Roger Cai Xiang Soh1,2, Guan Heng Tay3, Wen Siang Lew2, James Cheow Lei Lee2,3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, Singapore. 2. Division of Physics and Applied Physics, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. 3. Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre, Singapore.
Abstract
AIM: To identifying depth dose differences between the two versions of the algorithms using AIP CT of a 4D dataset. BACKGROUND: Motion due to respiration may challenge dose prediction of dose calculation algorithms during treatment planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The two versions of depth dose calculation algorithms, namely, Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) version 10.0 (AAAv10.0), AAA version 13.6 (AAAv13.6) and Acuros XB dose calculation (AXB) algorithm version 10.0 (AXBv10.0), AXB version 13.6 (AXBv13.6), were compared against a full MC simulated 6X photon beam using QUASAR respiratory motion phantom with a moving chest wall. To simulate the moving chest wall, a 4 cm thick wax mould was attached to the lung insert of the phantom. Depth doses along the central axis were compared in the anterior and lateral beam direction for field sizes 2 × 2 cm2, 4 × 4 cm2 and 10 × 10 cm2. RESULTS: For the lateral beam direction, the moving chest wall highlighted differences of up to 105% for AAAv10.0 and 40% for AXBv10.0 from MC calculations in the surface and buildup doses. AAAv13.6 and AXBv13.6 agrees with MC predictions to within 10% at similar depth. For anterior beam doses, dose differences predicted for both versions of AAA and AXB algorithm were within 7% and results were consistent with static heterogeneous studies. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of the moving chest wall was capable of identifying depth dose differences between the two versions of the algorithms. These differences could not be identified in the static chest wall as shown in the anterior beam depth dose calculations.
AIM: To identifying depth dose differences between the two versions of the algorithms using AIP CT of a 4D dataset. BACKGROUND: Motion due to respiration may challenge dose prediction of dose calculation algorithms during treatment planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The two versions of depth dose calculation algorithms, namely, Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) version 10.0 (AAAv10.0), AAA version 13.6 (AAAv13.6) and Acuros XB dose calculation (AXB) algorithm version 10.0 (AXBv10.0), AXB version 13.6 (AXBv13.6), were compared against a full MC simulated 6X photon beam using QUASAR respiratory motion phantom with a moving chest wall. To simulate the moving chest wall, a 4 cm thick wax mould was attached to the lung insert of the phantom. Depth doses along the central axis were compared in the anterior and lateral beam direction for field sizes 2 × 2 cm2, 4 × 4 cm2 and 10 × 10 cm2. RESULTS: For the lateral beam direction, the moving chest wall highlighted differences of up to 105% for AAAv10.0 and 40% for AXBv10.0 from MC calculations in the surface and buildup doses. AAAv13.6 and AXBv13.6 agrees with MC predictions to within 10% at similar depth. For anterior beam doses, dose differences predicted for both versions of AAA and AXB algorithm were within 7% and results were consistent with static heterogeneous studies. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of the moving chest wall was capable of identifying depth dose differences between the two versions of the algorithms. These differences could not be identified in the static chest wall as shown in the anterior beam depth dose calculations.
Entities:
Keywords:
AAA; AXB; Dose calculation algorithm; Monte Carlo
Authors: Jothy Selvaraj; Graham Rhall; Mounir Ibrahim; Talat Mahmood; Nigel Freeman; Zennon Gromek; Grant Buchanan; Farhan Syed; Hany Elsaleh; Ben J C Quah Journal: BJR Open Date: 2020-03-06