Literature DB >> 22584174

On the quantification of the dosimetric accuracy of collapsed cone convolution superposition (CCCS) algorithm for small lung volumes using IMRT.

Oscar I Calvo1, Alonso N Gutiérrez, Sotirios Stathakis, Carlos Esquivel, Nikos Papanikolaou.   

Abstract

Specialized techniques that make use of small field dosimetry are common practice in today's clinics. These new techniques represent a big challenge to the treatment planning systems due to the lack of lateral electronic equilibrium. Because of this, the necessity of planning systems to overcome such difficulties and provide an accurate representation of the true value is of significant importance. Pinnacle3 is one such planning system. During the IMRT optimization process, Pinnacle3 treatment planning system allows the user to specify a minimum segment size which results in multiple beams composed of several subsets of different widths. In this study, the accuracy of the engine dose calculation, collapsed cone convolution superposition algorithm (CCCS) used by Pinnacle3, was quantified by Monte Carlo simulations, ionization chamber, and Kodak extended dose range film (EDR2) measurements for 11 SBRT lung patients. Lesions were < 3.0 cm in maximal diameter and <27.0cm3 in volume. The Monte Carlo EGSnrc\BEAMnrc and EGS4\MCSIM were used in the comparison. The minimum segment size allowable during optimization had a direct impact on the number of monitor units calculated for each beam. Plans with the smallest minimum segment size (0.1 cm2 to 2.0 cm2) had the largest number of MUs. Although PTV coverage remained unaffected, the segment size did have an effect on the dose to the organs at risk. Pinnacle3-calculated PTV mean doses were in agreement with Monte Carlo-calculated mean doses to within 5.6% for all plans. On average, the mean dose difference between Monte Carlo and Pinnacle3 for all 88 plans was 1.38%. The largest discrepancy in maximum dose was 5.8%, and was noted for one of the plans using a minimum segment size of 1.0 cm2. For minimum dose to the PTV, a maximum discrepancy between Monte Carlo and Pinnacle3 was noted of 12.5% for a plan using a 6.0 cm2 minimum segment size. Agreement between point dose measurements and Pinnacle3-calculated doses were on average within 0.7% in both phantoms. The profiles show a good agreement between Pinnacle3, Monte Carlo, and EDR2 film. The gamma index and the isodose lines support the result.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22584174      PMCID: PMC5716560          DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v13i3.3751

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys        ISSN: 1526-9914            Impact factor:   2.102


  32 in total

1.  Dose verification of an IMRT treatment planning system with the BEAM EGS4-based Monte Carlo code.

Authors:  P Francescon; S Cora; P Chiovati
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Convolution/superposition using the Monte Carlo method.

Authors:  Shahid A Naqvi; Matthew A Earl; David M Shepard
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2003-07-21       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Microionization chamber for reference dosimetry in IMRT verification: clinical implications on OAR dosimetric errors.

Authors:  Francisco Sánchez-Doblado; Roberto Capote; Antonio Leal; Joan V Roselló; Juan I Lagares; Rafael Arráns; Günther H Hartmann
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2005-02-17       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Commissioning stereotactic radiosurgery beams using both experimental and theoretical methods.

Authors:  George X Ding; Dennis M Duggan; Charles W Coffey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2006-05-04       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Dosimetric verification of the anisotropic analytical algorithm for radiotherapy treatment planning.

Authors:  Christopher M Bragg; John Conway
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2006-11-27       Impact factor: 6.280

6.  Variation of dose distribution of stereotactic radiotherapy for small-volume lung tumors under different respiratory conditions.

Authors:  E Kunieda; H M Deloar; N Kishitani; T Fujisaki; T Kawase; S Seki; Y Oku; A Kubo
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 2.685

7.  Calculation of photon dose distributions in an inhomogeneous medium using convolutions.

Authors:  A L Boyer; E C Mok
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1986 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  The fraction of photons undergoing head scatter in x-ray beams.

Authors:  T C Zhu; B E Bjärngard
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Experimental validation tests of fast Fourier transform convolution and multigrid superposition algorithms for dose calculation in low-density media.

Authors:  Feliciano García-Vicente; Angel Miñambres; Inmaculada Jerez; Ignaci Modolell; Leopoldo Pérez; Juan Jose Torres
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 6.280

10.  Dosimetric characteristics of dual-layer multileaf collimation for small-field and intensity-modulated radiation therapy applications.

Authors:  Yaxi Liu; Chengyu Shi; Patricia Tynan; Niko Papanikolaou
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2008-03-31       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  6 in total

1.  Optimal partial-arcs in VMAT treatment planning.

Authors:  Jeremiah Wala; Ehsan Salari; Wei Chen; David Craft
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-09-05       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Assessing the role of volumetric-modulated arc therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Mian Xi; Li Zhang; Qiao-Qiao Li; Lei Zhao; Rui Zhang; Meng-Zhong Liu
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Dosimetric impact of orthopedic metal artifact reduction (O-MAR) on Spine SBRT patients.

Authors:  Zhilei Liu Shen; Ping Xia; Paul Klahr; Toufik Djemil
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Incorporating biological modeling into patient-specific plan verification.

Authors:  Ara N Alexandrian; Panayiotis Mavroidis; Ganesh Narayanasamy; Kristen A McConnell; Christopher N Kabat; Renil B George; Dewayne L Defoor; Neil Kirby; Nikos Papanikolaou; Sotirios Stathakis
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Monte Carlo modeling of the Elekta Versa HD and patient dose calculation with EGSnrc/BEAMnrc.

Authors:  Holly M Parenica Paschal; Christopher N Kabat; Pavlos Papaconstadopoulos; Neil A Kirby; Pamela A Myers; Timothy D Wagner; Sotirios Stathakis
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-08-19       Impact factor: 2.243

6.  Comprehensive dosimetric planning comparison for early-stage, non-small cell lung cancer with SABR: fixed-beam IMRT versus VMAT versus TomoTherapy.

Authors:  Ilma Xhaferllari; Omar El-Sherif; Stewart Gaede
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.