Performance of two commercial electron beam algorithms over regions close to the lung–mediastinum interface, against Monte Carlo simulation and point dosimetry in virtual and anthropomorphic phantoms

Dose Calculation Algorithms for External Radiation Therapy: An Overview for Practitioners

Radiation therapy (RT) is a constantly evolving therapeutic technique; improvements are continuously being introduced for both methodological and practical aspects. Among the features that have undergone a huge evolution in recent decades, dose calculation algorithms are still rapidly changing. This process is propelled by the awareness that the agreement between the delivered and calculated doses is of paramount relevance in RT, since it could largely affect clinical outcomes. The aim of this work is to provide an overall picture of the main dose calculation algorithms currently used in RT, summarizing their underlying physical models and mathematical bases, and highlighting their strengths and weaknesses, referring to the most recent studies on algorithm comparisons. This handy guide is meant to provide a clear and concise overview of the topic, which will prove useful in helping clinical medical physicists to perform their responsibilities more effectively and efficiently, increasing patient benefits and improving the overall quality of the management of radiation treatment.

Dose-area product ratio in external small-beam radiotherapy: beam shape, size and energy dependencies in clinical photon beams

In small-field radiotherapy (RT), a significant challenge is to define the amount of radiation dose absorbed in the patient where the quality of the beam has to be measured with high accuracy. The properties of a proposed new beam quality specifier, namely the dose-area-product ratio at 20 and 10 cm depths in water or DAPR_20,10, were studied to yield more information on its feasibility over the conventional quality specifier tissue-phantom ratio or TPR_20,10. The DAPR_20,10may be measured with a large-area ionization chamber (LAC) instead of small volume chambers or semi-conductors where detector, beam and water phantom positioning and beam perturbations introduce uncertainties. The effects of beam shape, size and energy on the DAPR_20,10were studied and it was shown that the DAPR_20,10increases with increasing beam energy similarly to TPR_20,10but in contrast exhibits a small beam size and shape dependence. The beam profile outside the beam limiting devices has been shown to have a large contribution to the DAPR_20,10. There is potential in large area chambers to be used in DAPR measurement and its use in dosimetry of small-beam RT for beam quality measurements.

[Comparison of Monitor Unit between Electron Monte Carlo Algorithm by Different Dose Normalization Methods and Conventional Manual Calculation]

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the discrepancy between the monitor unit (MU) calculated by different dose normalization methods in the electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithm and the conventional manual MU. In the water phantom condition, the manual MU obtained from the measured output factor was compared with the calculated MU by the eMC algorithm, using 24 different irradiation field shapes and several different energies of electron beam. In the breast boost condition, calculated MUs by both calculation methods were evaluated for 45 cases. As a result, the MUs computed by the eMC algorithm in the water phantom varied according to the dose normalization methods, and the mean±standard deviation of the difference between the manual and calculated MU were 1.1±1.4%, 0.0±1.0% and 0.4±1.2% in peak depth normalization (PN), no plan normalization (NPN) and 100% at body maximum (100%BM), respectively. In breast-boost cases, the MU difference between the manual and the calculated MU were 6.1±3.7%, 3.4±2.8% and 1.1±2.9% in PN, NPN and 100%BM, respectively. We revealed that the resultant MU calculated by eMC algorithm was dependent on the dose normalization method and the averaged differences exceeded 6% in PN, especially in breast boost condition. When using the eMC in the breast boost condition, it is desirable to select an appropriate dose normalization method according to dose prescription policies at each facility.

Novel Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm for robotic radiosurgery with multi leaf collimator: Dosimetric evaluation

PURPOSE

At introduction in 2014, dose calculation for the first MLC on a robotic SRS/SBRT platform was limited to a correction-based Finite-Size Pencil Beam (FSPB) algorithm. We report on the dosimetric accuracy of a novel Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation algorithm for this MLC, included in the Precision™ treatment planning system.

