Intensity Modulated Treatment Plans Research Articles

Impact of Reference Selection on Gamma Analysis in Patient-Specific Quality Assurance for Monte Carlo-Based Treatment Planning Systems.

Our study aimed to establish a standardized methodology for selecting "reference" and "evaluated" distributions in gamma analysis for Monte Carlo (MC) based intensity modulated treatment plans. Evaluation of importance of reference selection in MC based and non MC based treatment planning systems were analysed using a study classification. Three categories were utilized to analyzed gamma passing rates across using different treatment planning systems (TPS) and detectors for thirty five patients. Category 1 utilized MC-based Monaco TPS plans and a 2 dimensional(2D) I'mRTMatriXX detector. Category 2 employed non-MC-based Eclipse TPS plans, assessed with a 2D I'mRTMatriXX detector. In Category 3, MC-based Monaco TPS plans were validated using a Dolphin detector. All plans were subjected to analysis using gamma criteria, which considered a dose difference of 3% and a distance to agreement of 3mm. Additionally, another set of gamma criteria was employed, with a dose difference of 3% and a distance to agreement of 2mm. An introduced Asymmetric factors in both 2D and 3D analysis will quantify the asymmetric nature of gamma based on the choice of "reference" distribution. For 2D Gamma analysis, MC-based Monaco TPS and I'mRTMatriXX showed a consistent positive Zk2D trend for all patients, with significant p-values below 0.01 for both gamma passing criteria. In contrast, non-MC based Eclipse TPS exhibited varied Zk2D results, with non-significant p-values. In 3D Gamma analysis, all patients exhibited positive Zk3D values with significant p-values below 0.01 when "references" were swapped. The Pearson correlation between asymmetricity and isodose volumes was notably high at 0.99 for both gamma criteria. Our study highlights the imperative of using MC-based TPS as the definitive "reference" in gamma analysis for patient specific quality assurance of intensity modulated radiation therapy, emphasizing that variations can mislead results, especially given gamma analysis's sensitivity to MC calculation noise.

2D antiscatter grid and scatter sampling based CBCT method for online dose calculations during CBCT guided radiation therapy of pelvis.

Online dose calculations before the delivery of radiation treatments have applications in dose delivery verification, online adaptation of treatment plans, and simulation-free treatment planning. While dose calculations by directly utilizing CBCT images are desired, dosimetric accuracy can be compromised due to relatively lower HU accuracy in CBCT images. In this work, we propose a novel CBCT imaging pipeline to enhance the accuracy of CBCT-based dose calculations in the pelvis region. Our approach aims to improve the HU accuracy in CBCT images, thereby improving the overall accuracy of CBCT-based dose calculations prior to radiation treatment delivery. An in-house developed quantitative CBCT pipeline was implemented to address the CBCT raw data contamination problem. The pipeline combines algorithmic data correction strategies and 2D antiscatter grid-based scatter rejection to achieve high CT number accuracy. To evaluate the effect of the quantitative CBCT pipeline on CBCT-based dose calculations, phantoms mimicking pelvis anatomy were scanned using a linac-mounted CBCT system, and a gold standard multidetector CT used for treatment planning (pCT). A total of 20 intensity-modulated treatment plans were generated for five targets, using 6 and 10 MV flattening filter-free beams, and utilizing small and large pelvis phantom images. For each treatment plan, four different dose calculations were performed using pCT images and three CBCT imaging configurations: quantitative CBCT, clinical CBCT protocol, and a high-performance 1D antiscatter grid (1D ASG). Subsequently, dosimetric accuracy was evaluated for both targets and organs at risk as a function of patient size, target location, beam energy, and CBCT imaging configuration. When compared to the gold-standard pCT, dosimetric errors in quantitative CBCT-based dose calculations were not significant across all phantom sizes, beam energies, and treatment sites. The largest error observed was 0.6% among all dose volume histogram metrics and evaluated dose calculations. In contrast, dosimetric errors reached up to 7% and 97% in clinical CBCT and high-performance ASG CBCT-based treatment plans, respectively. The largest dosimetric errors were observed in bony targets in the large phantom treated with 6 MV beams. The trends of dosimetric errors in organs at risk were similar to those observed in the targets. The proposed quantitative CBCT pipeline has the potential to provide comparable dose calculation accuracy to the gold-standard planning CT in photon radiation therapy for the abdomen and pelvis. These robust dose calculations could eliminate the need for density overrides in CBCT images and enable direct utilization of CBCT images for dose delivery monitoring or online treatment plan adaptations before the delivery of radiation treatments.

