Treatment Planning System Dose Calculation Research Articles

Radiation Doses Received by Major Organs at Risk in Children and Young Adolescents Treated for Cancer with External Beam Radiation Therapy: A Large-scale Study from 12 European Countries

BackgroundChildhood cancer survivors are at high risk of long-term iatrogenic events, in particular those treated with radiotherapy. The prediction of risk of such events is mainly based on the knowledge of the radiation dose received to healthy organs and tissues during treatment of childhood cancer diagnosed decades ago. PurposeWe aimed to set up a standardised organ dose table in order to help former patients and clinician in charge of long term follow-up clinics. Material and methodsWe performed whole body dosimetric reconstruction for 2646 patients from 12 European Countries treated between 1941 and 2006 (median: 1976). Most planning were 2D or 3D, 46% of patients were treated using Cobalt 60 and 41% using linear accelerator, the median prescribed dose being 27.2 Gy (IQ1-IQ3: 17.6-40.0 Gy), A patient specific voxel-based anthropomorphic phantom with more than 200 anatomical structures or sub-structures delineated as a surrogate of each subject's anatomy was used. The radiation therapy was simulated with a treatment planning system (TPS) based on available treatment information. The radiation dose received by any organ of the body was estimated by extending the TPS dose calculation to the whole-body, by type and localisation of childhood cancer. ResultsThe integral dose and normal-tissue doses to most of the 23 considered organs increased between the 1950’s and the 1970’s and decreased or plateaued thereafter. Whatever the organ considered, the type of childhood cancer explained most of the variability in organ dose. The country of treatment explained only a small part of the variability. ConclusionThe detailed dose estimates provide very useful information for former patients or clinicians who have only limited knowledge about radiation therapy protocols or techniques, but who know the type and site of childhood cancer, gender, age and year of treatment. This will allow better prediction of the long-term risk of iatrogenic events and better referral to long-term follow-up clinics.

Investigation of skin dose of post-mastectomy radiation therapy for the halcyon and tomotherapy treatment machine: Comparison of calculation and in vivo measurements

In treatments such as post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) for breast cancer patients, skin doses are of great importance in terms of tumor control and side effects. This dosimetric study aimed to measure the skin dose on the chest wall surface for post-mastectomy radiotherapy with Tomotherapy and Halcyon devices using thermoluminescence dosimetry (TLD) and to evaluate the accuracy of the skin dose calculated by treatment planning systems (TPS). Computed tomography (CT) images of the Alderson Rando phantom were obtained. Treatment plans were created with Tomotherapy and Halycon devices for a total of 50 Gy with a fraction dose of 2 Gy to the target volume. The left chest wall was divided into 9 regions for detailed surface dose assessment. 88 dose measurement points were determined on the left chest wall. The phantom was irradiated separately in Halycon and Tomotherapy devices. In vivo, dose measurements were performed with TLD in both devices. TPS and TLD doses were compared for the left chest wall surface. For skin dose, TLD measurements were lower than the dose estimate by Tomotherapy TPS and higher than the dose estimate by Halycon TPS. In addition, the skin dose measurements showed that the skin dose of the Tomotherapy device was higher than that of the Halycon. It is recommended to consider the distance of the treatment device and the accuracy of the TPS dose calculation in skin dose assessment in PMRT.

Prospective Clinical Integration of AI Based Treatment Planning Tool for Whole Breast Radiation Therapy (WBRT): A Single Institution's Three-Year Experience

