The clinical implications of the collapsed cone planning algorithm

被引:23
作者
Irvine, C
Morgan, A
Crellin, A
Nisbet, A
Beange, I
机构
[1] Cookridge Hosp, Dept Med Phys, Leeds LS16 6QB, W Yorkshire, England
[2] Cookridge Hosp, Dept Clin Oncol, Leeds LS16 6QB, W Yorkshire, England
[3] Highlands Acute Hosp NHS Trust, Raigmore Hosp, Dept Med Phys & Bioengn, Inverness, Scotland
关键词
algorithm; collapsed cone; pencil beam; PTV; treatment planning system;
D O I
10.1016/j.clon.2003.11.014
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Aims: The accuracy of computer treatment planning systems is important in achieving clinically acceptable dose distributions. The pencil beam (PB) algorithm on Helax-TMS is currently used for all clinical treatment planning at the two centres involved in this study. However, it has been shown that the Helax-TMS collapsed cone (CC) algorithm is more accurate in regions of heterogeneity, such as the thorax, and head and neck. The aim of this study was to show the actual dose delivered to the patient when treating with a Helax-TMS PB plan, by using the corresponding Helax-TMS CC plan as the reference standard. Materials and methods: Thirty PB treatment plans (for lung and oesophageal treatments) were recalculated using the CC algorithm, and plans were then compared. Results: The number of monitor units required to deliver the prescription dose differed between algorithms, by up to 3.4%. In most cases, the CC algorithm calculated more monitor units than the PB, indicating under-dosage at the prescription point during treatment. The dose distributions also seemed less homogeneous when calculated using the CC algorithm. The minimum dose to the planning target volume (PTV) was lower than the PB plan suggested in every case, by up to 23.2%. ICRU homogeneity requirements (i.e. a minimum 95% of the prescription dose in the PTV) were not met in any of the cases. Even with some attempts at optimisation, conformance to these requirements was difficult. Conclusion: The CC algorithm has several factors limiting its suitability for routine clinical use. However, it is an important milestone in radiotherapy treatment planning, and should be used to show expected changes in computer planned dose distributions with new accurate dose algorithms. It is worthwhile considering dose homogeneity requirements well before the advent of anticipated Monte Carlo-based models. (C) 2004 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:148 / 154
页数:7
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]   A PENCIL BEAM MODEL FOR PHOTON DOSE CALCULATION [J].
AHNESJO, A ;
SAXNER, M ;
TREPP, A .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1992, 19 (02) :263-273
[2]   COLLAPSED CONE CONVOLUTION OF RADIANT ENERGY FOR PHOTON DOSE CALCULATION IN HETEROGENEOUS MEDIA [J].
AHNESJO, A .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1989, 16 (04) :577-592
[3]   Dose calculations for external photon beams in radiotherapy [J].
Ahnesjö, A ;
Aspradakis, MM .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1999, 44 (11) :R99-R155
[4]   Application of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 23 test package for comparison of two treatment planning systems for photon external beam radiotherapy [J].
Alam, R ;
Ibbott, GS ;
Pourang, R ;
Nath, R .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1997, 24 (12) :2043-2054
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1993, 50 ICRU
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1999, 62 ICRU
[7]   The impact of electron transport on the accuracy of computed dose [J].
Arnfield, MR ;
Siantar, CH ;
Siebers, J ;
Garmon, P ;
Cox, L ;
Mohan, R .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2000, 27 (06) :1266-1274
[8]   Verification of lung dose in an anthropomorphic phantom calculated by the collapsed cone convolution method [J].
Butson, MJ ;
Elferink, R ;
Cheung, T ;
Yu, PKN ;
Stokes, M ;
Quach, KY ;
Metcalfe, P .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2000, 45 (11) :N143-N149
[9]   Accuracy of two- and three-dimensional photon dose calculation for tangential irradiation of the breast [J].
Davis, JB ;
Pfafflin, A ;
Cozzi, AF .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 1997, 42 (03) :245-248
[10]   PITFALLS IN THE USE OF HIGH-ENERGY X-RAYS TO TREAT TUMORS IN THE LUNG [J].
EKSTRAND, KE ;
BARNES, WH .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1990, 18 (01) :249-252