PURPOSE: To provide a prescription dose for Monte Carlo (MC) treatment planning in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer according to tumor size and location. METHODS: Fifty-three stereotactic radiotherapy plans designed using the equivalent path-length (EPL) algorithm were re-calculated using MC. Plans were compared by the minimum dose to 95% of the PTV (D95), the heterogeneity index (HI) and the mean dose to organs at risk (OARs). Based on changes in D95, the prescription dose was converted from EPL to MC. Based on changes in HI, we examined the feasibility of MC prescription to plans re-calculated but not re-optimized with MC. RESULTS: The MC fraction dose for peripheral tumors is 16-18 Gy depending on tumor size. For central tumors the MC dose was reduced less than for peripheral tumors. The HI decreased on average by 4-9% in peripheral tumors and 3-5% in central tumors. The mean dose to OARs was lower for MC than EPL, and correlated strongly (R(2)=0.98-0.99). CONCLUSION: For the conversion from EPL to MC we recommend a separate prescription dose according to tumor size. MC optimization is not required if a HI > or = 70% is accepted. Dose constraints to OARs can be easily converted due to the high EPL-MC correlation. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
PURPOSE: To provide a prescription dose for Monte Carlo (MC) treatment planning in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer according to tumor size and location. METHODS: Fifty-three stereotactic radiotherapy plans designed using the equivalent path-length (EPL) algorithm were re-calculated using MC. Plans were compared by the minimum dose to 95% of the PTV (D95), the heterogeneity index (HI) and the mean dose to organs at risk (OARs). Based on changes in D95, the prescription dose was converted from EPL to MC. Based on changes in HI, we examined the feasibility of MC prescription to plans re-calculated but not re-optimized with MC. RESULTS: The MC fraction dose for peripheral tumors is 16-18 Gy depending on tumor size. For central tumors the MC dose was reduced less than for peripheral tumors. The HI decreased on average by 4-9% in peripheral tumors and 3-5% in central tumors. The mean dose to OARs was lower for MC than EPL, and correlated strongly (R(2)=0.98-0.99). CONCLUSION: For the conversion from EPL to MC we recommend a separate prescription dose according to tumor size. MC optimization is not required if a HI > or = 70% is accepted. Dose constraints to OARs can be easily converted due to the high EPL-MC correlation. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors: Susanne Stera; Panagiotis Balermpas; Mark K H Chan; Stefan Huttenlocher; Stefan Wurster; Christian Keller; Detlef Imhoff; Dirk Rades; Jürgen Dunst; Claus Rödel; Guido Hildebrandt; Oliver Blanck Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2017-09-05 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Steve E Braunstein; Sebastian A Dionisio; Michael W Lometti; Dilini S Pinnaduwage; Cynthia F Chuang; Sue S Yom; Alexander R Gottschalk; Martina Descovich Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2014
Authors: Jin Ho Song; Ki Mun Kang; Hoon-Sik Choi; Hojin Jeong; In Bong Ha; Jong Deog Lee; Ho Cheol Kim; Yi Yeong Jeong; Yu Ji Cho; Seung Jun Lee; Sung Hwan Kim; In-Seok Jang; Bae Kwon Jeong Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2016-04-05