Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm Research Articles

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy quality assurance by alanine-EPR and gel dosimetry of a simulated prostate treatment with bilateral metallic prostheses

The presence of metallic prostheses in patients undergoing prostate radiotherapy treatment can lead to scattered doses, compromising treatment reproducibility. This study aims to assess doses in the Planning Target Volume (PTV) and surrounding areas using a water phantom containing pelvic bones and bilateral metallic prostheses. Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) with optimization tools avoiding input dose to the prosthesis was employed. Experimental verification utilized a modified Fricke xylenol orange gel dosimeter (FXO-f) in a 63 mm diameter, 100 mm height cylinder (310 ml volume) for PTV dose checks, and alanine dosimeters for assessing doses in the PTV vicinity and near metallic prostheses. Evaluating doses near prostheses is vital as post-radiotherapy prosthesis loosening has been speculated, possibly linked to overexposure. Gamma evaluation with FXO-f dosimeter yielded approved gamma indices in 97.7% of data points versus TPS, indicating good agreement with linear accelerator-reproduced results. Alanine dosimeter results ranged between (1.0 ± 0.3), (1.2 ± 0.3) Gy, (1.4 ± 0.3) Gy, and (2.0 ± 0.3) Gy, which are comparable to TPS-calculated doses within the dosimeter volume. This result indicates that the heterogeneity correction applied by the Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm used for dose calculation and the avoidance tool employed in the treatment planning could addressed the problem. In summary, this study demonstrates that the treatment technique entering fields towards prostheses, with optimization tools to produce the desirable results.

Investigation of Dose Calculation Accuracy of Eclipse Treatment Planning System in the Presence of Metal Hip Prosthesis with Thermoluminescence Dosimeters

Aim: This study investigated the dose calculation accuracy of different treatment planning algorithms used in radiotherapy patients with hip prostheses. Method: The current research produced a tissue-equivalent cylindrical phantom that imitates a leg using a 3D printer. Co-Cr-Mo alloy and Ti-6AI-4V alloy prostheses were placed in the centre of the phantom, respectively. Both prostheses' dose measurements were taken with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) at 92 points. The dose calculation accuracy of the Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) and Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) algorithms, widely used in radiotherapy, were compared with the measurement results. Results: Since the Co-Cr-Mo hip prosthesis has a high density, the number of backscattered photons around it was higher than the Ti-6AI-4V hip prosthesis. The average surface dose of the Co-Cr-Mo alloy was 364.05 cGy, while the average surface dose of the Ti-6AI-4V alloy was 347.79 cGy. Conclusion: It was observed that the dose estimation abilities of the AAA and PBC algorithms decreased as the density of the hip replacement increased. In addition, the AAA algorithm predicted the surface dose in the phantom better than the PBC algorithm.

DIBH reduces right coronary artery and lung radiation dose in right breast cancer loco-regional radiotherapy

To determine whether deep inspiratory breath-hold (DIBH) reduces dose to organs-at-risk (OAR), in particular the right coronary artery (RCA), in women with breast cancer requiring right-sided post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) including internal mammary chain (+IMC) radiotherapy (RT). Fourteen consecutive women requiring right-sided PMRT + IMC were retrospectively identified. Nodal delineation was in accordance with European Society for Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) guidelines and tangential chest wall fields marked. Patients were planned with Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm using free-breathing (FB) and DIBH datasets. Dose was calculated using Acuros External Beam algorithm. FB and DIBH dose comparisons were analyzed for heart, RCA and right lung, as were chest wall and IMC planning target volumes (PTVs). DIBH vs FB resulted in median decreases of: the RCA mean dose by 0.6Gray (Gy) (interquartile range (IQR) 0.1, 1.9) (p = 0.002), RCA max dose by 1.8Gy (IQR 0.8, 6.1) (p = 0.002), and V5Gy by 2.9% (IQR 0.0, 37.2) (p = 0.016). RCA data indicated no statistically significant dosimetric reduction ≥10Gy. A median reduction of 1.7Gy (c -0.0, 7.1) (p = 0.019) in maximum heart dose was recorded with DIBH vs FB; no significant difference was observed in other heart and left anterior descending coronary artery parameters. The median reduction in right lung mean dose was 2.8Gy for DIBH vs FB plans (IQR 1.6, 3.6) (p = 0.001); significant median reductions of V5Gy, V20Gy, and V30Gy were all achieved with DIBH. Chest wall PTV coverage did not significantly differ between DIBH and FB plans; IMC dosimetric coverage improved with use of DIBH (V47.5Gy, V45Gy, V42Gy). DIBH reduced OAR dose in right-sided PMRT + IMC patients. A novel finding was that DIBH decreased RCA dose. Heart and right lung dose were also decreased with DIBH, whilst optimally dosed PTVs were maintained.