<h3>Purpose/Objective(s)</h3> Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promising results of treatment planning in well-controlled retrospective environment. However, its clinical acceptability and long-term robustness has not been widely investigated. We report the prospective clinical results of AI-based whole breast/chest wall radiation therapy (WBRT) planning tool. We evaluated the 3-year overall performance and the progression of AI tool's acceptance among human planners. <h3>Materials/Methods</h3> In-house AI based WBRT treatment planning tool using random forest was commissioned for clinic since 2019. A total of 1151 patients have been planned with AI tool by Dec 2021, and all were included in this study. The AI tool is seamlessly integrated with clinical planning workflow and treatment planning system (TPS) – AI automatically generates fluence maps, which are used for final dose calculation in TPS (AI plan). The planner evaluates the plan quality and attempts to improve by manually modifying fluence if deemed necessary before physician's approval (final plan). The manual modification value (MMV) of each beamlet is the difference between fluence maps in AI and final plans. The manually modified beamlets were located and correlated to the dosimetry quality enhancement of the final plan over AI plan. In the longitudinal dimension, MMV also tracks the adaptation of human planner towards AI tools over 3 years. A regression model captures planner's frequency of editing AI plans over time. If the planner becomes more acceptive of the AI over time, the regression trend line will be significantly different from zero. <h3>Results</h3> Table 1 shows the dosimetric endpoints, as well as mean MMV of the entire patient population. No statistical significance was observed between the AI and final plans in PTV coverage and OAR sparing (Mood's median test), except V105% (reduced in final plan by 18.4 cc, <i>p</i>< 0.001). Spatially, irradiated lung region received most frequent editing, while skin flash region received minimum editing. Among all 12 planners, the number of cases planned ranged from 13 to 150. The max mean absolute MMV of a single planner was 5.0% (planned 131 cases) and minimum was 0.8% (planned 38 cases). Ten out of 12 planners showed a significantly decreasing editing AI plans with yearly mean MMV of 4.0%, 2.3% and 0.8% for 2019, 2020 and 2021 respectively, indicating improving acceptability/trust over time (<i>p</i><0.001). <h3>Conclusion</h3> This 3-year study demonstrated robustness of AI planning and steady improvement in acceptability by planners over time. It also revealed key areas towards human planner's preference that can be adopted in future AI tools.

Impact through versatility: Patterns of in vivo dosimetry utilization with TLD across a large multi-site radiotherapy department.

The complexity of modern radiotherapy treatment pathways necessitate input from different professions to ensure treatment is delivered safely and as planned. In vivo dosimetry is one method of treatment verification providing the opportunity for both in-field verification or out-of-field measurements. It was the aim of this work to review the impact of an in vivo dosimetry programme with t.he view to justify resources and assist in developing a plan for equipment acquisition. Results of 310 (approximately 2 per 1000 treatment fractions) in vivo measurements were reviewed over a two-year time span. The in vivo dosimetry programme using thermoluminescence (TLD) chips was able to detect three significant treatment errors, amongst some 13 000 patients treated. These errors would likely to have been undetected through other quality assurance measures. Increasing demands in workload were found to be associated with commissioning of new equipment and techniques. A skilled operator with knowledge of TLD physics, treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculation algorithms and radiation transport proved to be essential for appropriate interpretation of TLD results particularly in complex radiation delivery scenarios. TLD continues to play a large role in patient safety and quality assurance at our institution.

Dosimetric effect of modelling non-homogeneous LINAC couch using cone-beam computed tomography on quality assurance (QA) results

Abstract Aim: To evaluate the dosimetric effect of modelling a non-homogeneous couch on patients’ quality assurance (QA) gamma pass rates for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. Materials and Methods: A non-homogeneous treatment couch (TxT 550 TTM, CIVCO, USA) was imaged using the LINAC mounted cone-beam computer tomography (CBCT) system. Modelling this couch in different situations, including incomplete (homogeneous model), correct model and not defined situations in the treatment planning system (TPS), was performed based on the geometrical and material densities data extracted from the CBCT images. Calculated gamma pass rates between TPS dose calculations and the measurements in a phantom for different couch models were obtained and compared at two gamma criteria (2%-2 mm and 3%-3 mm). Results: Comparing TPS calculations for the correct modelled couch and the measurements showed high gamma pass rates for both the IMRT and VMAT techniques (96·5 ± 0·9%, 99·2 ± 0·5% for IMRT in 2%-2 mm and 3%-3 mm criteria; 97·5 ± 0·8%, 99·4 ± 0·5% for VMAT). The overall gamma pass rate of the IMRT plan QAs was reduced by about 2% and 3% on average for incomplete and no couch modelling, respectively. These reductions for VMAT techniques were 2·5% and 4·3%, respectively. Conclusions: Non-homogeneous couches have different parts with different attenuations, which can be correctly defined using LINAC CBCT. Modelling of treatment couch has a significant effect on patient QA results for VMAT and IMRT plans, especially in radiation fields/subfield transmitting from the couch. We suggest using LINAC CBCTs as an appropriate device for couch modelling in modulated radiotherapy techniques.

