Comparison of tissue characterization curves for different CT scanners: implication in proton therapy treatment planning

被引:16
作者
Cheng, Chee-Wai [1 ,2 ]
Zhao, Li [1 ,2 ]
Wolanski, Mark [1 ,2 ]
Zhao, Qingya [1 ,3 ]
James, Josuha [4 ]
Dikeman, Kate [4 ]
Mills, Michael [4 ]
Li, Mei [5 ]
Srivastava, Shiv P. [6 ,7 ]
Lu, Xing Qi [8 ]
Das, Indra J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, Hlth Proton Therapy Ctr, Bloomington, IN 47401 USA
[2] Indiana Univ Sch Med, Dept Radiat Oncol, Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA
[3] Parkview Hlth, Dept Radiat Oncol, Ft Wayne, IN USA
[4] Univ Louisville, Dept Radiat Oncol, Louisville, KY 40202 USA
[5] Morristown Mem Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Morristown, NJ 07962 USA
[6] Purdue Univ, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
[7] Reid Hosp, Richmond, IN 47374 USA
[8] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr, Boston, MA 02215 USA
关键词
Proton beam; CT scanner; electron density; relative stopping power; dosimetric uncertainty; ELECTRON-DENSITY CALIBRATION; EQUIVALENT MATERIALS; HOUNSFIELD UNITS;
D O I
10.3978/j.issn.2218-676X.2012.11.05
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
For proton beam therapy, CT imaging is required to calculate dose based on CT pixel values of relative stopping power (RSP). The variation among CT-scanners and the phantom used to derive the relationship CT number-electron density-RSP has not been investigated. Using RMI CT phantoms, 18 CT scanners and a Tomotherapy unit, the Hounsfield unit (HU) variations and associated dosimetric uncertainty were investigated. The variation of HU was within one standard deviation (SD) of the average for 14 out of the 15 scanners tested with the same phantoms. For high density materials (>400 HU) the HU values deviated by more than 4% from the average. The HU-RSP curves of 18 scanners were fitted with a straight line in three HU intervals: -700<HU<0, 0<HU<230 and <230<HU<1,700. The dosimetric impacts of the variation of HU among scanners were <1% in DVH point dose comparisons in a prostate cancer plan. For a head and neck cancer plan the difference was up to 4% due to large inhomogeneities. Our results seem to suggest that the X-ray spectrum of a CT scanner has a smaller effect on the HU-RSP curve than the elemental compositions of the tissue substitutes used in the calibration. Furthermore, a single HU-RSP curve may suffice as a reference curve for proton treatment planning. It is found to agree with the calibration curve obtained for the specific scanner. This study does not address the issue of metallic implants included in the treatment plan.
引用
收藏
页码:236 / 246
页数:11
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1989, ICRU REPORT 44
[2]  
[Anonymous], AM I PHYS HDB
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1993, 49 ICRU
[4]   Golden beam data for proton pencil-beam scanning [J].
Clasie, Benjamin ;
Depauw, Nicolas ;
Fransen, Maurice ;
Goma, Carles ;
Panahandeh, Hamid Reza ;
Seco, Joao ;
Flanz, Jacob B. ;
Kooy, Hanne M. .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2012, 57 (05) :1147-1158
[5]   AN ELECTRON-DENSITY CALIBRATION PHANTOM FOR CT-BASED TREATMENT PLANNING COMPUTERS [J].
CONSTANTINOU, C ;
HARRINGTON, JC ;
DEWERD, LA .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1992, 19 (02) :325-327
[6]   Calibration of CT Hounsfield units for radiotherapy treatment planning of patients with metallic hip prostheses: the use of the extended CT-scale [J].
Coolens, C ;
Childs, PJ .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2003, 48 (11) :1591-1603
[7]   Dosimetric impact of computed tomography calibration on a commercial treatment planning system for external radiation therapy [J].
Cozzi, L ;
Fogliata, A ;
Buffa, F ;
Bieri, S .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 1998, 48 (03) :335-338
[8]  
Faulkner K, 1985, Radiography, V51, P163
[9]   Tolerance levels for quality assurance of electron density values generated from CT in radiotherapy treatment planning [J].
Kilby, W ;
Sage, J ;
Rabett, V .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2002, 47 (09) :1485-1492
[10]   The use of megavoltage CT (MVCT) images for dose recomputations [J].
Langen, KM ;
Meeks, SL ;
Poole, DO ;
Wagner, TH ;
Willoughby, TR ;
Kupelian, PA ;
Ruchala, KJ ;
Haimerl, J ;
Olivera, GH .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2005, 50 (18) :4259-4276