Literature DB >> 23231297

Small field segments surrounded by large areas only shielded by a multileaf collimator: comparison of experiments and dose calculation.

T Kron1, A Clivio, E Vanetti, G Nicolini, J Cramb, P Lonski, L Cozzi, A Fogliata.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Complex radiotherapy fields delivered using a tertiary multileaf collimator (MLC) often feature small open segments surrounded by large areas of the beam only shielded by the MLC. The aim of this study was to test the ability of two modern dose calculation algorithms to accurately calculate the dose in these fields which would be common, for example, in volumetric modulated arc treatment (VMAT) and study the impact of variations in dosimetric leaf gap (DLG), focal spot size, and MLC transmission in the beam models.
METHODS: Nine test fields with small fields (0.6-3 cm side length) surrounded by large MLC shielded areas (secondary collimator 12 × 12 cm(2)) were created using a 6 MV beam from a Varian Clinac iX linear accelerator with 120 leaf MLC. Measurements of output factors and profiles were performed using a diamond detector (PTW) and compared to two dose calculations algorithms anisotropic analytical algorithm [(AAA) and Acuros XB] implemented on a commercial radiotherapy treatment planning system (Varian Eclipse 10).
RESULTS: Both calculation algorithms predicted output factors within 1% for field sizes larger than 1 × 1 cm(2). For smaller fields AAA tended to underestimate the dose. Profiles were predicted well for all fields except for problems of Acuros XB to model the secondary penumbra between MLC shielded fields and the secondary collimator. A focal spot size of 1 mm or less, DLG 1.4 mm and MLC transmission of 1.4% provided a generally good model for our experimental setup.
CONCLUSIONS: AAA and Acuros XB were found to predict the dose under small MLC defined field segments well. While DLG and focal spot affect mostly the penumbra, the choice of correct MLC transmission will be essential to model treatments such as VMAT accurately.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23231297     DOI: 10.1118/1.4762564

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


  15 in total

1.  Evaluation of beam modeling for small fields using a flattening filter-free beam.

Authors:  Daisuke Kawahara; Shuichi Ozawa; Takeo Nakashima; Masamichi Aita; Shintaro Tsuda; Yusuke Ochi; Takuro Okumura; Hirokazu Masuda; Yoshimi Ohno; Yuji Murakami; Yasushi Nagata
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2016-06-21

2.  Reference dataset of users' photon beam modeling parameters for the Eclipse, Pinnacle, and RayStation treatment planning systems.

Authors:  Mallory C Glenn; Christine B Peterson; David S Followill; Rebecca M Howell; Julianne M Pollard-Larkin; Stephen F Kry
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Response to Thomsen et al.: Comments on "The Radiological Physics Center's standard dataset for small field size output factors".

Authors:  David S Followill; Stephen Kry
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Rounded leaf end modeling in Pinnacle VMAT treatment planning for fixed jaw linacs.

Authors:  Lori A Young; Fei Yang; Ning Cao; Juergen Meyer
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Tuning of AcurosXB source size setting for small intracranial targets.

Authors:  Stephen J Gardner; Siming Lu; Chang Liu; Ning Wen; Indrin J Chetty
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline 5.a.: Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations - Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams.

Authors:  Jennifer B Smilowitz; Indra J Das; Vladimir Feygelman; Benedick A Fraass; Stephen F Kry; Ingrid R Marshall; Dimitris N Mihailidis; Zoubir Ouhib; Timothy Ritter; Michael G Snyder; Lynne Fairobent
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

Review 7.  Influence of the jaw tracking technique on the dose calculation accuracy of small field VMAT plans.

Authors:  Ans C C Swinnen; Michel C Öllers; Erik Roijen; Sebastiaan M Nijsten; Frank Verhaegen
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Testing the methodology for dosimetry audit of heterogeneity corrections and small MLC-shaped fields: Results of IAEA multi-center studies.

Authors:  Joanna Izewska; Paulina Wesolowska; Godfrey Azangwe; David S Followill; David I Thwaites; Mehenna Arib; Amalia Stefanic; Claudio Viegas; Luo Suming; Daniela Ekendahl; Wojciech Bulski; Dietmar Georg
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 4.089

9.  Dosimetric comparison of Acuros XB with collapsed cone convolution/superposition and anisotropic analytic algorithm for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy of thoracic spinal metastases.

Authors:  Heming Zhen; Brian Hrycushko; Huichen Lee; Robert Timmerman; Arnold Pompoš; Strahinja Stojadinovic; Ryan Foster; Steve B Jiang; Timothy Solberg; Xuejun Gu
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  The clinical impact of detector choice for beam scanning.

Authors:  Jacob A Gersh; Ryan C M Best; Ronald J Watts
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.