Influence of dose calculation algorithms on the helical diode array using volumetric-modulated arc therapy for small targets.

For patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) for small targets, the dose resolution can change depending on the characteristics of the dose calculation algorithms. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of the dose calculation algorithms Acuros XB (AXB), anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), photon Monte Carlo (pMC), and collapsed cone (CC) on a helical diode array using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for small targets. ArcCHECK detectors were inserted with a physical depth of 2.9cm from the surface. To evaluate the influence of the dose calculation algorithms for small targets, rectangular fields of 2×100, 5×100, 10×100, 20×100, 50×100, and 100×100 mm2 were irradiated and measured using ArcCHECK with TrueBeam STx. A total of 20 VMAT plans for small targets, including the clinical sites of 19 brain metastases and one spine, were also evaluated. The gamma passing rates (GPRs) were evaluated for the rectangular fields and the 20 VMAT plans using AXB, AAA, pMC, and CC. For rectangular fields of 2×100 and 5×100 mm2 , the GPR at 3%/2mm of AXB was<50% because AXB resulted in a coarser dose resolution with narrow beams. For field sizes>10×100 mm2, the GPR at 3%/2mm was>88.1% and comparable for all dose calculation algorithms. For the 20 VMAT plans, the GPRs at 3%/2mm were 79.1±15.7%, 93.2±5.8%, 94.9±4.1%, and 94.5±4.1% for AXB, AAA, pMC, and CC, respectively. The behavior of the dose distribution on the helical diode array differed depending on the dose calculation algorithm for small targets. Measurements using ArcCHECK for VMAT with small targets can have lower GPRs owing to the coarse dose resolution of AXB around the detector area.

Dosimetric impact of CT metal artifact reduction for spinal implants in stereotactic body radiotherapy planning.

Metal artifacts due to spinal implants may affect the accuracy of dose calculation for radiotherapy. However, the dosimetric impact of metal artifact reduction (MAR) for spinal implants in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) plans has not been well studied. The objective of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric impact of MAR in spinal SBRT planning with three clinically common dose calculation algorithms. Gammex phantom and 10 patients' computed tomography (CT) images were studied to investigate the effects of titanium implants. A commercial orthopedic MAR algorithm was employed to reduce artifacts. Dose calculations for SBRT were conducted on both artifact-corrected and uncorrected images using three commercial algorithms [analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA), Acuros XB (AXB), and Monte Carlo (MC)]. Dose discrepancies between artifact-corrected and uncorrected cases were appraised using a dose-volume histogram (DVH) and 3-dimensional (3D) gamma analysis with different distance to agreement (DTA) and dose difference criteria. The gamma agreement index (GAI) was denoted as G(∆D, DTA). Statistical analysis of t-test was utilized to evaluate the dose differences of different algorithms. The phantom study demonstrated that titanium metal artifacts can be effectively reduced. The patient cases study showed that dose differences between the artifact-corrected and uncorrected datasets were small evaluated by gamma index and DVH. Gamma analysis found that even the strict criterion local G(1,1) had average values ≥93.9% for the three algorithms. For all DVH metrics, average differences did not exceed 0.7% in planning target volume (PTV) and 2.1% in planning risk volume of spinal cord (PRV-SC). Statistical analysis showed that the observed dose differences of MC method were significantly larger than those of AAA (P<0.01 for D98% of PTV and P<0.001 for D0.1cc of spinal cord) and AXB methods (P<0.001 for D98% and P<0.0001 for D0.1cc). Dosimetric impact of artifacts caused by titanium implants is not significant in spinal SBRT planning, which indicates that dose calculation algorithms might not be very sensitive to CT number variation caused by titanium inserts.