Evaluation of Surface Dose for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy of Head and Neck Cancer Using Thermoluminescent Dosimeters

Accurate estimation of the surface dose in radiotherapy of patients with head and neck cancer is very important in terms of treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate the surface dose for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of head and neck cancer using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). In addition, it is aimed to examine the surface dose estimates of the treatment planning system (TPS) for different grid sizes. Before the computed tomography (CT) images were taken for 15 head and neck cancer patients, 5 different points determined in the neck region were marked in a way that would not cause artifacts. IMRT plans are created for 1.5 and 2.5 mm grid sizes. Surface doses were obtained for TPS calculations and TLD measurements at 5 different points in the neck region. Surface doses obtained from TLD measurements and TPS calculations with different grid sizes were compared. All patients received 3-stage adaptive radiotherapy (ART) and the surface dose comparison was repeated for each plan. According to plan 0, the height of TLD measurements for the 1.5 and 2.5 mm grid size were 4.06% and 7.87%, respectively. In Plan 1, the difference between TPS and TLD doses was 4.00% and 8.15% for grid size 1.5mm and 2.5mm, respectively (p=0.00 and p=0.00). For dose measurements from Plan 2, the difference between TPS and TLD doses was 4.07% and 9.96% for grid size 1.5mm and 2.5mm, respectively (p=0.00 and p=0.00). Surface doses obtained in TLD measurements for all treatment plans were higher than in TPS dose calculations. Accurate estimation of the surface dose in head and neck cancer radiotherapy is very important for treatment. Surface doses calculated with TPS are usually lower than the prescribed dose. Therefore, during the evaluation of radiotherapy plans, it should be considered that TPS underestimates the surface dose. This ratio can be determined by dosimetric measurements. Thermoluminescent dosimeters are suitable equipment for this process.

Dosimetric considerations for moldable silicone composites used in radiotherapy applications.

Due to their many favorable characteristics, moldable silicone (MS) composites have gained popularity in medicine and recently, in radiotherapy applications. We investigate the dosimetric properties of silicones in radiotherapy beams and determine their suitability as water substitutes for constructing boluses and phantoms. Two types of silicones were assessed (ρ= 1.04 g/cm3 and ρ= 1.07 g/cm3). Various dosimetric properties were characterized, including the relative electron density, the relative mean mass energy‐absorption coefficient, and the relative mean mass restricted stopping power. Silicone slabs with thickness of 1.5 cm and 5.0 cm were molded to mimic a bolus setup and a phantom setup, respectively. Measurements were conducted for Co‐60 and 6 MV photon beams, and 6 MeV electron beams. The doses at 1.5 cm and 5.0 cm depths in MS were measured with solid water (SW) backscatter material (D MS–SW), and with a full MS setup (D MS–MS), then compared with doses at the same depths in a full SW setup (D SW–SW). Relative doses were reported as D MS–SW/D MS–SW and D MS–MS/D SW–SW. Experimental results were verified using Monaco treatment planning system dose calculations and Monte Carlo EGSnrc simulations. Film measurements showed varying dose ratios according to MS and beam types. For photon beams, the bolus setup D MS–SW/D SW–SW exhibited a 5% relative dose reduction. The dose for 6 MV beams was reduced by nearly 2% in a full MS setup. Up to 2% dose increase in both scenarios was observed for electron beams. Compared with dose in SW, an interface of MS–SW can cause relatively high differences. We conclude that it is important to characterize a particular silicone's properties in a given beam quality prior to clinical use. Because silicone compositions vary between manufacturers and differ from water/SW, accurate dosimetry using these materials requires consideration of the reported differences.

