Literature DB >> 29637904

Comparison of normal tissue dose calculation methods for epidemiological studies of radiotherapy patients.

Matthew M Mille1, Jae Won Jung, Choonik Lee, Gleb A Kuzmin, Choonsik Lee.   

Abstract

Radiation dosimetry is an essential input for epidemiological studies of radiotherapy patients aimed at quantifying the dose-response relationship of late-term morbidity and mortality. Individualised organ dose must be estimated for all tissues of interest located in-field, near-field, or out-of-field. Whereas conventional measurement approaches are limited to points in water or anthropomorphic phantoms, computational approaches using patient images or human phantoms offer greater flexibility and can provide more detailed three-dimensional dose information. In the current study, we systematically compared four different dose calculation algorithms so that dosimetrists and epidemiologists can better understand the advantages and limitations of the various approaches at their disposal. The four dose calculations algorithms considered were as follows: the (1) Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) and (2) Acuros XB algorithm (Acuros XB), as implemented in the Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS); (3) a Monte Carlo radiation transport code, EGSnrc; and (4) an accelerated Monte Carlo code, the x-ray Voxel Monte Carlo (XVMC). The four algorithms were compared in terms of their accuracy and appropriateness in the context of dose reconstruction for epidemiological investigations. Accuracy in peripheral dose was evaluated first by benchmarking the calculated dose profiles against measurements in a homogeneous water phantom. Additional simulations in a heterogeneous cylinder phantom evaluated the performance of the algorithms in the presence of tissue heterogeneity. In general, we found that the algorithms contained within the commercial TPS (AAA and Acuros XB) were fast and accurate in-field or near-field, but not acceptable out-of-field. Therefore, the TPS is best suited for epidemiological studies involving large cohorts and where the organs of interest are located in-field or partially in-field. The EGSnrc and XVMC codes showed excellent agreement with measurements both in-field and out-of-field. The EGSnrc code was the most accurate dosimetry approach, but was too slow to be used for large-scale epidemiological cohorts. The XVMC code showed similar accuracy to EGSnrc, but was significantly faster, and thus epidemiological applications seem feasible, especially when the organs of interest reside far away from the field edge.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29637904      PMCID: PMC6007019          DOI: 10.1088/1361-6498/aabd4f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Radiol Prot        ISSN: 0952-4746            Impact factor:   1.394


  38 in total

1.  Fast Monte Carlo dose calculation for photon beams based on the VMC electron algorithm.

Authors:  M Fippel
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Population-based risks of CNS tumors in survivors of childhood cancer: the British Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.

Authors:  Aliki J Taylor; Mark P Little; David L Winter; Elaine Sugden; David W Ellison; Charles A Stiller; Marilyn Stovall; Clare Frobisher; Emma R Lancashire; Raoul C Reulen; Michael M Hawkins
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-11-15       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 3.  Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials.

Authors:  M Clarke; R Collins; S Darby; C Davies; P Elphinstone; V Evans; J Godwin; R Gray; C Hicks; S James; E MacKinnon; P McGale; T McHugh; R Peto; C Taylor; Y Wang
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005-12-17       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  A simple and fast physics-based analytical method to calculate therapeutic and stray doses from external beam, megavoltage x-ray therapy.

Authors:  Lydia J Jagetic; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Variability of a peripheral dose among various linac geometries for second cancer risk assessment.

Authors:  A Joosten; F Bochud; S Baechler; F Levi; R-O Mirimanoff; R Moeckli
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-07-20       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Systematic measurements of whole-body dose distributions for various treatment machines and delivery techniques in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Roger A Halg; Jurgen Besserer; Uwe Schneider
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Risk of second primary thyroid cancer after radiotherapy for a childhood cancer in a large cohort study: an update from the childhood cancer survivor study.

Authors:  Parveen Bhatti; Lene H S Veiga; Cécile M Ronckers; Alice J Sigurdson; Marilyn Stovall; Susan A Smith; Rita Weathers; Wendy Leisenring; Ann C Mertens; Sue Hammond; Debra L Friedman; Joseph P Neglia; Anna T Meadows; Sarah S Donaldson; Charles A Sklar; Leslie L Robison; Peter D Inskip
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 2.841

8.  The UF family of reference hybrid phantoms for computational radiation dosimetry.

Authors:  Choonsik Lee; Daniel Lodwick; Jorge Hurtado; Deanna Pafundi; Jonathan L Williams; Wesley E Bolch
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 9.  Second solid cancers after radiation therapy: a systematic review of the epidemiologic studies of the radiation dose-response relationship.

Authors:  Amy Berrington de Gonzalez; Ethel Gilbert; Rochelle Curtis; Peter Inskip; Ruth Kleinerman; Lindsay Morton; Preetha Rajaraman; Mark P Little
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  Revisiting fetal dose during radiation therapy: evaluating treatment techniques and a custom shield.

Authors:  Amir M Owrangi; Donald A Roberts; Elizabeth L Covington; James A Hayman; Kathryn M Masi; Choonik Lee; Jean M Moran; Joann I Prisciandaro
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  4 in total

1.  Conversion of computational human phantoms into DICOM-RT for normal tissue dose assessment in radiotherapy patients.

Authors:  Keith T Griffin; Matthew M Mille; Christopher Pelletier; Mahesh Gopalakrishnan; Jae Won Jung; Choonik Lee; John Kalapurakal; Anil Pyakuryal; Choonsik Lee
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Application of an automatic segmentation method for evaluating cardiac structure doses received by breast radiotherapy patients.

Authors:  Jae Won Jung; Matthew M Mille; Bonnie Ky; Walter Kenworthy; Choonik Lee; Yeon Soo Yeom; Aaron Kwag; Walter Bosch; Shannon MacDonald; Oren Cahlon; Justin E Bekelman; Choonsik Lee
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-08-23

3.  Out-of-field doses from radiotherapy using photon beams: A comparative study for a pediatric renal treatment.

Authors:  Julie Colnot; Sofia Zefkili; Régine Gschwind; Christelle Huet
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Validation and Comparison of Radiograph-Based Organ Dose Reconstruction Approaches for Wilms Tumor Radiation Treatment Plans.

Authors:  Ziyuan Wang; Marco Virgolin; Brian V Balgobind; Irma W E M van Dijk; Susan A Smith; Rebecca M Howell; Matthew M Mille; Choonsik Lee; Choonik Lee; Cécile M Ronckers; Peter A N Bosman; Arjan Bel; Tanja Alderliesten
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2022-07-04
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.