Verification of Treatment Planning Algorithms Using Optically Stimulated Luminescent Dosimeters in a Breast Phantom

Dosimetric comparison and validation of Eclipse Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and AcurosXB (AXB) algorithms in RapidArc-based radiosurgery plans of patients with solitary brain metastasis

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is increasingly being used to manage solitary or multiple brain metastasis. This study aims to compare and validate Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and AcurosXB (AXB) algorithms of Eclipse Treatment Planning System (TPS) in RapidArc-based SRS plans of patients with solitary brain metastasis. Twenty patients with solitary brain metastasis who have been already treated with RapidArc SRS plans calculated using AAA plans were selected for this study. These plans were recalculated using AXB algorithm keeping the same arc orientations, multi-leaf collimator apertures, and monitor units. The two algorithms were compared for target coverage parameters, isodose volumes, plan quality metrics, dose to organs at risk and integral dose. The dose calculated by the TPS using AAA and AXB algorithms was validated against measured dose for all patient plans using an in-house developed cylindrical phantom. An Exradin A14SL ionization chamber was positioned at the center of this phantom to measure the in-field dose. NanoDot Optically Stimulated Luminescent Dosimeters (OSLDs) (Landauer Inc.) were placed at distances 3.0 cm, 4.0 cm, 5.0 cm, and 6.0 cm respectively from the center of the phantom to measure the non-target dose. In addition, the planar dose distribution was measured using amorphous silicon aS1000 Electronic Portal Imaging Device. The measured 2D dose distribution was compared against AAA and AXB estimated 2D distribution using gamma analysis. All results were tested for significance using the paired t-test at 5% level of significance. Significant differences between the AAA and AXB plans were found only for a few parameters analyzed in this study. In the experimental verification using cylindrical phantom, the difference between the AAA calculated dose and the measured dose was found to be highly significant (p < 0.001). However, the difference between the AXB calculated dose and the measured dose was not significant (p = 0.197). The difference between AAA/AXB calculated and measured at non-target locations was statistically insignificant at all four non-target locations and the dose calculated by both AAA and AXB algorithms shows a strong positive correlation with the measured dose. The results of the gamma analysis show that the AXB calculated planar dose is in better agreement with measurements compared to the AAA. Even though the results of the dosimetric comparison show that the differences are mostly not significant, the measurements show that there are differences between the two algorithms within the target volume. The AXB algorithm may be therefore more accurate in the dose calculation of VMAT plans for the treatment of small intracranial targets. For non-target locations either algorithm can be used for the estimation of dose accounting for their limitations in non-target dose estimations.

Comparison of skin doses of treated and contralateral breasts during whole breast radiotherapy for different treatment techniques using optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters

Purpose:

To measure and compare the skin doses received by treated left breast and contralateral breast (CB) during whole breast radiotherapy using five treatment techniques in an indigenously prepared wax breast phantom.

Materials and methods:

Computed tomography (CT) images of the breast phantom were used for treatment planning and comparison of skin dose calculated from treatment planning system (TPS) with measured dose. Planning target volume (PTV) and the CB were drawn arbitrarily on the CT images acquired for the breast phantom with 10 numbers of calibrated optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLDs) fixed on the surface of both breasts. The TPS calculated surface doses of PTV breast and CB for five treatment planning techniques, viz., conventional wedge (CW), irregular surface compensator-based (ISC), field-in-field (FiF), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and rapid arc (RA) techniques were obtained for comparison. The plans were executed in Clinac iX Linear Accelerator with the OSLDs fixed at the same locations on the phantom as in simulation. The TPS calculated mean dose at the surface of the treated left breast and CB was noted for the 10 OSLDs from dose-volume histogram (DVH) and compared with the measured dose. Also, the mean chamber dose at the centre of the left breast was noted from the DVH for comparing with ion chamber measured dose.

Results:

With reference to the results, it is seen that the dose to the CB is lowest in ISC technique and FiF technique and greatest in IMRT technique. The CW technique also delivered a dose comparable to IMRT to the CB of the phantom. The dose to the surface of PTV breast was highest and comparable in CW plans and FiF plans (68% and 67%) and lowest in IMRT and RA plans (50% each).

Findings:

Analysis of the results shows that the FiF and ISC techniques are preferred while planning breast radiotherapy due to the reduced dose to the CB.

Evaluation of a new commercial automated planning software for tangential breast intensity-modulated radiation therapy

Automated treatment planning may decrease the effort required in planning and promote increased routine clinical use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for many breast cancer patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate a new commercial automated planning software for tangential breast IMRT by comparing it with clinical plans from whole-breast irradiation. We prospectively enrolled 150 patients with Stage 0-1 breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery at our institution between September 2016 and August 2017. Total doses of 42.56 Gy in 16 fractions (n = 98) or 50 Gy in 25 fractions (n = 44) were used. All treatment plans were retrospectively re-planned using the automated breast planning (ABP) software. All automated plans generated clinically deliverable beam parameters with no patient body collision and no contralateral breast pass through. The mean homogeneity index of the automatically generated clinical target volume, percentage volume of lungs receiving dose more than 20 Gy, mean heart dose, and dose to the highest irradiated 2-cc volumes of the irradiated volume were 0.077 ± 0.019, 4.2% ± 1.2%, 142 ± 69 cGy, and 105.8% ± 1.7% (prescribed dose: 100%), respectively. The mean planning time was 4.8 ± 1.4 min. The ABP software demonstrated high clinical acceptability and treatment planning cost efficiency for tangential breast IMRT. The ABP software may be useful for delivering high-quality treatment to a majority of patients with early-stage breast cancer.