Comparison of Rapid Arc and Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in a True Beam Linear Accelerator for 6 MV: Application of AAPM TG‐119 tests in treatment planning and quality assurance

AbstractObjectiveWe developed rapid arc (RA) and intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans based on the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group‐119 (AAPM TG‐119) proposals and compared the planning and quality assurance results.Materials and MethodsTwo treatment plans were used for each study patient: one using 7–9 IMRT fields and the other using the two full‐arc RA methods. Plan optimization and dose calculations were performed using 6 MV photons and EclipseTM with the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA). Task group (TG)‐119 described the planning objectives used to evaluate the treatment plans generated for this study. Point dose, planar fluence measurement, and trajectory log file analysis are used for quality assurance.ResultsThe conformity index (CI) for treatment plans varied between 0.76–0.91 when using IMRT and 0.75–0.93 when using RA. The homogeneity index (HI) was approximately 0.10–0.24 (IMRT) and 0.07–0.23 (RA). The ratio of the total number of monitor units required for IMRT to that required for RA was between 0.87 and 2.14. The treatment log files exhibited higher gamma passing with RA than with IMRT.ConclusionRA plans were more effective than IMRT plans in achieving the test goals. Point dose measurements and electronic portal imaging device (EPID)‐based planar fluence measurements showed statistically insignificant differences between the IMRT and RA plan quality assurance (QA) results. However, the trajectory log file analysis exhibited better gamma‐passing results for RA than for IMRT.

Particular issues to be considered in small field dosimetry for TrueBeam STx commissioning

This study aims to report the relevant issues concerning small fields in the commissioning of a TrueBeam STx for photon energies of 6MV, 10MV, 6FFF, and 10FFF. Percent depth doses, profiles, and field output factors were measured according to the beam model configuration of the treatment planning system. Multiple detectors were used based on the IAEA TRS-483 protocol as well as EBT3 radiochromic film. Analytical Anisotropic and Acuros XB algorithms, were configured and validated through basic dosimetry comparisons and end-to-end clinical tests.

Comparison of Plan Quality Metrics after Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery Sparing in VMAT Esophageal Radiotherapy

Cardiotoxicity is a significant late effect of esophageal radiotherapy (RT). Mean heart dose has been implicated with major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and emerging evidence increases MACE association with left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery specific dose. This retrospective planning study investigates the dosimetric impact of including the LAD as an OAR-sparing objective for VMAT-based plan optimization in patients previously treated for esophageal cancers. A retrospective cohort was identified of patients who underwent neoadjuvant RT for esophageal cancers between 2017-2020 without intentional LAD sparing. Treatment planning was performed using Eclipse™ treatment planning system. Doses were calculated using Acuros® XB algorithm or anisotropic analytical algorithm with a 2-2.5mm calculation grid. For each patient, the LAD was delineated and the treated VMAT plan was re-optimized to reduce the dose to the LAD receiving 15 Gy to less than 10%, when possible. Re-plans were performed such that 95% of the PTV received the prescription dose. Institutional constraints were used to minimize the dose to the heart, lung, and spinal cord (Table 1). A paired t-test was used to compare the dose between the original VMAT plan used for treatment (Esophagus Original) against those re-optimized (Esophagus + LAD), with significance of p<0.05. A total of 19 patients were identified. Of those treated, 12 of 19 original plans (63%) exceeded the LAD constraint (V15<10%) with a mean V15 Gy of 47.1%. Plan re-optimization accounting for the LAD allowed for 66.7% (9/12) of cases to meet LAD V15 constraints. Aside from increased sparing of the mean heart dose, there were no statistically significant impacts on target coverage and OAR doses otherwise, including to that of the lung and spinal cord (Table 1). Accounting for LAD dose in treatment planning may help reduce future MACE risks. LAD dose can be significantly reduced without compromising PTV coverage or having significant effects on other OAR dose sparing.

Development of an Anthropomorphic Heterogeneous Female Pelvic Phantom and Its Comparison with a Homogeneous Phantom in Advance Radiation Therapy: Dosimetry Analysis.