Implementation and validation of anisotropic analytical algorithm in eclipse treatment planning system for indigenous telecobalt machine (Bhabhatron II)

Background:The photon dose calculation model anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) available with eclipse integrated treatment planning system (TPS) (Varian) supports telecobalt dose calculation from Version 13.6 onward. Formerly, pencil beam convolution (PBC) was used for modeling telecobalt machines. Eclipse TPS no longer supports PBC dose calculation algorithm in v13.6 and above. The AAA dose calculation model is a three-dimensional PBC/superposition algorithm. Its configuration is based on Monte-Carlo-determined basic physical parameters that are tailored to measured clinical beam data.Aim:The study investigated the feasibility of clinical implementation of AAA in Eclipse TPS for Bhabhatron II.Materials and Methods:The indigenous telecobalt machine, Bhabhatron II, was configured as a generic machine because an inbuilt machine model for the same was not available in Varian Eclipse TPS algorithm library. In such a scenario, it was necessary to evaluate and validate dosimetric parameters of the TPS because improper tailoring would cause errors in dose calculations. Beam data measurements of the machine were carried out which were used for configuration of the algorithm.Result:After successful configuration, a variety of plans created in TPS were executed on the machine and subsequently evaluated.Conclusion:From this study, we concluded that AAA-based dose calculation in TPS is very well suited for accurate dose calculations for telecobalt machine and can be implemented for clinical use.

Comparison of dosimetric parameters and three-dimensional dosimetric verification of three intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans for thymoma based on the dose-volume histogram and ArcCHECK-3DVH system

Objective: To compare the dosimetric parameters of step-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (sIMRT), dynamic intensity-modulated radiotherapy (dIMRT), and volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in thymoma and to study the feasibility of the ArcCHECK-3DVH system in three intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans to choose a more appropriate intensity-modulated radiotherapy for thymoma. Materials and Methods: Seventeen patients with thymoma were enrolled in this study. Treatment plans of sIMRT, dIMRT, and VMAT for each patient were based on the Monaco treatment planning system (TPS). Dosimetric verification was performed via the ArcCHECK-3DVH system. We compared and analyzed the 3D γ pass rates of the TPS dose calculation and ArcCHECK-3DVH system dose reconstruction with the three gamma criteria (3 mm/3%, 2 mm/2%, and 1 mm/1%) with a threshold of 10%. Dose-volume histogram analysis was used to compare the dose parameters for target volumes, and organs at risk (OARs), such as D98%, D50%, D2%, Dmax, V20, and V5. Monitor units (MUs) and delivery time were also compared. Results: There were significant differences in the three intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans. For target volume, VMAT showed the highest planning target volume (PTV) D98% and the lowest PTV D50% compared with sIMRT or dIMRT. The PTV D2% of VMAT was lower than that of sIMRT and higher than that of dIMRT, and VAMT demonstrated the highest conformity index and MU, lowest homogeneity index, and shortest treatment delivery time. For the OARs, VMAT is not inferior to sIMRT and dIMRT in OARs protection. For the dosimetric verification, the entire area, PTV, lungs, heart, and spinal cord of VMAT showed the highest γ pass rates than the other two techniques under the gamma 3 mm/3% criteria, which was even more pronounced when the stricter gamma criteria of 2 mm/2% and 1 mm/1% were applied. Conclusion: VMAT can be applied to radiotherapy of thymoma, and the accuracy of treatment plan execution can be guaranteed through the ArcCHECK-3DVH system.

Commissioning Validation of a Brachytherapy Treatment Planning System with EGSnrc Monte Carlo Code and EBT3 GAFChromic Film.

Most brachytherapy treatment planning system (TPS) commissioning requires data input based on the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group-43 formalism. The commissioning accuracy is very important for dose calculation. The aim of this study is the implementation of a brachytherapy TPS into a clinical environment and check the TPS calculated dose accuracy. After introducing data of the different catheters (CIS Bio International, Saclay, France), composed of several Cesium-137 Eckert and Ziegler BEBIG CSM-11 radioactive sources; for XiO (CMS, St. Louis) brachytherapy TPS, the TPS dose calculation accuracy was investigated by comparing between the TPS calculated dose distribution (DD) for all the catheters with (1) the measuring DD using EBT3 GAFChromic film and (2) calculating DD by egs_brachy (Electron Gamma Shower, National Research Council of Canada) Monte Carlo simulation. The phantom used for this study consists of six PTW slabs 30 cm × 30 cm × 1 cm of polymethyl methacrylate with a Delouche MEDpro applicator on the top. The TPS DD was calculated on the computed tomography scan of this phantom. PTW VeriSoft version 6.0.1.7 (PTW-Freiburg, Germany) software was used for analyzing scanned films and to perform the comparison based on the gamma index distribution. For each catheter, the gamma index distribution showed agreement >95% of all pixels in both verification methods, with gamma ≤1. We confirm the commissioning accuracy and that the TPS can be used for clinical purposes.

