B Zeinali-Rafsanjani1, R Faghihi1,2, M A Mosleh-Shirazi3,4, M Saeedi-Moghadam3, R Jalli3, S Sina2. 1. 1 Department of Nuclear Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. 2. 2 Radiation Research Center, School of Mechanical Engineering, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. 3. 3 Medical Imaging Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. 4. 4 Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Physics Unit, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: MRI-only treatment planning (TP) can be advantageous in paediatric radiotherapy. However, electron density extraction is necessary for dose calculation. Normally, after bone segmentation, a bulk density is assigned. However, the variation of bone bulk density in patients makes the creation of pseudo CTs challenging. This study aims to assess the effects of bone density variations in children on radiation attenuation and dose calculation for MRI-only TP. METHODS: Bone contents of <15-year-old children were calculated, and substituted in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory paediatric phantoms. The percentage depth dose and beam profile of 150 kVp and 6 MV photon and 6 MeV electron beams were then calculated using Xcom, MCNPX (Monte Carlo N-particle version X) and ORLN phantoms. RESULTS: Using 150 kVp X-rays, the difference in attenuation coefficient was almost 5% between an 11-year-old child and a newborn, and ~8% between an adult and a newborn. With megavoltage radiation, the differences were smaller but still important. For an 18 MV photon beam, the difference of radiation attenuation between an 11-year-old child and a newborn was 4% and ~7.4% between an adult and a newborn. For 6 MeV electrons, dose differences were observed up to the 2 cm depth. The percentage depth dose difference between 1 and 10-year-olds was 18.5%, and between 10 and 15-year-olds was 24%. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that for MRI-only TP of photon- or electron-beam radiotherapy, the bone densities of each age group should be defined separately for accurate dose calculation. Advances in knowledge: This study highlights the need for more age-specific determination of bone electron density for accurate dose calculations in paediatric MRI-only radiotherapy TP.
OBJECTIVE: MRI-only treatment planning (TP) can be advantageous in paediatric radiotherapy. However, electron density extraction is necessary for dose calculation. Normally, after bone segmentation, a bulk density is assigned. However, the variation of bone bulk density in patients makes the creation of pseudo CTs challenging. This study aims to assess the effects of bone density variations in children on radiation attenuation and dose calculation for MRI-only TP. METHODS: Bone contents of <15-year-old children were calculated, and substituted in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory paediatric phantoms. The percentage depth dose and beam profile of 150 kVp and 6 MV photon and 6 MeV electron beams were then calculated using Xcom, MCNPX (Monte Carlo N-particle version X) and ORLN phantoms. RESULTS: Using 150 kVp X-rays, the difference in attenuation coefficient was almost 5% between an 11-year-old child and a newborn, and ~8% between an adult and a newborn. With megavoltage radiation, the differences were smaller but still important. For an 18 MV photon beam, the difference of radiation attenuation between an 11-year-old child and a newborn was 4% and ~7.4% between an adult and a newborn. For 6 MeV electrons, dose differences were observed up to the 2 cm depth. The percentage depth dose difference between 1 and 10-year-olds was 18.5%, and between 10 and 15-year-olds was 24%. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that for MRI-only TP of photon- or electron-beam radiotherapy, the bone densities of each age group should be defined separately for accurate dose calculation. Advances in knowledge: This study highlights the need for more age-specific determination of bone electron density for accurate dose calculations in paediatric MRI-only radiotherapy TP.
Authors: J L Bedford; P J Childs; V Nordmark Hansen; M A Mosleh-Shirazi; F Verhaegen; A P Warrington Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Mika Kapanen; Juhani Collan; Annette Beule; Tiina Seppälä; Kauko Saarilahti; Mikko Tenhunen Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-08-10 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Ciprian Catana; Andre van der Kouwe; Thomas Benner; Christian J Michel; Michael Hamm; Matthias Fenchel; Bruce Fischl; Bruce Rosen; Matthias Schmand; A Gregory Sorensen Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: A F Thornton; H M Sandler; R K Ten Haken; D L McShan; B A Fraass; M L La Vigne; B R Yanke Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1992 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Qinan Bao; Brian A Hrycushko; Joseph P Dugas; Frederick H Hager; Timothy D Solberg Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2012-03-20 Impact factor: 3.481