Influence of monte carlo variance with fluence smoothing in VMAT treatment planning with Monaco TPS

被引:11
作者
Sarkar, B. [1 ]
Manikandan, A. [2 ]
Nandy, M. [3 ]
Munshi, A. [4 ]
Sayan, P. [4 ]
Sujatha, N. [5 ]
机构
[1] AMRI Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Kolkata, India
[2] Narayana Hrudayala, Dept Radiat Oncol, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
[3] Saha Inst Nucl Phys, Div Chem Sci, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
[4] Fortis Mem Res Inst, Dept Radiat Oncol, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
[5] Guntur Med Coll, Dept Radiat Oncol, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
关键词
Fluence smoothening factor; monte carlo; volumetric modulated arc therapy; VOLUMETRIC MODULATED ARC; RADIATION-THERAPY; IMRT; IMPLEMENTATION;
D O I
10.4103/0019-509X.180820
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
INTRODUCTION: The study aimed to investigate the interplay between Monte Carlo Variance (MCV) and fluence smoothing factor (FSF) in volumetric modulated arc therapy treatment planning by using a sample set of complex treatment planning cases and a X-ray Voxel Monte Carlo-based treatment planning system equipped with tools to tune fluence smoothness as well as MCV. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The dosimetric (dose to tumor volume, and organ at risk) and physical characteristic (treatment time, number of segments, and so on) of a set 45 treatment plans for all combinations of 1%, 3%, 5% MCV and 1, 3, 5 FSF were evaluated for five carcinoma esophagus cases under the study. RESULT: Increase in FSF reduce the treatment time. Variation of MCV and FSF gives a highest planning target volume (PTV), heart and lung dose variation of 3.6%, 12.8% and 4.3%, respectively. The heart dose variation was highest among all organs at risk. Highest variation of spinal cord dose was 0.6 Gy. CONCLUSION: Variation of MCV and FSF influences the organ at risk (OAR) doses significantly but not PTV coverage and dose homogeneity. Variation in FSF causes difference in dosimetric and physical parameters for the treatment plans but variation of MCV does not. MCV 3% or less do not improve the plan quality significantly (physical and clinical) compared with MCV greater than 3%. The use of MCV between 3% and 5% gives similar results as 1% with lesser calculation time. Minimally detected differences in plan quality suggest that the optimum FSF can be set between 3 and 5.
引用
收藏
页码:158 / 161
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] RapidBrachyMCTPS: a Monte Carlo-based treatment planning system for brachytherapy applications
    Famulari, Gabriel
    Renaud, Marc-Andre
    Poole, Christopher M.
    Evans, Michael D. C.
    Seuntjens, Jan
    Enger, Shirin A.
    PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2018, 63 (17)
  • [32] Reporting and analyzing statistical uncertainties in Monte Carlo-based treatment planning
    Chetty, Indrin J.
    Rosu, Mihaela
    Kessler, Marc L.
    Fraass, Benedick A.
    Ten Haken, Randall K.
    Kong, Feng-Ming
    McShan, Daniel L.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2006, 65 (04): : 1249 - 1259
  • [33] Evaluation of the material assignment method used by a Monte Carlo treatment planning system
    Isambert, A.
    Brualla, L.
    Lefkopoulos, D.
    CANCER RADIOTHERAPIE, 2009, 13 (08): : 744 - 746
  • [34] Monte Carlo dose verification of VMAT treatment plans using Elekta Agility 160-leaf MLC
    Onizuka, Ryota
    Araki, Fujio
    Ohno, Takeshi
    PHYSICA MEDICA-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 51 : 22 - 31
  • [35] Implementation of the DPM Monte Carlo code on a parallel architecture for treatment planning applications
    Tyagi, N
    Bose, A
    Chetty, IJ
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2004, 31 (09) : 2721 - 2725
  • [36] Clinical introduction of Monte Carlo treatment planning for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy
    Miura, Hideharu
    Masai, Norihisa
    Oh, Ryoong-Jin
    Shiomi, Hiroya
    Yamada, Kouichi
    Sasaki, Junichi
    Inoue, Toshihiko
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 15 (01): : 38 - 46
  • [37] Dose verification of an IMRT treatment planning system with the BEAM EGS4-based Monte Carlo code
    Francescon, P
    Cora, S
    Chiovati, P
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2003, 30 (02) : 144 - 157
  • [38] GRID-ENABLED TREATMENT PLANNING FOR PROTON THERAPY USING MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS
    Vadapalli, Ravi
    Yepes, Pablo
    Newhauser, Wayne
    Lichti, Roger
    NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY, 2011, 175 (01) : 16 - 21
  • [39] Evaluation of treatment planning technique on metallic implant in Radixact® using Monte Carlo Method
    Yeung, Fu Ki
    Cheung, Chi Wai
    Chiu, Tin Lok
    Yu, Siu Ki
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2024, 194 : S3531 - S3533
  • [40] Monte Carlo evaluation of RapidArc™ oropharynx treatment planning strategies for sparing of midline structures
    Bush, K.
    Zavgorodni, S.
    Gagne, I.
    Townson, R.
    Ansbacher, W.
    Beckham, W.
    PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2010, 55 (16) : 4465 - 4479