Literature DB >> 23039658

Report of the Task Group 186 on model-based dose calculation methods in brachytherapy beyond the TG-43 formalism: current status and recommendations for clinical implementation.

Luc Beaulieu1, Asa Carlsson Tedgren, Jean-Francois Carrier, Stephen D Davis, Firas Mourtada, Mark J Rivard, Rowan M Thomson, Frank Verhaegen, Todd A Wareing, Jeffrey F Williamson.   

Abstract

The charge of Task Group 186 (TG-186) is to provide guidance for early adopters of model-based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs) for brachytherapy (BT) dose calculations to ensure practice uniformity. Contrary to external beam radiotherapy, heterogeneity correction algorithms have only recently been made available to the BT community. Yet, BT dose calculation accuracy is highly dependent on scatter conditions and photoelectric effect cross-sections relative to water. In specific situations, differences between the current water-based BT dose calculation formalism (TG-43) and MBDCAs can lead to differences in calculated doses exceeding a factor of 10. MBDCAs raise three major issues that are not addressed by current guidance documents: (1) MBDCA calculated doses are sensitive to the dose specification medium, resulting in energy-dependent differences between dose calculated to water in a homogeneous water geometry (TG-43), dose calculated to the local medium in the heterogeneous medium, and the intermediate scenario of dose calculated to a small volume of water in the heterogeneous medium. (2) MBDCA doses are sensitive to voxel-by-voxel interaction cross sections. Neither conventional single-energy CT nor ICRU∕ICRP tissue composition compilations provide useful guidance for the task of assigning interaction cross sections to each voxel. (3) Since each patient-source-applicator combination is unique, having reference data for each possible combination to benchmark MBDCAs is an impractical strategy. Hence, a new commissioning process is required. TG-186 addresses in detail the above issues through the literature review and provides explicit recommendations based on the current state of knowledge. TG-43-based dose prescription and dose calculation remain in effect, with MBDCA dose reporting performed in parallel when available. In using MBDCAs, it is recommended that the radiation transport should be performed in the heterogeneous medium and, at minimum, the dose to the local medium be reported along with the TG-43 calculated doses. Assignments of voxel-by-voxel cross sections represent a particular challenge. Electron density information is readily extracted from CT imaging, but cannot be used to distinguish between different materials having the same density. Therefore, a recommendation is made to use a number of standardized materials to maintain uniformity across institutions. Sensitivity analysis shows that this recommendation offers increased accuracy over TG-43. MBDCA commissioning will share commonalities with current TG-43-based systems, but in addition there will be algorithm-specific tasks. Two levels of commissioning are recommended: reproducing TG-43 dose parameters and testing the advanced capabilities of MBDCAs. For validation of heterogeneity and scatter conditions, MBDCAs should mimic the 3D dose distributions from reference virtual geometries. Potential changes in BT dose prescriptions and MBDCA limitations are discussed. When data required for full MBDCA implementation are insufficient, interim recommendations are made and potential areas of research are identified. Application of TG-186 guidance should retain practice uniformity in transitioning from the TG-43 to the MBDCA approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23039658     DOI: 10.1118/1.4747264

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


  59 in total

1.  Prospects for in vivo estimation of photon linear attenuation coefficients using postprocessing dual-energy CT imaging on a commercial scanner: comparison of analytic and polyenergetic statistical reconstruction algorithms.

Authors:  Joshua D Evans; Bruce R Whiting; Joseph A O'Sullivan; David G Politte; Paul H Klahr; Yaduo Yu; Jeffrey F Williamson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 2.  Electronic brachytherapy--current status and future directions.

Authors:  D J Eaton
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-03-06       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) for superficial skin irradiation with significant curvature in one or more planes.

Authors:  Rachel J Wills; Gerry Lowe; Caroline L Jones; Peter J Hoskin
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 4.  In vivo dosimetry: trends and prospects for brachytherapy.

Authors:  G Kertzscher; A Rosenfeld; S Beddar; K Tanderup; J E Cygler
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Current state of the art brachytherapy treatment planning dosimetry algorithms.

Authors:  P Papagiannis; E Pantelis; P Karaiskos
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 6.  Dosimetric audit in brachytherapy.

Authors:  A L Palmer; D A Bradley; A Nisbet
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Tissue decomposition from dual energy CT data for MC based dose calculation in particle therapy.

Authors:  Nora Hünemohr; Harald Paganetti; Steffen Greilich; Oliver Jäkel; Joao Seco
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 8.  Recent developments and best practice in brachytherapy treatment planning.

Authors:  C D Lee
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-06-02       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 9.  A review of dosimetric impact of implementation of model-based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs) for HDR brachytherapy.

Authors:  Yousif A M Yousif; Alexander F I Osman; Mohammed A Halato
Journal:  Phys Eng Sci Med       Date:  2021-06-17

Review 10.  Magnetic resonance image guided brachytherapy.

Authors:  Kari Tanderup; Akila N Viswanathan; Christian Kirisits; Steven J Frank
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 5.934

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.