Efficiency enhancements of a Monte Carlo beamlet based treatment planning process: implementation and parameter study

Objective. The computational effort to perform beamlet calculation, plan optimization and final dose calculation of a treatment planning process (TPP) generating intensity modulated treatment plans is enormous, especially if Monte Carlo (MC) simulations are used for dose calculation. The goal of this work is to improve the computational efficiency of a fully MC based TPP for static and dynamic photon, electron and mixed photon-electron treatment techniques by implementing multiple methods and studying the influence of their parameters. Approach. A framework is implemented calculating MC beamlets efficiently in parallel on each available CPU core. The user can specify the desired statistical uncertainty of the beamlets, a fractional sparse dose threshold to save beamlets in a sparse format and minimal distances to the PTV surface from which 2 × 2 × 2 = 8 (medium) or even 4 × 4 × 4 = 64 (large) voxels are merged. The compromise between final plan quality and computational efficiency of beamlet calculation and optimization is studied for several parameter values to find a reasonable trade-off. For this purpose, four clinical and one academic case are considered with different treatment techniques. Main results. Setting the statistical uncertainty to 5% (photon beamlets) and 15% (electron beamlets), the fractional sparse dose threshold relative to the maximal beamlet dose to 0.1% and minimal distances for medium and large voxels to the PTV to 1 cm and 2 cm, respectively, does not lead to substantial degradation in final plan quality compared to using 2.5% (photon beamlets) and 5% (electron beamlets) statistical uncertainty and no sparse format nor voxel merging. Only OAR sparing is slightly degraded. Furthermore, computation times are reduced by about 58% (photon beamlets), 88% (electron beamlets) and 96% (optimization). Significance. Several methods are implemented improving computational efficiency of beamlet calculation and plan optimization of a fully MC based TPP without substantial degradation in final plan quality.

Контроль качества планов с модуляцией интенсивности (volumetric modulated arc therapy - vmat) в лучевой терапии на линейном ускорителе vitalbeam

The importance of medical physics methods in modern radiation therapy is shown. The types of irradiation used in radiation therapy are considered. At each stage, it is necessary to maintain high accuracy of all procedures. One of the significant stages is the treatment planning, where the quality control of the plan is carried out to ensure the accuracy of the treatment of the patient. The process of quality control of radiation plans in radiation therapy with intensity modulation (Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy - VMAT) on the VitalBeam linear accelerator is presented. The widely used method of quality control on the portal detector (Electronic Portal Imaging Device, EPID) of the radiation therapy plan with intensity modulation (Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy - VMAT) is considered. Comparison of dose distribution that is the overlapping of dose distribution contours. Isodose lines and a dose-volume histogram for a plan with intensity modulation are presented and the main dimensional geometries used in clinical practice for dosimetric examination of treatment plans are described. Intensity modulated plan gamma analysis (VMAT) and gamma analysis criteria are defined. As well as the coverage of the physical volume of exposure. Quality control of dosimetric distributions of the intensity modulated treatment plan (VMAT) on the VitalBeam linear accelerator was assessed.

Patterns of Relapse After Adjuvant Chemoradiation for Cervical Cancer in a Phase 3 Clinical Trial (PARCER): An Evaluation of Updated NRG Oncology/RTOG Target Delineation Guidelines

The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) under NRG Oncology recently published updated contouring guidelines for intensity modulated radiation therapy in postoperative treatment for endometrial and cervical cancer. The present study was designed to evaluate the implications ofnewly published guidelines. We recruited 300 patients in a phase 3 randomized controlled trial of adjuvant chemoradiation therapy for cervical cancer (NCT01279135) to understand patterns of relapse. For those patients with pelvic relapse, we imported radiation therapy structure sets, treatment plans, and diagnostic images atrelapse on the treatment planning system. We performed rigid registration with treatment planning images that contained the delineated planning target volume and radiation dose information. We delineated gross tumor volume at time of relapse on the diagnostic scans and superimposed it on the radiation therapy treatment scans. We categorized the site of pelvic relapse as "within field of old RTOG/[Postoperative Adjuvant Radiation in Cervical Cancer (PARCER)] target delineation guidelines" or "within field of new NRG/RTOG guidelines," or both, and compared proportions of recurrences contained within the 2 guidelines. We consider a P value of <.05 statistically significant. Additionally, we generated intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment plans based on the new guidelines for a limited set of patients to see if these new guidelines increased the organ at risk doses. Most common form of relapse was distant metastasis (15%). Pelvic relapse rate in our study was 8%. Overall, 9 out of 19 relapses were encompassed in the contouring guidelines of the old RTOG/ Postoperative Adjuvant Radiation in Cervical Cancer (PARCER) trial, and 12 out of 19 were encompassed within the new RTOG 2021 contouring guidelines. This corresponded to a further 1% reduction in local relapses (P=.007). Dose to rectum was marginally increased with the new contouring, with no difference in other organs at risk. Salvage treatment was offered in 25 out of 60 patients who relapsed. Patients who received local treatment after relapse had a mean survival after relapse of 27.2 months compared with 8 months among those who received supportive care alone. Our study supportsthe use of newly published NRG/RTOG contouring guidelines in patients with cervical cancer who have undergone hysterectomy. Further data are needed to ascertain if anterior extension of the clinical target volume is needed as in the Postoperative Adjuvant Radiation in Cervical Cancer trial.

