Literature DB >> 21076191

Accuracy of out-of-field dose calculations by a commercial treatment planning system.

Rebecca M Howell1, Sarah B Scarboro, S F Kry, Derek Z Yaldo.   

Abstract

The dosimetric accuracy of treatment planning systems (TPSs) decreases for locations outside the treatment field borders. However, the true accuracy of specific TPSs for locations beyond the treatment field borders is not well documented. Our objective was to quantify the accuracy of out-of-field dose predicted by the commercially available Eclipse version 8.6 TPS (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) for a clinical treatment delivered on a Varian Clinac 2100. We calculated (in the TPS) and determined (with thermoluminescent dosimeters) doses at a total of 238 points of measurement (with distance from the field edge ranging from 3.75 to 11.25 cm). Our comparisons determined that the Eclipse TPS underestimated out-of-field doses by an average of 40% over the range of distances examined. As the distance from the treatment field increased, the TPS underestimated the dose with increasing magnitude--up to 55% at 11.25 cm from the treatment field border. These data confirm that accuracy beyond the treatment border is inadequate, and out-of-field data from TPSs should be used only with a clear understanding of this limitation. Studies that require accurate out-of-field dose should use other dose reconstruction methods, such as direct measurements or Monte Carlo calculations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21076191      PMCID: PMC3152254          DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/55/23/S03

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


  20 in total

1.  AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams.

Authors:  P R Almond; P J Biggs; B M Coursey; W F Hanson; M S Huq; R Nath; D W Rogers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Comparative risk assessment of secondary cancer incidence after treatment of Hodgkin's disease with photon and proton radiation.

Authors:  U Schneider; A Lomax; N Lombriser
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.841

3.  Experimental verification of convolution/superposition photon dose calculations for radiotherapy treatment planning.

Authors:  Maria M Aspradakis; Rachel H Morrison; Neil D Richmond; Alasdair Steele
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2003-09-07       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Uncertainty analysis of absorbed dose calculations from thermoluminescence dosimeters.

Authors:  T H Kirby; W F Hanson; D A Johnston
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1992 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Dose reconstruction for therapeutic and diagnostic radiation exposures: use in epidemiological studies.

Authors:  Marilyn Stovall; Rita Weathers; Catherine Kasper; Susan A Smith; Lois Travis; Elaine Ron; Ruth Kleinerman
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 2.841

6.  Dosimetric validation of the anisotropic analytical algorithm for photon dose calculation: fundamental characterization in water.

Authors:  Antonella Fogliata; Giorgia Nicolini; Eugenio Vanetti; Alessandro Clivio; Luca Cozzi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2006-02-21       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Calculation of effective dose from measurements of secondary neutron spectra and scattered photon dose from dynamic MLC IMRT for 6 MV, 15 MV, and 18 MV beam energies.

Authors:  Rebecca M Howell; Nolan E Hertel; Zhonglu Wang; Jesson Hutchinson; Gary D Fullerton
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  The calculated risk of fatal secondary malignancies from intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Authors:  Stephen F Kry; Mohammad Salehpour; David S Followill; Marilyn Stovall; Deborah A Kuban; R Allen White; Isaac I Rosen
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2005-07-15       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Mailable TLD system for photon and electron therapy beams.

Authors:  T H Kirby; W F Hanson; R J Gastorf; C H Chu; R J Shalek
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1986-02       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 10.  Fetal dose from radiotherapy with photon beams: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 36.

Authors:  M Stovall; C R Blackwell; J Cundiff; D H Novack; J R Palta; L K Wagner; E W Webster; R J Shalek
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  55 in total

1.  Methodology for determining doses to in-field, out-of-field and partially in-field organs for late effects studies in photon radiotherapy.

Authors:  Rebecca M Howell; Sarah B Scarboro; Phillip J Taddei; Sunil Krishnan; Stephen F Kry; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  A simple and fast physics-based analytical method to calculate therapeutic and stray doses from external beam, megavoltage x-ray therapy.

Authors:  Lydia J Jagetic; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Conversion of computational human phantoms into DICOM-RT for normal tissue dose assessment in radiotherapy patients.

Authors:  Keith T Griffin; Matthew M Mille; Christopher Pelletier; Mahesh Gopalakrishnan; Jae Won Jung; Choonik Lee; John Kalapurakal; Anil Pyakuryal; Choonsik Lee
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Risk of radiogenic second cancers following volumetric modulated arc therapy and proton arc therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Laura A Rechner; Rebecca M Howell; Rui Zhang; Carol Etzel; Andrew K Lee; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-10-10       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  A comparative study on the risks of radiogenic second cancers and cardiac mortality in a set of pediatric medulloblastoma patients treated with photon or proton craniospinal irradiation.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; Rebecca M Howell; Phillip J Taddei; Annelise Giebeler; Anita Mahajan; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 6.280

6.  Comparison of risk of radiogenic second cancer following photon and proton craniospinal irradiation for a pediatric medulloblastoma patient.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; Rebecca M Howell; Annelise Giebeler; Phillip J Taddei; Anita Mahajan; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Analytical model for out-of-field dose in photon craniospinal irradiation.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Wassim Jalbout; Rebecca M Howell; Nabil Khater; Fady Geara; Kenneth Homann; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-10-08       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Calculating and estimating second cancer risk from breast radiotherapy using Monte Carlo code with internal body scatter for each out-of-field organ.

Authors:  Takeshi Takata; Kenshiro Shiraishi; Shinobu Kumagai; Norikazu Arai; Takenori Kobayashi; Hiroshi Oba; Takahide Okamoto; Jun'ichi Kotoku
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Impact of margin size on the predicted risk of radiogenic second cancers following proton arc therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Laura A Rechner; Rebecca M Howell; Rui Zhang; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Treatment of breast cancer with simultaneous integrated boost in hybrid plan technique : Influence of flattening filter-free beams.

Authors:  Marzieh Bahrainy; Matthias Kretschmer; Vincent Jöst; Astrid Kasch; Florian Würschmidt; Jörg Dahle; Jörn Lorenzen
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 3.621

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.