Literature DB >> 23790325

Independent calculation-based verification of IMRT plans using a 3D dose-calculation engine.

Sankar Arumugam1, Aitang Xing, Gary Goozee, Lois Holloway.   

Abstract

Independent monitor unit verification of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans requires detailed 3-dimensional (3D) dose verification. The aim of this study was to investigate using a 3D dose engine in a second commercial treatment planning system (TPS) for this task, facilitated by in-house software. Our department has XiO and Pinnacle TPSs, both with IMRT planning capability and modeled for an Elekta-Synergy 6MV photon beam. These systems allow the transfer of computed tomography (CT) data and RT structures between them but do not allow IMRT plans to be transferred. To provide this connectivity, an in-house computer programme was developed to convert radiation therapy prescription (RTP) files as generated by many planning systems into either XiO or Pinnacle IMRT file formats. Utilization of the technique and software was assessed by transferring 14 IMRT plans from XiO and Pinnacle onto the other system and performing 3D dose verification. The accuracy of the conversion process was checked by comparing the 3D dose matrices and dose volume histograms (DVHs) of structures for the recalculated plan on the same system. The developed software successfully transferred IMRT plans generated by 1 planning system into the other. Comparison of planning target volume (TV) DVHs for the original and recalculated plans showed good agreement; a maximum difference of 2% in mean dose, - 2.5% in D95, and 2.9% in V95 was observed. Similarly, a DVH comparison of organs at risk showed a maximum difference of +7.7% between the original and recalculated plans for structures in both high- and medium-dose regions. However, for structures in low-dose regions (less than 15% of prescription dose) a difference in mean dose up to +21.1% was observed between XiO and Pinnacle calculations. A dose matrix comparison of original and recalculated plans in XiO and Pinnacle TPSs was performed using gamma analysis with 3%/3mm criteria. The mean and standard deviation of pixels passing gamma tolerance for XiO-generated IMRT plans was 96.1 ± 1.3, 96.6 ± 1.2, and 96.0 ± 1.5 in axial, coronal, and sagittal planes respectively. Corresponding results for Pinnacle-generated IMRT plans were 97.1 ± 1.5, 96.4 ± 1.2, and 96.5 ± 1.3 in axial, coronal, and sagittal planes respectively.
© 2013 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.

Keywords:  Dose-calculation algorithms; IMRT; Independent calculation; Treatment planning system

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23790325     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2013.04.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  2 in total

Review 1.  Towards effective and efficient patient-specific quality assurance for spot scanning proton therapy.

Authors:  X Ronald Zhu; Yupeng Li; Dennis Mackin; Heng Li; Falk Poenisch; Andrew K Lee; Anita Mahajan; Steven J Frank; Michael T Gillin; Narayan Sahoo; Xiaodong Zhang
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2015-04-10       Impact factor: 6.639

2.  Commissioning results of an automated treatment planning verification system.

Authors:  Christopher L Nelson; Bryan E Mason; Ronald C Robinson; Kelly D Kisling; Steven M Kirsner
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.