Skin dose measurement and estimating the dosimetric effect of applicator misplacement in gynecological brachytherapy: A patient and phantom study.

To evaluate skin dose differences between TPS (treatment planning system) calculations and TLD (thermo-luminescent dosimeters) measurements along with the dosimetric effect of applicator misplacement for patients diagnosed with gynecological (GYN) cancers undergoing brachytherapy. The skin doses were measured using TLDs attached in different locations on patients' skin in pelvic regions (anterior, left, and right) for 20 patients, as well as on a phantom. In addition, the applicator surface dose was calculated with TLDs attached to the applicator. The measured doses were compared with TPS calculations to find TPS accuracy. For the phantom, different applicator shifts were applied to find the effect of applicator misplacement on the surface dose. The mean absolute dose differences between the TPS and TLDs results for anterior, left, and right points were 3.14±1.03, 6.25±1.88, and 6.20±1.97 %, respectively. The mean difference on the applicator surface was obtained 1.92±0.46 %. Applicator misplacements of 0.5, 2, and 4 cm (average of three locations) resulted in 9, 36, and 61%, dose errors respectively. The surface/skin differences between the calculations and measurements are higher in the left and right regions, which relate to the higher uncertainty of TPS dose calculation in these regions. Furthermore, applicator misplacements can result in high skin dose variations, therefore it can be an appropriate quality assurance method for future research.

Dose calculation accuracy for photon small fields in treatment planning systems with comparison by Monte Carlo simulations

Abstract Purpose: Advanced radiation therapy techniques use small fields in treatment planning and delivery. Small fields have the advantage of more accurate dose delivery, but with the cost of some complications in dosimetry. Different dose calculation algorithms imported in various treatment planning systems (TPSs) which each of them has different accuracy. Monte Carlo (MC) simulation has been reported as one of the accurate methods for calculating dose distribution in radiation therapy. The aim of this study was the evaluation of TPS dose calculation algorithms in small fields against 2 MC codes. Methods: A linac head was simulated in 2 MC codes, MCNPX, and GATE. Then three small fields (0.5×0.5, 1×1 and 1.5×1.5 cm2) were simulated with 2 MC codes, and also these fields were planned with different dose calculation algorithms in Isogray and Monaco TPS. PDDs and lateral dose profiles were extracted and compared between MC simulations and dose calculation algorithms. Results: For 0.5×0.5 cm2 field mean differences in PDDs with MCNPX were 2.28, 4.6, 5.3, and 7.4% and with GATE were -0.29, 2.3, 3 and 5% for CCC, superposition, FFT and Clarkson algorithms respectively. For 1×1 cm2 field mean differences in PDDs with MCNPX were 1.58, 0.6, 1.1 and 1.4% and with GATE were 0.77, 0.1, 0.6 and 0.9% for CCC, superposition, FFT and Clarkson algorithms respectively. For 1.5×1.5 cm2 field mean differences in PDDs with MCNPX were 0.82, 0.4, 0.6 and -0.4% and with GATE were 2.38, 2.5, 2.7 and 1.7% for CCC, superposition, FFT and Clarkson algorithms respectively. Conclusions: Different dose calculation algorithms were evaluated and compared with MC simulation in small fields. Mean differences with MC simulation decreased with the increase of field sizes for all algorithms.

Gel and thermoluminescence dosimetry for dose verifications of a real anatomy simulated prostate conformal radiation treatment in the presence of metallic femoral prosthesis.