METHODS

A phantom was built of one slab (5.0 cm) of lung-equivalent material (0.09…0.29 g/cc) enclosed by 3.5 cm (above) and 5 cm (below) slabs of solid water (1.045 g/cc). This was irradiated using rectangular (15.4 × 15.4 mm² to 53.8 × 53.7 mm²) and two irregular MLC-fields. Radiochromic film (EBT3) was positioned perpendicular to the slabs and parallel to the beam. Calculated dose distributions were compared to film measurements using line scans and 2D gamma analysis.

RESULTS

Measured and MC calculated percent depth dose curves showed a characteristic dose drop within the low-density region, which was not correctly reproduced by FSPB. Superior average gamma pass rates (2%/1 mm) were found for MC (91.2 ± 1.5%) compared to FSPB (55.4 ± 2.7%). However, MC calculations exhibited localized anomalies at mass density transitions around 0.15 g/cc, which were traced to a simplification in electron transport. Absence of these anomalies was confirmed in a modified build of the MC engine, which increased gamma pass rates to 96.6 ± 1.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel MC algorithm greatly improves dosimetric accuracy in heterogeneous tissue, potentially expanding the clinical use of robotic radiosurgery with MLC. In-depth, independent validation is paramount to identify and reduce the residual uncertainties in any software solution.

Determination of Initial Beam Parameters of Varian 2100 CD Linac for Various Therapeutic Electrons Using PRIMO

The aim of the present research was to establish primary characteristics of electron beams for a Varian 2100C/D linear accelerator with recently developed PRIMO Monte Carlo software and to verify relations between electron energy and dose distribution. To maintain conformity of simulated and measured dose curves within 1%/1mm, mean energy, Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) of energy and focal spot FWHM of initial beam were changed iteratively. Mean and most probable energies were extracted from validated phase spaces and compared with related empirical equation results. To explain the importance of correct estimation of primary energy on a clinical case, computed tomography images of a thorax phantom were imported in PRIMO. Dose distributions and dose volume histogram (DVH) curves were compared between validated and artificial cases with overestimated energy. Initial mean energies were obtained of 6.68, 9.73, 13.2 and 16.4 MeV for 6, 9, 12 and 15 nominal energies, respectively. Energy FWHM reduced with increase in energy. Three mm focal spot FWHM for 9 MeV and 4 mm for other energies made proper matches of simulated and measured profiles. In addition, the maximum difference of calculated mean electrons energy at the phantom surface with empirical equation was 2.2 percent. Finally, clear differences in DVH curves of validated and artificial energy were observed as heterogeneity indexes were 0.15 for 7.21 MeV and 0.25 for 6.68 MeV. The Monte Carlo model presented in PRIMO for Varian 2100 CD was precisely validated. IAEA polynomial equations estimated mean energy more accurately than a known linear one. Small displacement of R50 changed DVH curves and homogeneity indexes. PRIMO is a user-friendly software which has suitable capabilities to calculate dose distribution in water phantoms or computerized tomographic volumes accurately.

Full Monte Carlo and measurement-based overall performance assessment of improved clinical implementation of eMC algorithm with emphasis on lower energy range

New version 13.6.23 of the electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithm in Varian Eclipse™ treatment planning system has a model for 4MeV electron beam and some general improvements for dose calculation. This study provides the first overall accuracy assessment of this algorithm against full Monte Carlo (MC) simulations for electron beams from 4MeV to 16MeV with most emphasis on the lower energy range. Beams in a homogeneous water phantom and clinical treatment plans were investigated including measurements in the water phantom. Two different material sets were used with full MC: (1) the one applied in the eMC algorithm and (2) the one included in the Eclipse™ for other algorithms. The results of clinical treatment plans were also compared to those of the older eMC version 11.0.31. In the water phantom the dose differences against the full MC were mostly less than 3% with distance-to-agreement (DTA) values within 2mm. Larger discrepancies were obtained in build-up regions, at depths near the maximum electron ranges and with small apertures. For the clinical treatment plans the overall dose differences were mostly within 3% or 2mm with the first material set. Larger differences were observed for a large 4MeV beam entering curved patient surface with extended SSD and also in regions of large dose gradients. Still the DTA values were within 3mm. The discrepancies between the eMC and the full MC were generally larger for the second material set. The version 11.0.31 performed always inferiorly, when compared to the 13.6.23.

