V Peppa1, E P Pappas1, P Karaiskos1, T Major2, C Polgár2, P Papagiannis3. 1. Medical Physics Laboratory, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece. 2. National Institute of Oncology, Budapest, Hungary. 3. Medical Physics Laboratory, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece. Electronic address: ppapagi@med.uoa.gr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the clinical significance of introducing model based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs) as an alternative to TG-43 in 192Ir interstitial breast brachytherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 57 patient cohort was used in a retrospective comparison between TG-43 based dosimetry data exported from a treatment planning system and Monte Carlo (MC) dosimetry performed using MCNP v. 6.1 with plan and anatomy information in DICOM-RT format. Comparison was performed for the target, ipsilateral lung, heart, skin, breast and ribs, using dose distributions, dose-volume histograms (DVH) and plan quality indices clinically used for plan evaluation, as well as radiobiological parameters. RESULTS: TG-43 overestimation of target DVH parameters is statistically significant but small (less than 2% for the target coverage indices and 4% for homogeneity indices, on average). Significant dose differences (>5%) were observed close to the skin and at relatively large distances from the implant leading to a TG-43 dose overestimation for the organs at risk. These differences correspond to low dose regions (<50% of the prescribed dose), being less than 2% of the prescribed dose. Detected dosimetric differences did not induce clinically significant differences in calculated tumor control probabilities (mean absolute difference <0.2%) and normal tissue complication probabilities. CONCLUSION: While TG-43 shows a statistically significant overestimation of most indices used for plan evaluation, differences are small and therefore not clinically significant. Improved MBDCA dosimetry could be important for re-irradiation, technique inter-comparison and/or the assessment of secondary cancer induction risk, where accurate dosimetry in the whole patient anatomy is of the essence.
PURPOSE: To investigate the clinical significance of introducing model based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs) as an alternative to TG-43 in 192Ir interstitial breast brachytherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 57 patient cohort was used in a retrospective comparison between TG-43 based dosimetry data exported from a treatment planning system and Monte Carlo (MC) dosimetry performed using MCNP v. 6.1 with plan and anatomy information in DICOM-RT format. Comparison was performed for the target, ipsilateral lung, heart, skin, breast and ribs, using dose distributions, dose-volume histograms (DVH) and plan quality indices clinically used for plan evaluation, as well as radiobiological parameters. RESULTS:TG-43 overestimation of target DVH parameters is statistically significant but small (less than 2% for the target coverage indices and 4% for homogeneity indices, on average). Significant dose differences (>5%) were observed close to the skin and at relatively large distances from the implant leading to a TG-43 dose overestimation for the organs at risk. These differences correspond to low dose regions (<50% of the prescribed dose), being less than 2% of the prescribed dose. Detected dosimetric differences did not induce clinically significant differences in calculated tumor control probabilities (mean absolute difference <0.2%) and normal tissue complication probabilities. CONCLUSION: While TG-43 shows a statistically significant overestimation of most indices used for plan evaluation, differences are small and therefore not clinically significant. Improved MBDCA dosimetry could be important for re-irradiation, technique inter-comparison and/or the assessment of secondary cancer induction risk, where accurate dosimetry in the whole patient anatomy is of the essence.
Authors: Rodrigo Bredariol Achilles; Daniel Vitor DE Souza; Hananiah Tardivo Quintana; Andrea Cristina Moraes Malinverni; Carolina Foot Gomes DE Moura; Giovana Wagner Branda; Ana Claudia Muniz Renno; Daniel Araki Ribeiro Journal: In Vivo Date: 2022 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.406