Accurate dosimetry is crucial in radiotherapy to ensure optimal radiation dose delivery to the tumor while sparing healthy tissues. Traditional dosimetry techniques using homogeneous phantoms may not accurately represent the complex anatomical variations in cervical cancer patients, highlighting the need to compare dosimetry results obtained from different phantom models. The aim of this study is to design and evaluate an anthropomorphic heterogeneous female pelvic (AHFP) phantom for radiotherapy quality assurance in cervical cancer treatment. Thirty RapidArc plans designed for cervical cancer patients were exported to both the RW3 homogeneous phantom and the anthropomorphic heterogeneous pelvic phantom. Dose calculations were performed using the anisotropic analytic algorithm (AAA), and the plans were delivered using a linear accelerator (LA). Dose measurements were obtained using a 0.6 cc ion chamber. The percentage (%) variation between planned and measured doses was calculated and analyzed. Additionally, relative dosimetry was performed for various target locations using RapidArc and IMRT treatment techniques. The AHFP phantom demonstrated excellent agreement between measured and expected dose distributions, making it a reliable quality assurance tool in radiotherapy. The results reveal that the percentage variation between planned and measured doses for all RapidArc quality assurance (QA) plans using the AHFP phantom is 10.67% (maximum value), 2.31% (minimum value), and 6.89% (average value), with a standard deviation (SD) of 2.565 (t = 3.21604, p = 0.001063). Also, for the percentage of variation between homogeneous and AHFP phantoms, the t-value is -11.17016 and the p-value is <0.00001. The result is thus significant at p < 0.05. We can see that the outcomes differ significantly due to the influence of heterogeneous media. Also, the average gamma values in RapidArc plans are 0.29, 0.32, and 0.35 (g ≤ 1) and IMRT plans are 0.45, 0.44, and 0.42 (g ≤ 1) for targets 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The AHFP phantom results show more dose variability than homogenous phantom outcomes. Also, the AHFP phantom was found to be suitable for QA evaluation.

Dosimetric Evaluation Study of 10-MV FFF Used in SBRT for Lung Tumours

Purpose: The objective of this research was to conduct a comparative and dosimetric analysis of three different radiotherapy techniques used in lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), the three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), using a 10 MV flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beam. Materials and methods: The present study employed computed tomography (CT) images of a humanoid phantom for the purpose of treatment planning. The gross tumour volumes (GTVs) delineated in both the central and peripheral positions of the lungs. The determination of Planning Target Volumes (PTVs) involved the addition of a margin of 0.5 cm to the Gross Tumour Volume (GTV). Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans produced employing a 10-megavolt (MV) flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beam. The calculation of dosage for all plans Performed using the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA). Results: IMRT and VMAT had better PTV dose conformation than 3DCRT for both central and peripheral targets. PTV conformity improved in VMAT compared to IMRT, and CI values were acceptable for VMAT, IMRT, and 3DCRT plans. VMAT plans had slightly better CI than IMRT, with better results in peripheral lung PTVs compared to central PTVs. VMAT and IMRT are superior for treating HDV and D2cm, with lower HDV for peripheral lung tumours. Both 3DCRT and IMRT improved outcomes for peripheral lung PTVs, while VMAT was better for central lung PTVs. The former proved better with less low lung doses and improved D2cm results. 3DCRT plans demonstrated higher precision in dose distribution than VMAT and IMRT plans, with superior average GI values. VMAT and IMRT had higher HI, Dmax, and D2% than 3DCRT. VMAT plans compared to IMRT plans, with similar HI values for central lung PTVs. VMAT better spares OARs than other techniques, but V20 and V30 lung doses were lower with 3DCRT. VMAT increases lung dose, but OAR stays below thresholds.&#x0D; Conclusion: The investigation found that all three treatment techniques can deliver SBRT plans that meet RTOG dose constraints. However, VMAT is a better treatment strategy than IMRT and 3DCRT for both peripheral and central lung PTVs, based on dosimetric indices like CI, D2cm, HI, and HDV. The study found that 3DCRT improves dosimetric indices, especially gradient index (GI), more than VMAT. Despite the need for more monitor units (MUs) in VMAT plans, treatment time reduced due to faster gantry velocity and higher dose rates (2400cGy/min) via free flatting filter energy.