Quantification of dose differences between two versions of Acuros XB algorithm compared to Monte Carlo simulations--the effect on clinical patient treatment planning

A commercialized implementation of linear Boltzmann transport equation solver, the Acuros XB algorithm (AXB), represents a class of most advanced type 'c' photon radiotherapy dose calculation algorithms. The purpose of the study was to quantify the effects of the modifications implemented in the more recent version 11 of the AXB (AXB11) compared to the first commercial implementation, version 10 of the AXB (AXB10), in various anatomical regions in clinical treatment planning. Both versions of the AXB were part of Varian's Eclipse clinical treatment planning system and treatment plans for 10 patients were created using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT). The plans were first created with the AXB10 and then recalculated with the AXB11 and full Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. Considering the full MC simulations as reference, a DVH analysis for gross tumor and planning target volumes (GTV and PTV) and organs at risk was performed, and also 3D gamma agreement index (GAI) values within a 15% isodose region and for the PTV were determined. Although differences up to 12% in DVH analysis were seen between the MC simulations and the AXB, based on the results of this study no general conclusion can be drawn that the modifications made in the AXB11 compared to the AXB10 would imply that the dose calculation accuracy of the AXB10 would be inferior to the AXB11 in the clinical patient treatment planning. The only clear improvement with the AXB11 over the AXB10 is the dose calculation accuracy in air cavities. In general, no large deviations are present in the DVH analysis results between the two versions of the algorithm, and the results of 3D gamma analysis do not favor one or the other. Thus it may be concluded that the results of the comprehensive studies assessing the accuracy of the AXB10 may be extended to the AXB11.

The accuracy of Acuros XB algorithm for radiation beams traversing a metallic hip implant - comparison with measurements and Monte Carlo calculations

In this study, the clinical benefit of the improved accuracy of the Acuros XB (AXB) algorithm, implemented in a commercial radiotherapy treatment planning system (TPS), Varian Eclipse, was demonstrated with beams traversing a high‐Z material. This is also the first study assessing the accuracy of the AXB algorithm applying volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique compared to full Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. In the first phase the AXB algorithm was benchmarked against point dosimetry, film dosimetry, and full MC calculation in a water‐filled anthropometric phantom with a unilateral hip implant. Also the validity of the full MC calculation used as reference method was demonstrated. The dose calculations were performed both in original computed tomography (CT) dataset, which included artifacts, and in corrected CT dataset, where constant Hounsfield unit (HU) value assignment for all the materials was made. In the second phase, a clinical treatment plan was prepared for a prostate cancer patient with a unilateral hip implant. The plan applied a hybrid VMAT technique that included partial arcs that avoided passing through the implant and static beams traversing the implant. Ultimately, the AXB‐calculated dose distribution was compared to the recalculation by the full MC simulation to assess the accuracy of the AXB algorithm in clinical setting. A recalculation with the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) was also performed to quantify the benefit of the improved dose calculation accuracy of type ‘c’ algorithm (AXB) over type ‘b’ algorithm (AAA). The agreement between the AXB algorithm and the full MC model was very good inside and in the vicinity of the implant and elsewhere, which verifies the accuracy of the AXB algorithm for patient plans with beams traversing through high‐Z material, whereas the AAA produced larger discrepancies.

