Effects of heterogeneities in dose distributions under nonreference conditions: Monte Carlo simulation vs dose calculation algorithms

被引:19
作者
Melo Reis, Cristiano Queiroz [1 ]
Nicolucci, Patricia [2 ]
Fortes, Saulo S. [1 ]
Silva, Leonardo R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Inst Nacl Canc Jose Alencar Gomes da Silva INCA, Dept Fis Med, Praca Cruz Vermelha, BR-20230130 Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
[2] Univ Sao Paulo, Fac Filosofia Ciancias & Letras Ribeirao Preto, Dept Fis, Ave Bandeirantes 3900, BR-14040901 Ribeirao Preto, SP, Brazil
关键词
Dose calculation algorithms; Heterogeneity correction; Treatment panning systems; Monte Carlo simulation; Radiotherapy; ANISOTROPIC ANALYTICAL ALGORITHM; HIGH-ENERGY PHOTON; PENCIL BEAM; RADIOTHERAPY; VALIDATION; INTERFACES; PHANTOMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.meddos.2018.02.009
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of dose calculation algorithms used in radiotherapy treatment planning systems (TPSs) in comparison with Monte Carlo (MC) simulations in nonelectronic equilibrium conditions. MC simulations with PENELOPE package were performed for comparison of doses calculated by pencil beam convolution (PBC), analytical anisotropy algorithm (AAA), and Acuros XB TPS algorithms. Relative depth dose curves were calculated in heterogeneous water phantoms with layers of bone (1.8 g/cm(3)) and lung (0.3 g/cm(3)) equivalent materials for radiation fields between 1 x 1 cm(2) and 10 x 10cm(2). Analysis of relative depth dose curves at the water-bone interface shows that PBC and AAA algorithms present the largest differences to MC calculations (U-MC =0.5%), with maximum differences of up to 4.3% of maximum dose. For the lung-equivalent material and 1 x 1 cm(2) field, differences can be up to 24.3% for PBC, 11.5% for AAA, and 7.5% for Acuros. Results show that Acurus presents the best agreement with MC simulation data with equivalent accuracy for modeling radiotherapy dose deposition especially in regions where electronic equilibrium does not hold. For typical (nonsmall) fields used in radiotherapy, AAA and PBC can exhibit reasonable agreement with MC results even in regions of heterogeneities. (C) 2018 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:74 / 82
页数:9
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   The effect of different lung densities on the accuracy of various radiotherapy dose calculation methods: Implications for tumour coverage [J].
Aarup, Lasse Rye ;
Nahum, Alan E. ;
Zacharatou, Christina ;
Juhler-Nottrup, Trine ;
Knoos, Tommy ;
Nystrom, Hakan ;
Specht, Lena ;
Wieslander, Elinore ;
Korreman, Stine S. .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2009, 91 (03) :405-414
[2]   A PENCIL BEAM MODEL FOR PHOTON DOSE CALCULATION [J].
AHNESJO, A ;
SAXNER, M ;
TREPP, A .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1992, 19 (02) :263-273
[3]   Quantitative assessment of the accuracy of dose calculation using pencil beam and Monte Carlo algorithms and requirements for clinical quality assurance [J].
Ali, Imad ;
Ahmad, Salahuddin .
MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2013, 38 (03) :255-261
[4]   AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams [J].
Almond, PR ;
Biggs, PJ ;
Coursey, BM ;
Hanson, WF ;
Huq, MS ;
Nath, R ;
Rogers, DWO .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1999, 26 (09) :1847-1870
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1999, 62 ICRU
[6]  
[Anonymous], ACTA ONCOL S1
[7]   CALCULATION OF PHOTON DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS IN AN INHOMOGENEOUS-MEDIUM USING CONVOLUTIONS [J].
BOYER, AL ;
MOK, EC .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1986, 13 (04) :503-509
[8]   Clinical implications of the anisotropic analytical algorithm for IMRT treatment planning and verification [J].
Bragg, Christopher M. ;
Wingate, Katrina ;
Conway, John .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2008, 86 (02) :276-284
[9]   Dosimetric verification of the anisotropic analytical algorithm for radiotherapy treatment planning [J].
Bragg, Christopher M. ;
Conway, John .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2006, 81 (03) :315-323
[10]   Dosimetric validation of Acuros® XB with Monte Carlo methods for photon dose calculations [J].
Bush, K. ;
Gagne, I. M. ;
Zavgorodni, S. ;
Ansbacher, W. ;
Beckham, W. .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (04) :2208-2221