Dose difference between anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and Acuros XB (AXB) caused by target's air content for volumetric modulated arc therapy of head and neck cancer.

We clarified the dose difference between the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and Acuros XB (AXB) with increasing target's air content using a virtual phantom and clinical cases. Whole neck volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan was transferred into a virtual phantom with a cylindrical air structure at the center. The diameter of the air structure was changed from 0 to 6 cm, and the target's air content defined as the air/planning target volume (PTV) in percent (air/PTV) was varied. VMAT plans were recalculated by AAA and AXB with the same monitor unit (MU) and multi-leaf collimator (MLC) motions. The dose at each air/PTV (5%-30%) was compared between each algorithm with D98%, D95%, D50% and D2% for the PTV. In addition, MUs were also compared with the same MLC motions between the D95% prescription with AAA (AAA_D95%), AXB_D95%, and the prescription to 100% minus air/PTV (AXB_D100%-air/PTV) in clinical cases of head and neck (HNC). When air/PTV increased (5-30%), the dose differences between AAA and AXB for D98%, D95%, D50% and D2% were 3.08-15.72%, 2.35-13.92%, 0.63-4.59%, and 0.14-6.44%, respectively. At clinical cases with air/PTV of 5.61% and 28.19%, compared to AAA_D95%, the MUs differences were, respectively, 2.03% and 6.74% for AXB_D95% and 1.80% and 0.50% for AXB_D100%-air/PTV. The dose difference between AAA and AXB increased as the target's air content increased, and AXB_D95% resulted in a dose escalation over AAA_D95% when the target's air content was ≥ 5%. The D100%-air/PTV of PTV using AXB was comparable to the D95% of PTV using AAA.

Dosimetric comparison and evaluation of two computational algorithms in VMAT treatment plans.

This study aimed to assess the accuracy and dosimetric impact of the Acuros XB (AXB) algorithm compared to the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) in two situations. First, simple phantom geometries were set and analyzed; moreover, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) clinical plans for Head & Neck and lung cases were calculated and compared. First, a phantom study was performed to compare the algorithms with radiochromic EBT3 film doses using one PMMA slab phantom and two others containing foam or air gap. Subsequently, a clinical study was conducted, including 20 Head & Neck and 15 lung cases irradiated with the VMAT technique. The treatment plans calculated by AXB and AAA were evaluated in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage (V95% ), dose received by relevant organs at risk (OARs), and the impact of using AXB with a grid size of 1mm. Finally, patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) was performed and compared for 17 treatment plans. Phantom dose calculations showed a better agreement of AXB with the film measurements. In the clinical study, AXB plans exhibited lower Conformity Index and PTV V95% , higher maximum PTV dose, and lower mean and minimum PTV doses for all anatomical sites. The most notable differences were detected in regions of intense heterogeneity. AXB predicted lower doses for the OARs, while the calculation time with a grid size of 1mm was remarkably higher. Regarding PSQA, although AAA was found to exhibit slightly higher gamma passing rates, the difference did not affect the AXB treatment plan quality. AXB demonstrated higher accuracy than AAA in dose calculations of both phantom and clinical conditions, specifically in interface regions, making it suitable for sites with large heterogeneities. Hence, such dosimetric differences between the two algorithms should always be considered in clinical practice.