PACS numbers: 87.55.‐x, 87.55.D‐, 87.55.K‐, 87.55.kd, 87.55.Qr

Isocentric integration of intensity-modulated radiotherapy with electron fields improves field junction dose uniformity in postmastectomy radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

In postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT), the dose coverage of the planning target volume (PTV) with additional margins, including the chest wall, supraclavicular, interpectoral, internal mammary and axillar level I-III lymph nodes, is often compromised. Electron fields may improve the medial dose coverage while maintaining organ at risk (OAR) doses at an acceptable level, but at the cost of hot and cold spots at the electron and photon field junction. To improve PMRT dose coverage and uniformity, an isocentric technique combining tangential intensity-modulated (IM)RT fields with one medial electron field was implemented.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

For 10 postmastectomy patients isocentric IMRT with electron plans were created and compared with a standard electron/photon mix and a standard tangent technique. PTV dose uniformity was evaluated based on the tolerance range (TR), i.e. the ratio of the standard deviation to the mean dose, a dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and the 90% isodose coverage and the hot spot volumes. OAR and contralateral breast doses were also recorded.

RESULTS

IMRT with electrons significantly improved the PTV dose homogeneity and conformity based on the TR and DSC values when compared with the standard electron/photon and tangent technique (p < 0.02). The 90% isodose coverage improved to 86% compared with 82% and 80% for the standard techniques (p < 0.02). Compared with the standard electron/photon mix, IMRT smoothed the dose gradient in the electron and photon field junction and the volumes receiving a dose of 110% or more were reduced by a third. For all three strategies, the OAR and contralateral breast doses were within clinically tolerable limits.

CONCLUSION

Based on these results two-field IMRT combined with an electron field is a suitable strategy for PMRT.

Performance of dose calculation algorithms from three generations in lung SBRT: comparison with full Monte Carlo-based dose distributions

The accuracy of dose calculation is a key challenge in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of the lung. We have benchmarked three photon beam dose calculation algorithms — pencil beam convolution (PBC), anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), and Acuros XB (AXB) — implemented in a commercial treatment planning system (TPS), Varian Eclipse. Dose distributions from full Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were regarded as a reference. In the first stage, for four patients with central lung tumors, treatment plans using 3D conformal radiotherapy (CRT) technique applying 6 MV photon beams were made using the AXB algorithm, with planning criteria according to the Nordic SBRT study group. The plans were recalculated (with same number of monitor units (MUs) and identical field settings) using BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc MC codes. The MC‐calculated dose distributions were compared to corresponding AXB‐calculated dose distributions to assess the accuracy of the AXB algorithm, to which then other TPS algorithms were compared. In the second stage, treatment plans were made for ten patients with 3D CRT technique using both the PBC algorithm and the AAA. The plans were recalculated (with same number of MUs and identical field settings) with the AXB algorithm, then compared to original plans. Throughout the study, the comparisons were made as a function of the size of the planning target volume (PTV), using various dose‐volume histogram (DVH) and other parameters to quantitatively assess the plan quality. In the first stage also, 3D gamma analyses with threshold criteria 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm were applied. The AXB‐calculated dose distributions showed relatively high level of agreement in the light of 3D gamma analysis and DVH comparison against the full MC simulation, especially with large PTVs, but, with smaller PTVs, larger discrepancies were found. Gamma agreement index (GAI) values between 95.5% and 99.6% for all the plans with the threshold criteria 3%/3 mm were achieved, but 2%/2 mm threshold criteria showed larger discrepancies. The TPS algorithm comparison results showed large dose discrepancies in the PTV mean dose (D50%), nearly 60%, for the PBC algorithm, and differences of nearly 20% for the AAA, occurring also in the small PTV size range. This work suggests the application of independent plan verification, when the AAA or the AXB algorithm are utilized in lung SBRT having PTVs smaller than 20‐25 cc. The calculated data from this study can be used in converting the SBRT protocols based on type ‘a’ and/or type ‘b’ algorithms for the most recent generation type ‘c’ algorithms, such as the AXB algorithm.

PACS numbers: 87.55.‐x, 87.55.D‐, 87.55.K‐, 87.55.kd, 87.55.Qr