron equivalent doses on gantry angle and energy was investigated. The results indicate that the box treatment plus 6-field boost delivered the highest intermediate- and low-level photon doses per treatment MU to the patient primarily due to the elevated patient scatter contribution as a result of an increase in integral dose delivered by this treatment. In most organs the contribution of neutron dose to the total equivalent dose for the 3D-CRT treatments was less than the contribution of photon dose, except for the lung, esophagus, thyroid and brain. The total equivalent dose per MU to each organ was calculated by summing the photon and neutron dose contributions. For all organs non-adjacent to the primary beam, the equivalent doses per MU from the IMRT treatment were less than the doses from the 3D-CRT treatments. This is due to the increase in the integral dose and the added neutron dose to these organs from the 18 MV treatments. However, depending on the application technique and optimization used, the required MU values for IMRT treatments can be two to three times greater than 3D CRT. Therefore, the total equivalent dose in most organs would be higher from the IMRT treatment compared to the box treatment and comparable to the organ doses from the box treatment plus the 6-field boost. This is the first time when organ dose data for an adult male patient of the ICRP reference anatomy have been calculated and documented. The tools presented in this paper can be used to estimate the second cancer risk to patients undergoing radiation treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19671968      PMCID: PMC3376897          DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/54/17/013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  25 in total

1.  Incorporating dynamic collimator motion in Monte Carlo simulations: an application in modelling a dynamic wedge.

Authors:  F Verhaegen; H H Liu
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Monte Carlo simulation of a dynamic MLC based on a multiple source model.

Authors:  M K Fix; P Manser; E J Born; R Mini; P Rüegsegger
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Incorporating multi-leaf collimator leaf sequencing into iterative IMRT optimization.

Authors:  Jeffrey V Siebers; Marc Lauterbach; Paul J Keall; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 4.  Monte Carlo simulation for MLC-based intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

Authors:  T Pawlicki; C M Ma
Journal:  Med Dosim       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.482

5.  Second malignancies in prostate carcinoma patients after radiotherapy compared with surgery.

Authors:  D J Brenner; R E Curtis; E J Hall; E Ron
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-01-15       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Peripheral neutron and gamma doses in radiotherapy with an 18 MV linear accelerator.

Authors:  F Vanhavere; D Huyskens; L Struelens
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 0.972

7.  Basic anatomical and physiological data for use in radiological protection: reference values. A report of age- and gender-related differences in the anatomical and physiological characteristics of reference individuals. ICRP Publication 89.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2002

8.  Breast cancer following radiotherapy and chemotherapy among young women with Hodgkin disease.

Authors:  Lois B Travis; Deirdre A Hill; Graça M Dores; Mary Gospodarowicz; Flora E van Leeuwen; Eric Holowaty; Bengt Glimelius; Michael Andersson; Tom Wiklund; Charles F Lynch; Mars B Van't Veer; Ingrid Glimelius; Hans Storm; Eero Pukkala; Marilyn Stovall; Rochelle Curtis; John D Boice; Ethel Gilbert
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-07-23       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 9.  Radiation-induced second cancers: the impact of 3D-CRT and IMRT.

Authors:  Eric J Hall; Cheng-Shie Wuu
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2003-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 10.  Can we reduce the incidence of second primary malignancies occurring after radiotherapy? A critical review.

Authors:  Maurice Tubiana
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2009-02-05       Impact factor: 6.280

View more
  7 in total

1.  A comparative study on the risk of second primary cancers in out-of-field organs associated with radiotherapy of localized prostate carcinoma using Monte Carlo-based accelerator and patient models.

Authors:  Bryan Bednarz; Basit Athar; X George Xu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Comparison of out-of-field photon doses in 6 MV IMRT and neutron doses in proton therapy for adult and pediatric patients.

Authors:  Basit S Athar; Bryan Bednarz; Joao Seco; Cindy Hancox; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Estimation of organs doses and radiation-induced secondary cancer risk from scattered photons for conventional radiation therapy of nasopharynx: a Monte Carlo study.

Authors:  Asghar Mesbahi; Farshad Seyednejad; Amir Gasemi-Jangjoo
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2010-06-30       Impact factor: 2.374

4.  Therapeutic combination of radiolabeled CLR1404 with external beam radiation in head and neck cancer model systems.

Authors:  Zachary S Morris; Jamey P Weichert; Jarob Saker; Eric A Armstrong; Abigail Besemer; Bryan Bednarz; Randall J Kimple; Paul M Harari
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 6.280

5.  Reconstruction of organ dose for external radiotherapy patients in retrospective epidemiologic studies.

Authors:  Choonik Lee; Jae Won Jung; Christopher Pelletier; Anil Pyakuryal; Stephanie Lamart; Jong Oh Kim; Choonsik Lee
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-02-26       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 6.  Clinical trials involving carbon-ion radiation therapy and the path forward.

Authors:  Ann A Lazar; Reinhard Schulte; Bruce Faddegon; Eleanor A Blakely; Mack Roach
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Peripheral dose measurements with diode and thermoluminescence dosimeters for intensity modulated radiotherapy delivered with conventional and un-conventional linear accelerator.

Authors:  Rajesh Kinhikar; Poonam Gamre; Chandrashekhar Tambe; Sudarshan Kadam; George Biju; C S Magai; Dipak Dhote; Shyam Shrivastava; Deepak Deshpande
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2013-01
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.