The Effect of Varying Collimator Angles on VMAT planning of Prostate Cancer

Background: The variation in collimator angles in the Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) has been a factor of consideration in modern radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of cancer. Aim: To investigate dose-volume evaluation in planning target volume (PTV) and organs-at-risk (OARs) in prostate carcinoma patients planned with 1.5 arcs for different collimator angles. Methods: The collimator angle plays a vital role in VMAT planning due to leakage of radiation from the leaves of multi-leaf collimator (MLCs). Using the same optimization parameters on designated treatment planning system (TPS), the arcs of VMAT plans were optimized with 0°, 10°, 20°, 30°, 45°, and 90°, and 0°, 350°, 340°, 330°, 315° and 270° collimator angles. Different parameters like homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI), monitoring units (MUs), low dose coverage (V40Gy), maximum dose (Dmax), mean dose (Dmean), dose-volume histogram (DVH), D98%, D95%, etc. were calculated with Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) Version 15.6.04 and results were analyzed. Results: It was found that at 20°, 30° and 45° collimator angles, the dose conformity, homogeneity, and MUs have optimal values. The target coverage and dose to organ at risks at all angles is not significantly affected by different collimator angles. Conclusion: According to this study it is advised to clinical medical physicists to make a solid decision about the collimator angles for treatment. The dosimetric analysis shows that the optimal collimator angle is necessary for different plan analyzing parameters like better conformity and homogeneity. Keywords: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy. Prostate cancer, Planning Target Volume, organs-at-risk

Investigating a correlation between MLC positional errors and IMRT QA passing rate

Patient-specific quality assurance (QA) using measurement-based techniques has been the standard method used in many institutions as an essential step to ensure the accuracy of the actual treatment. In this work, we studied the use of the trajectory log files in specifying the influence of the linear accelerator multi-leaf collimators (MLC) positional errors in the passing rates of our measurement-based QA. In the study, we analyzed sixty-five QA treatment plan results including plans for head and neck, lungs, pelvises, craniospinal, and total body irradiation. Eclipse treatment planning system with Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) dose calculation engine was the system used to generate all of our treatment plans. All plans were delivered on Varian® linear accelerator UNIQUE which is equipped with 120 Millennium MLC. Trajectory log files generated during treatment delivery were analyzed by a software developed using MATLAB. We compared the planned versus the actual delivered fluence from the recorded log files. Direct subtraction of both fluences allowed us to calculate the degree of match between both fluences. We called it the MLC matching percentage. Measurement-based QAs for all IMRT patients were done using Octavius 4D -PTW dosimetry that incorporates 729 chamber array. The gamma analysis passing rates were calculated by verisoft software using criteria of 3% for dose and 3 mm for distance to agreement and based on the global maximum dose of calculation volume and suppressing the dose blow of 5% of maximum dose of the calculated volume. Then we tested the correlation between the QA passing rate with the related MLC matching percentage. The gamma analysis passing rate was in the range of 90%–99.1% and the matching percentage ranged from 89% to 98.8%. The assessment of the correlation between the gamma passing rate and the matching percentage showed 0.45 correlation coefficient. The p-value was less than 0.05 which indicates a statistically significant correlation. The effect size was on the order of 0.7. Trajectory log file analysis combined with the measurement-based patient specific QA is beneficial to our IMRT QA process and it could be an aid to detect the actual delivery error and hence could improve our passing rates in the future.

Comprehensive commissioning and quality assurance validation of Ethos™ therapy

PurposeAdaptive radiotherapy with the Ethos® therapy Varian system has been recently implemented at the Montpellier Cancer Institute, France. This article details the commissioning performed before the implementation of this new treatment planning system (TPS). Material and methodsTo validate the golden beam data of the machine (Halcyon linear accelerator), percentage depth doses (PDD) and profiles were measured for several field sizes and at different depths with a microdiamond chamber. The final doses calculated for different plan types with the Ethos Acuros XB algorithm and the Halcyon Eclipse Analytic Anisotropic Algorithm were compared using the gamma index method. Lastly, for the patient quality assurance (QA) process, the patient treatment plan results obtained with the Mobius3D QA platform (Varian) were compared with the portal dosimetry results obtained with Epiqa (Epidos). ResultsMinor differences were observed for the PDD and profile curves (mean difference of 0.2% and 2%, respectively). The χ index pass rate was above 98% for all measures using the 1%/1mm and 2%/2mm criteria for PDD and profile evaluations. The Ethos AXB algorithm was validated for every configuration (fixed fields, standard IMRT and VMAT fields, and clinical plans) with 2D/3D gamma index values>99%. Seventy-three 3-arcs-VMAT QA plans and 27 9-fields-IMRT QA plans were evaluated. Both showed excellent agreement with the TPS calculations (mean gamma pass rate higher than 99%). No difference was observed between IMRT and VMAT. ConclusionThe beam delivery, the Ethos AXB algorithm, and the patient QA were comprehensively validated using independent tools.