This study aims to verify the dose delivery of prostate radiotherapy treatments in an adult pelvic phantom with two metallic hip and femur prosthesis using a four‐field box technique. The prostate planned target volume (PTV) tridimensional (3D) dose distribution was evaluated using gel dosimetry, and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) were used for point‐dose measurements outside it. Both results were compared to the treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculation without using heterogeneity corrections to evaluate the influence of the metal in the dose distribution. MAGIC‐f gel dosimeter (Methacrylic and Ascorbic acid in Gelatin Initiated by Copper with Formaldehyde) associated with magnetic resonance imaging was used. TLD were positioned at several points at the bone metal interface and the sacrum region. The comparison of the gel measured and the TPS calculated dose distributions were done using gamma analysis (3%/3 mm), and a pass rate of 93% was achieved. The TLD dose values at the bone‐metal interface showed variations from the planned dose. However, at the sacrum region, where the beams did not intercept the prosthesis, there was a good agreement between TPS planning and TLD measurements. Our results show how the combination of 3D dosimetry and measurements at specific points in the phantom allowed a comprehensive view of the dose distribution and identified that care must also be paid to regions outside the PTV.

Implementation of a real-time, ultrasound-guided prostate HDR brachytherapy program.

This work presents a comprehensive commissioning and workflow development process of a real‐time, ultrasound (US) image‐guided treatment planning system (TPS), a stepper and a US unit. To adequately benchmark the system, commissioning tasks were separated into (1) US imaging, (2) stepper mechanical, and (3) treatment planning aspects. Quality assurance US imaging measurements were performed following the AAPM TG‐128 and GEC‐ESTRO recommendations and consisted of benchmarking the spatial resolution, accuracy, and low‐contrast detectability. Mechanical tests were first used to benchmark the electronic encoders within the stepper and were later expanded to evaluate the needle free length calculation accuracy. Needle reconstruction accuracy was rigorously evaluated at the treatment planning level. The calibration length of each probe was redundantly checked between the calculated and measured needle free length, which was found to be within 1 mm for a variety of scenarios. Needle placement relative to a reference fiducial and coincidence of imaging coordinate origins were verified to within 1 mm in both sagittal and transverse imaging planes. The source strength was also calibrated within the interstitial needle and was found to be 1.14% lower than when measured in a plastic needle. Dose calculations in the TPS and secondary dose calculation software were benchmarked against manual TG‐43 calculations. Calculations among the three calculation methods agreed within 1% for all calculated points. Source positioning and dummy coincidence was tested following the recommendations of the TG‐40 report. Finally, the development of the clinical workflow, checklists, and planning objectives are discussed and included within this report. The commissioning of real‐time, US‐guided HDR prostate systems requires careful consideration among several facets including the image quality, dosimetric, and mechanical accuracy. The TPS relies on each of these components to develop and administer a treatment plan, and as such, should be carefully examined.

PO38: Commissioning and Workflow Development for a Real-Time, Ultrasound-Guided Prostate HDR Brachytherapy Program

Purpose: This work presents the commissioning of a real-time, ultrasound (US)-guided HDR brachytherapy system (Elekta AB, Inc.), including the hardware, US imaging system, treatment planning system (TPS) (Oncentra Prostate), and the developed workflow.Materials and Methods: Commissioning tasks were separated into (1) US imaging, (2) stepper mechanicals, and (3) treatment planning aspects. Quality assurance US imaging measurements consisted of benchmarking the spatial resolution, accuracy, and low-contrast detectability. Mechanical tests were first performed to validate the electronic encoders used within the stepper and were later expanded to evaluate the needle free length calculation accuracy. Several system-integrated measurements were performed to verify needle positioning accuracy and imaging origin coincidence measurements using the needle free length measurement as a surrogate marker, as this remains one of the largest potential sources of error. The workflow was developed through a multi-disciplinary team, including physicians, radiation-therapists, nurses, physicists, administration staff, sterilization and anesthesia staff and included multi-dry-runs of the full procedure. A detailed description of each party's role was also developed, including checklists for the planning physicist, a secondary check physicist, and a radiation therapist.Results: Needle placement accuracy was verified to within 1 mm for both sagittal and transverse imaging planes. Needle reconstruction accuracy was also rigorously evaluated. The source strength was also calibrated with the interstitial needle and was found to be 1.14% lower than when measured in a plastic needle. The calibration length of each probe was redundantly check between the calculated and measured needle free length, which was found to be within 1 mm for a variety of scenarios. Dose calculations in the TPS and secondary dose calculation software were benchmarked against manual TG-43 calculations, which were within 1% for all calculated points. Source positioning and dummy coincidence was also verified. The US-guided HDR prostate procedure consisted of six primary components: (1) the delineation of personnel and their roles, (2) HDR suite preparation prior to the treatment day, (3) day of treatment preparations, (4) patient setup, (4) pre-needle insertion plan, (5) initial insertion and live reconstruction, and (6) final imaging and planning. A set of plan evaluation metrics were established based on the currently available guidelines (ABS, ESTRO, and RTOG) and the culmination of clinical experiences across multiple institutions.Conclusions: The commissioning of real-time, US-guided HDR prostate systems requires careful consideration among several facets including the image quality, dosimetric and mechanical accuracy. The TPS relies on each of these components to develop and administer a treatment plan, and as such, should be carefully examined.

