Literature DB >> 31437832

On the conversion from dose-to-medium to dose-to-water in heterogeneous phantoms with Acuros XB and Monte Carlo calculations.

Alexia Delbaere1, Tony Younes, Laure Vieillevigne.   

Abstract

The method implemented in Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm to convert dose-to-medium (D m) to dose-to-water (D w) is usually based on the Bragg-Gray cavity theory. Acuros XB (AXB) reports also D m and D w but the method to calculate D w is based on the energy deposition cross sections for water in place of those for the local media. For both algorithms, the calculation of D w in non-water media is similar to the dose received in a small volume of water, small enough not to disturb the fluence of charged particles. Recently, two new methods revised the Bragg-Gray cavity theory, one proposed by Andreo and the other by Reynaert et al. In this context, comparisons between AXB and MC were carried out in terms of dose-to-medium ([Formula: see text]) and dose-to-water ([Formula: see text]), respectively. Multilayer slab heterogeneous phantoms made of lung, bone and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) were investigated and measurements were carried out using radiochromic films. These latter were then compared to [Formula: see text] and to D w which would be obtained according to the conversion methods proposed by Andreo and Reynaert et al [Formula: see text] agreed with [Formula: see text] for all cases (±1%). In lung, all D w calculations and film measurements were in agreement. By contrast, [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] differed notably in bone (4.5%) and PTFE (3.5%), and both algorithms overestimated film measurements. These findings demonstrate that the conversion method is different between AXB and MC. Furthermore, films were not able to give dose in a small volume of water according to the definition of [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. Applying either the fluence correction factor suggested by Andreo or the mass energy absorption ratios proposed by Reynaert et al, resulted in a good agreement (<1%) with film measurements. According to the method used for the conversion, different D w could be obtained which might lead to several issues in clinical context.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31437832     DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab3df3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  3 in total

1.  Radiobiological Comparison of Acuros External Beam and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm on Esophageal Carcinoma Radiotherapy Treatment Plans.

Authors:  Lin Wang; Jianping Zhang; Miaoyun Huang; Benhua Xu; Xiaobo Li
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 2.623

2.  Dosimetric Evaluation of the Treatment Plan on Indigenous Heterogeneous Phantoms using Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm and Acuros-XB Algorithm for Different Photon Energies.

Authors:  Vinod Kumar Gangwar; Om Prakash Gurjar; Lalit Kumar; Avinash Agarwal; Vineet Kumar Mishra; Surendra Prasad Mishra; Saket Pandey
Journal:  J Biomed Phys Eng       Date:  2022-06-01

3.  Correlation between the γ passing rates of IMRT plans and the volumes of air cavities and bony structures in head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Zhengwen Shen; Xia Tan; Shi Li; Xiumei Tian; Huanli Luo; Ying Wang; Fu Jin
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 3.481

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.