Validation of esophageal cancer treatment methods from 3D-CRT, IMRT, and Rapid Arc plans using custom Python software to compare radiobiological plans to normal tissue integral dosage.

The aim was to develop in-house software that is able to calculate and generate the biological plan evaluation of the esophagus treatment plan using the Niemierko model for normal tissue complication probability and tumor control probability. The Niemierko model can be applied for esophagus cancer treatment plan to estimate the tumor control probability (TCP) and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) using different planning techniques. The equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and effective volume parameters were compared with organ at risk. Subsequently, EUD and TCP parameter were compared with tumor volume for all five different planning techniques. Ten cases for esophageal cancer were included in this study. For each patient, five treatment plans were generated. The Anisotropic analytical algorithms (AAA) were used for dose calculation for the three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. The in-house developed radiobiological plan evaluation software using python programming is used for this study which takes a dose volume histogram (DVH) text file as an input file for biological plan evaluation. EUD, NTCP, TCP and effective volume were calculated from the Niemierko model using the in-house developed python based software and compared with treatment monitor units (MU) with all five different treatment plan. The best technique is quantified as benchmarked out of other different qualities of treatment. The four field 3D-CRT treatment plan is found to be the best suited from the perspective of biological plan index evaluation among the other planning techniques.

Accuracy of In-Field and Out-Field Doses Calculated by Analytical Anisotropic and Pencil Beam Convolution Algorithms: A Dosimetric Study

Out-of-field doses may affect the formation of secondary cancers, especially in radiosensitive organs, in patients treated with radiotherapy. The aim of this study is to investigate the in-field dose and out-of-field dose accuracy of Eclipse's analytic anisotropic algorithm (AAA) and pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithms using TLDs. A tissue equivalent phantom containing a total of 21 measurement points at a depth of 5 cm from the anterior and posterior was created. Using Eclipse AAA and PBC algorithms in TPS, 100 MU for AP/PA fields and 95 cm source-skin distance (SSD) were planned. In-field measurement points including isocenter were 3, 5, 7 and 11 points for 3x3, 5x5, 7x7 and 10x10 cm2, respectively. Measuring points outside the field edge were 38, 36, 34 and 30 points for 3x3, 5x5, 7x7 and 10x10 cm2, respectively. In-field point dose values calculated by TPS for different fields were compared with TLD doses measured at the same location. The difference between in-field dose estimation and TLD measurements of both algorithms was generally below 1%. The difference between TPS and TLD was found to be 4.41% for the 10x10 cm2 irradiation field, due to the field edge at a distance of 5 cm from the isocenter. As the field size decreased, the out-of-field dose calculation performance of the AAA and PBC algorithms was adversely affected. For the 10x10 cm2 irradiation field, the TLD measurements and the out-of-field point dose difference of the PBC algorithm were found to be 39.40%. This difference was at most 12.06% for the AAA algorithm. The Eclipse TPS is good at calculating the in-field dose but underestimates the off-field dose. In out-of-field dose calculation, the AAA algorithm gives more accurate results than the PBC algorithm. Additionally, the smaller the field size, the worse the outfield dose accuracy. The use of in vivo dosimeters is recommended in order to estimate the out-of-field dose with great accuracy in radiotherapy.

Adjuvant Radiation Treatment of Breast Cancer After Mastectomy: Advanced Algorithms and Partial Bolus Improve the Dose Calculation Accuracy in the Case of Thin-Chest-Wall Irradiation

