Dosimetric comparison of peripheral NSCLC SBRT using Acuros XB and AAA calculation algorithms

被引:15
|
作者
Ong, Chloe C. H. [1 ]
Ang, Khong Wei [2 ]
Soh, Roger C. X. [3 ]
Tin, Kah Ming [2 ]
Yap, Jerome H. H. [2 ]
Lee, James C. L. [2 ,3 ]
Bragg, Christopher M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Sheffield Hallam Univ, Fac Hlth & Wellbeing, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
[2] Natl Canc Ctr Singapore, Div Radiat Oncol, Singapore, Singapore
[3] Nanyang Technol Univ, Sch Phys & Math Sci, Div Phys & Appl Phys, Singapore, Singapore
关键词
SBRT; AXB; AAA; Calculation algorithms; NSCLC; DOSE CALCULATION; RADIATION-THERAPY; LUNG; CANCER;
D O I
10.1016/j.meddos.2017.05.005
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
There is a concern for dose calculation in highly heterogenous environments such as the thorax region. This study compares the quality of treatment plans of peripheral non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using 2 calculation algorithms, namely, Eclipse Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and Acuros External Beam (AXB), for 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) data from 20 anonymized patients were studied using Varian Eclipse planning system, AXB, and MA version 10.0.28. A 3DCRT plan and a VMAT plan were generated using AAA and AXB with constant plan parameters for each patient. The prescription and dose constraints were benchmarked against Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0915 protocol. Planning parameters of the plan were compared statistically using Mann-Whitney U tests. Results showed that 3DCRT and VMAT plans have a lower target coverage up to 8% when calculated using AXB as compared with AAA. The conformity index (CI) for AXB plans was 4.7% lower than AAA plans, but was closer to unity, which indicated better target conformity. AXB produced plans with global maximum doses which were, on average, 2% hotter than AAA plans. Both 3DCRT and VMAT plans were able to achieve D95%. VMAT plans were shown to be more conformal (CI = 1.01) and were at least 3.2% and 1.5% lower in terms of PTV maximum and mean dose, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference for doses received by organs at risk (OARs) regardless of calculation algorithms and treatment techniques. In general, the difference in tissue modeling for AXB and AAA algorithm is responsible for the dose distribution between the AXB and the AAA algorithms. The AXB VMAT plans could be used to benefit patients receiving peripheral NSCLC SBRT. (C) 2017 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.
引用
收藏
页码:216 / 222
页数:7
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [21] Comparison of dosimetric accuracy of acuros XB and analytical anisotropic algorithm against Monte Carlo technique
    Seniwal, Baljeet
    Bhatt, C. P.
    Fonseca, Telma C. F.
    BIOMEDICAL PHYSICS & ENGINEERING EXPRESS, 2020, 6 (01)
  • [22] Dosimetric Impact of Using the Acuros XB Algorithm for Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy and RapidArc Planning in Nasopharyngeal Carcinomas
    Kan, Monica W. K.
    Leung, Lucullus H. T.
    Yu, Peter K. N.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2013, 85 (01): : E73 - E80
  • [23] Dosimetric comparison of analytic anisotropic algorithm and Acuros XB algorithm in VMAT plans for high-grade glioma
    Takizawa, Takeshi
    Tanabe, Satoshi
    Utsunomiya, Satoru
    Nakano, Hisashi
    Yamada, Takumi
    Sakai, Hironori
    Ohta, Atsushi
    Saito, Hirotake
    Nakano, Toshimichi
    Abe, Eisuke
    Kaidu, Motoki
    Aoyama, Hidefumi
    PHYSICA MEDICA-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2020, 73 : 73 - 82
  • [24] Dosimetric comparison of Acuros XB with collapsed cone convolution/superposition and anisotropic analytic algorithm for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy of thoracic spinal metastases
    Zhen, Heming
    Hrycushko, Brian
    Lee, Huichen
    Timmerman, Robert
    Pompos, Arnold
    Stojadinovic, Strahinja
    Foster, Ryan
    Jiang, Steve B.
    Solberg, Timothy
    Gu, Xuejun
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 16 (04): : 181 - 192
  • [25] The effect of material assignment in nasal cavity on dose calculation for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) using Acuros XB
    Cheung, Michael L. M.
    Chow, Vivian U. Y.
    Kan, Monica W. K.
    Chan, Anthony T. C.
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2022, 23 (08):
  • [26] Dosimetric accuracy of AAA and acuros XB dose calculations within an air cavity for small fields of a 6-MV flattening filter-free beam
    Kang, Sang-Won
    Suh, Tae-Suk
    Chung, Jin-Beom
    Eom, Kuen-Yong
    Kim, In-Ah
    Kim, Jae-Sung
    Lee, Jeong-Woo
    Park, Ji-Yeon
    JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY, 2015, 67 (12) : 2138 - 2145
  • [27] Comparison between Acuros XB and Brainlab Monte Carlo algorithms for photon dose calculationVergleich zwischen Acuros-XB- und Brainlab-Monte-Carlo-Algrorithmus zur Dosisberechnung von Photonenstrahlung
    M. Mißlbeck
    P. Kneschaurek
    Strahlentherapie und Onkologie, 2012, 188 (7) : 599 - 605
  • [28] Lung and liver SBRT using helical tomotherapy - a dosimetric comparison of fixed jaw and dynamic jaw delivery
    Rudofsky, Leonie
    Aynsley, Eleanor
    Beck, Sebastian
    Schubert, Kai
    Habl, Gregor
    Krause, Sonja
    Debus, Juergen
    Sterzing, Florian
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 15 (03): : 114 - 121
  • [29] Dosimetric comparison of Acuros XB deterministic radiation transport method with Monte Carlo and model-based convolution methods in heterogeneous media
    Han, Tao
    Mikell, Justin K.
    Salehpour, Mohammad
    Mourtada, Firas
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (05) : 2651 - 2664
  • [30] The comparison of two calculation algorithms to evaluate the dosimetric effects of thermoplastic masks used in radiotherapy
    Oulhouq, Y.
    Zerfaoui, M.
    Bakari, D.
    Rrhioua, A.
    Machichi, M.
    Berhili, S.
    MATERIALS TODAY-PROCEEDINGS, 2019, 13 : 1102 - 1107