Comparison of the RayStation photon Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm against measured data under homogeneous and heterogeneous irradiation geometries.

This work compares Monte Carlo dose calculations performed using the RayStation treatment planning system against data measured on a Varian Truebeam linear accelerator with 6 MV and 10 MV FFF photon beams. The dosimetric performance of the RayStation Monte Carlo calculations was evaluated in a variety of irradiation geometries employing homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms. Profile and depth dose comparisons against measurement were carried out in relative mode using the gamma index as a quantitative measure of similarity within the central high dose regions. The results demonstrate that the treatment planning system dose calculation engine agrees with measurement to within 2%/1 mm for more than 95% of the data points in the high dose regions for all test cases. A systematic underestimation was observed at the tail of the profile penumbra and out of field, with mean differences generally<0.5mm or 1% of curve dose maximum respectively. Out of field agreement varied between evaluated beam models. The RayStation implementation of photon Monte Carlo dose calculations show good agreement with measured data for the range of scenarios considered in this work and is deemed sufficiently accurate for introduction into clinical use.

A comparison of skin dose estimation between thermo-luminescent dosimeter and treatment planning system in prostatic cancer: a brachytherapy technique

This study aimed to compare the skin dose calculated by treatment planning system (TPS) and measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) in brachytherapy of prostatic cancer to show the skin TLD dosimetry as an appropriate quality assurance procedure for TPS dose calculations. Read more at JCTRes.com

Dose calculation accuracy in proximity of a pacemaker: A multicenter study with threecommercial treatment planning systems.

This study compares Treatment Planning System (TPS) out of field dose calculation on a pacemaker (PMK) during external beam radiotherapy treatment. We consider four TPSs (Elekta-Monaco, Oncentra- Masterplan and two Philips-Pinnacle3) commissioned for two linacs (Elekta Sinergy and Varian Clinac) delivering two test beams (a highly modulated one and a square field) and two clinical breast plans. To calculate and measure dose to a PMK we built a Real Water3 phantom with a PMK embedded in it. Measures are performed with thermo-luminescent dosimeters and Mosfet dosimeters. We evaluate differences between TPS calculated values for the dose to the PMK (both point dose and dose-volume histogram parameters) when the PMK is positioned in the first 10cm outside the radiation fields. TPS calculation accuracy is evaluated comparing such values with measures. Differences in TPS calculations are on average 3.5cGyGy-1 for the modulated beam, and always lower than 2cGyGy-1 for the square beam. TPS dose calculation depends mostly on the TPS algorithm and model rather than the linac commissioned. TPSs considered show different degrees of calculation accuracy. In the first 4cm to the field edge three out of four TPSs are in good agreement with measurements in the square beam, but only one keeps the agreement in the modulated beam: the others show over and underestimations up to +20% -40%. The same accuracy is found considering a homogeneous phantom. Our results confirm what reported in previous studies and highlight the impact of TPS commissioning.

Monte Carlo calculations of radiotherapy dose in "homogeneous" anatomy.