The aim of this study was to examine measured and calculated dose distributions in a thin-chest-wall phantom and estimate the variations in the dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters used in plan evaluation for patient geometries with chest-wall thicknesses <15 mm with and without bolus implementation. Measurements were made using thermoluminescent dosimeters in a chest-wall phantom. The Monte Carlo method, anisotropic analytical algorithm, and Acuros XB Eclipse algorithms were used to calculate dose distributions for clinical plans. DVH parameters for clinical target volume tumor (CTVT) and planning target volume (PTV) and mean doses were evaluated for 15 patients with a chest-wall thickness of 8 to 15 mm with and without partial bolus and for 10 patients with a chest-wall thickness of 20 to 25 mm without bolus. Measurements showed that the dose at a depth of 2 to 12 mm at the beam entrance and laterally was within 90% of the dose at 8 mm depth. Monte Carlo and Acuros XB calculations were well aligned with the experimental data, whereas the anisotropic analytical algorithm underestimated the beam entrance and lateral doses. The DVH parameters for the patients with a thin chest wall were sensitive to calculation algorithm, resolution, body structure definition, and patient geometry. The parameters CTVTV95%, CTVTD98%, and PTVD98% were much lower than the tolerance criteria. Partial bolus improved the values for all algorithms and decreased the variations due to patient geometry. Dose calculations for patients with a chest-wall thickness of 20 to 25 mm resulted in sufficient target coverage and low dependence on patient geometry and calculation algorithm without the use of bolus. Dose calculations using advanced algorithms and resolution <2 mm are recommended for patients with a thin chest wall. Specific DVH criteria or the implementation of partial bolus was needed to facilitate plan development and evaluation for this patient group.

Uncertainties in the dosimetric heterogeneity correction and its potential effect on local control in lung SBRT

Objective. Dose calculation in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is challenging due to the low density of the lungs and small volumes. Here we assess uncertainties associated with tissue heterogeneities using different dose calculation algorithms and quantify potential associations with local failure for lung SBRT. Approach. 164 lung SBRT plans were used. The original plans were prepared using Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC, n = 8) or Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA, n = 156). Each plan was recalculated with AcurosXB (AXB) leaving all plan parameters unchanged. A subset (n = 89) was calculated with Monte Carlo to verify accuracy. Differences were calculated for the planning target volume (PTV) and internal target volume (ITV) Dmean[Gy], D99%[Gy], D95%[Gy], D1%[Gy], and V100%[%]. Dose metrics were converted to biologically effective doses (BED) using α/β = 10Gy. Regression analysis was performed for AAA plans investigating the effects of various parameters on the extent of the dosimetric differences. Associations between the magnitude of the differences for all plans and outcome were investigated using sub-distribution hazards analysis. Main results. For AAA cases, higher energies increased the magnitude of the difference (ΔDmean of −3.6%, −5.9%, and −9.1% for 6X, 10X, and 15X, respectively), as did lung volume (ΔD99% of −1.6% per 500cc). Regarding outcome, significant hazard ratios (HR) were observed for the change in the PTV and ITV D1% BEDs upon univariate analysis (p = 0.042, 0.023, respectively). When adjusting for PTV volume and prescription, the HRs for the change in the ITV D1% BED remained significant (p = 0.039, 0.037, respectively). Significance. Large differences in dosimetric indices for lung SBRT can occur when transitioning to advanced algorithms. The majority of the differences were not associated with local failure, although differences in PTV and ITV D1% BEDs were associated upon univariate analysis. This shows uncertainty in near maximal tumor dose to potentially be predictive of treatment outcome.

RADIOTHERAPY GENETIC ALGORITHM PARETO-MULTIOBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION OF BIOLOGICAL EFECTIVE DOSE AND CLONOGENS MODELS FOR HEAD AND NECK TUMOR ADVANCED TREATMENT

BED model (Biological Effective Dose) for Head and Neck tumors Hyperfractionation TPO was optimizedwith Pareto-Multiobjective (PMO) Genetic Algorithms (GA) software. Artificial Intelligence (AI) with GA is applied on Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Optimization (TPO). Secondly, the review of NEffective (Effective Tumor Population Clonogens Number) model optimization for breast cancer clonogens parameters determination in TPO (Treatment Planning Optimization) is got with 3D Graphical and Interior Optimization methods. Results series comprise PMO imaging process sequences and numerical values of PMO and NEffective model for Head and Neck cancer parameters. Further results demonstrate PMO-GA BED model both with Pareto-Optimal Front detailed graphics, charts and numerical dose fractionation datasets. Supplemental review of new recent applications with 3D Isodoses TPO with AAA (Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm) model wedge filters dose delivery is shown. Advanced RT Head and Neck cancer TPO, and tumors in general for Fractionation-dose protocols are explained.