Deering SG, Hilts M, Batchelar D, Crook J, Thomson RM. Dosimetric investigation of
103Pd permanent breast seed implant brachytherapy based on Monte Carlo calculations.
Brachytherapy 2021;
20:686-694. [PMID:
33551273 DOI:
10.1016/j.brachy.2020.12.009]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2020] [Revised: 12/03/2020] [Accepted: 12/19/2020] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE
Permanent breast seed implant using 103Pd is emerging as an effective adjuvant radiation technique for early stage breast cancer. However, clinical dose evaluations follow the water-based TG-43 approach with its considerable approximations. Toward clinical adoption of advanced TG-186 model-based dose evaluations, this study presents a comprehensive investigation for permanent breast seed implant considering both target and normal tissue doses.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Dose calculations are performed with the free open-source Monte Carlo (MC) code, egs_brachy, using two types of virtual patient models: TG43sim (simulated TG-43 conditions) and MCref (heterogeneous tissue modeling from patient CT, seeds at implant angle) for 35 patients. The sensitivity of dose metrics to seed orientation and tissue segmentation are assessed.
RESULTS
In the target volume, D90 is 14.1 ± 5.8% lower with MCref than with TG43sim, on average. Conversely, normal tissue doses are generally higher with MCref than with TG43sim, for example, by 22 ± 13% for skin D1cm2, 82 ± 7% for ribs Dmax, and 71 ± 23% for heart D1cm3. Discrepancies between MCref and TG43sim doses vary over the patient cohort, as well as with the tissue and metric considered. Skin doses are particularly sensitive to seed orientation, with average difference of 4% (maximum 28%) in D1cm2 for seeds modeled vertically (egs_brachy default) compared with those aligned with implant angle.
CONCLUSIONS
TG-43 dose evaluations generally underestimate doses to critical normal organs/tissues while overestimating target doses. There is considerable variation in MCref and TG43sim on a patient-by-patient basis, motivating clinical adoption of patient-specific MC dose calculations. The MCref framework presented herein provides a consistent modeling approach for clinical implementation of advanced TG-186 dose calculations.
Collapse