Given the substantial literature on the use of Monte Carlo (MC) simulations to verify treatment planning system (TPS) calculations of radiotherapy dose in heterogeneous regions, such as head and neck and lung, this study investigated the potential value of running MC simulations of radiotherapy treatments of nominally homogeneous pelvic anatomy. A pre-existing in-house MC job submission and analysis system, built around BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc, was used to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of a sample of 12 pelvic volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) treatments, planned using the Varian Eclipse TPS, where dose was calculated with both the Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) and the Acuros (AXB) algorithm. In-house TADA (Treatment And Dose Assessor) software was used to evaluate treatment plan complexity, in terms of the small aperture score (SAS), modulation index (MI) and a novel exposed leaf score (ELS/ELA). Results showed that the TPS generally achieved closer agreement with the MC dose distribution when treatments were planned for smaller (single-organ) targets rather than larger targets that included nodes or metastases. Analysis of these MC results with reference to the complexity metrics indicated that while AXB was useful for reducing dosimetric uncertainties associated with density heterogeneity, the residual TPS dose calculation uncertainties resulted from treatment plan complexity and TPS model simplicity. The results of this study demonstrate the value of using MC methods to recalculate and check the dose calculations provided by commercial radiotherapy TPSs, even when the treated anatomy is assumed to be comparatively homogeneous, such as in the pelvic region.

Development of an age-scalable 3D computational phantom in DICOM standard for late effects studies of childhood cancer survivors

Purpose: We previously developed an age-scalable 3D computational phantom that has been widely used for retrospective whole-body dose reconstructions of conventional two-dimensional historic radiation therapy (RT) treatments in late effects studies of childhood cancer survivors. This phantom is modeled in the FORTRAN programming language and is not readily applicable for dose reconstructions for survivors treated with contemporary RT whose treatment plans were designed using computed tomography images and complex treatment fields. The goal of this work was to adapt the current FORTRAN model of our age-scalable computational phantom into Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) standard so that it can be used with any treatment planning system (TPS) to reconstruct contemporary RT. Additionally, we report a detailed description of the phantom’s age-based scaling functions, information that was not previously published. Method: We developed a Python script that adapts our phantom model from FORTRAN to DICOM. To validate the conversion, we compared geometric parameters for the phantom modeled in FORTRAN and DICOM scaled to ages 1 month, 6 months, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 15, and 18 years. Specifically, we calculated the percent differences between the corner points and volume of each body region and the normalized mean square distance (NMSD) between each of the organs. In addition, we also calculated the percent difference between the heights of our DICOM age-scaled phantom and the heights (50th percentile) reported by the World Health Organization (WHO) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for male and female children of the same ages. Additionally, we calculated the difference between the organ masses for our DICOM phantom and the organ masses for two reference phantoms (from International Comission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) 89 and the University of Florida/National Cancer Institute reference hybrid voxel phantoms) for ages newborn, 1, 5, 10, 15 and adult. Lastly, we conducted a feasibility study using our DICOM phantom for organ dose calculations in a commercial TPS. Specifically, we simulated a 6 MV photon right-sided flank field RT plan for our DICOM phantom scaled to age 3.9 years; treatment field parameters and age were typical of a Wilms tumor RT treatment in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. For comparison, the same treatment was simulated using our in-house dose calculation system with our FORTRAN phantom. The percent differences (between FORTRAN and DICOM) in mean dose and percent of volume receiving dose ≥5 Gy were calculated for two organs at risk, liver and pancreas. Results: The percent differences in corner points and the volumes of head, neck, and trunk body regions between our phantom modeled in FORTRAN and DICOM agreed within 3%. For all of the ages, the NMSDs were negliglible with a maximum NMSD of mm for occiptital lobe of 1 month. The heights of our age-scaled phantom agreed with WHO/CDC data within 7% from infant to adult, and within 2% agreement for ages 5 years and older. We observed that organ masses in our phantom are less than the organ masses for other reference phantoms. Dose calculations done with our in-house calculation system (with FORTRAN phantom) and commercial TPS (with DICOM phantom) agreed within 7%. Conclusion: We successfully adapted our phantom model from the FORTRAN language to DICOM standard and validated its geometric consistency. We also demonstrated that our phantom model is representative of population height data for infant to adult, but that the organ masses are smaller than in other reference phantoms and need further refinement. Our age-scalable computational phantom modeled in DICOM standard can be scaled to any age at RT and used within a commercial TPS to retrospectively reconstruct doses from contemporary RT in childhood cancer survivors.