Optimizing Adjuvant Stereotactic Radiotherapy of Motor-Eloquent Brain Metastases: Sparing the nTMS-Defined Motor Cortex and the Hippocampus.

Brain metastases can effectively be treated with surgical resection and adjuvant stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) has been used to non-invasively map the motor cortex prior to surgery of motor eloquent brain lesions. To date, few studies have reported the integration of such motor maps into radiotherapy planning. The hippocampus has been identified as an additional critical structure of radiation-induced deficits. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of selective dose reduction to both the nTMS-based motor cortex and the hippocampi in SRT of motor-eloquent brain metastases. Patients with motor-eloquent brain metastases undergoing surgical resection and adjuvant SRT between 07/2014 and 12/2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The radiotherapy treatment plans were retrieved from the treatment planning system (“original” plan). For each case, two intensity-modulated treatment plans were created: the “motor” plan aimed to reduce the dose to the motor cortex, the “motor & hipp” plan additionally reduce the dose to the hippocampus. The optimized plans were compared with the “original” plan regarding plan quality, planning target volume (PTV) coverage, and sparing of organs at risk (OAR). 69 plans were analyzed, all of which were clinically acceptable with no significant differences for PTV coverage. All OAR were protected according to standard protocols. Sparing of the nTMS motor map was feasible: mean dose 9.66 ± 5.97 Gy (original) to 6.32 ± 3.60 Gy (motor) and 6.49 ± 3.78 Gy (motor & hipp), p<0.001. In the “motor & hipp” plan, dose to the ipsilateral hippocampi could be significantly reduced (max 1.78 ± 1.44 Gy vs 2.49 ± 1.87 Gy in “original”, p = 0.003; mean 1.01 ± 0.92 Gy vs. 1.32 ± 1.07 Gy in “original”, p = 0.007). The study confirms the results from previous studies that inclusion of nTMS motor information into radiotherapy treatment planning is possible with a relatively straightforward workflow and can achieve reduced doses to the nTMS-defined motor area without compromising PTV coverage. Furthermore, we demonstrate the feasibility of selective dose reduction to the hippocampus at the same time. The clinical significance of these optimized plans yet remains to be determined. However, with no apparent disadvantages these optimized plans call for further and broader exploration.

Myths, facts and scope of spinal cord tolerance dose revision in Intensity modulated SIB treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer: A dosimetrical and radiobiological demonstration

PurposeTo explore the possibility of revising the spinal cord tolerance dose in Simultaneously Integrated Boost (SIB) intensity modulated treatment plan of locally advanced head and neck (H&N) cancer and assessment of achieved planning gain due to the revision. In SIB regimen, the Organ at Risk (OARs) tolerance dose is equally distributed throughout the treatment. Clinicians have usually considered the spinal cord tolerance to be the same as in conventional technique. However, in SIB fractionation regimen with intensity modulation treatment, the spinal cord may receive a physical dose of 45Gy, with much lesser dose per fraction than 2Gy per fraction. So when the dose of spinal cord is distributed throughout the treatment, the tolerance dose limit of physical dose can be considered higher than the usual conventional dose limits. In this study, an attempt has been made to explore the possibilities of dose escalation and treatment planning benefits while exploiting this “Window of Opportunity (WoO)” of increase in spinal cord and Planning Risk Volume (PRV) spinal cord tolerance dose. Material and methodsA total of 12 patients CT data set along with approved structure set of H&N cancer used for treatment planning in. Three independent SIB VMAT plans named as SPC, SPR and SPDE were generated for the 12 patients. First plan (SPC) was generated by considering standard spinal cord tissue constraint of maximum dose of 45Gy and PRV spinal cord maximum dose 50Gy as per QUANTEC summary and second plan (SPR) was generated considering spinal cord tissue constraint of maximum dose 52.50Gy and PRV spinal cord maximum dose 56.35Gy while optimization and dose calculation. The objectives for rest of the Organ at Risk (OAR) were kept same in both the plans during optimization and dose calculation. The SPC plan was copied for creation of third plan (SPDE) in which dose was escalated by increasing dose per fraction for target volumes such that dose to spinal cord reached a maximum dose of 52.50Gy and PRV spinal cord maximum dose of 56.35Gy. In this plan there have been changes to only dose per fraction, however dose optimization and dose calculation have not been performed. Radiobiological parameters TCP and NTCP were also calculated by using indigenously developed software. ResultsConsidering the increase of spinal cord tolerance dose as “window of opportunity”, a sufficient escalation in physical dose, Biological Effective Dose (BED) and Tumor Control Probability (TCP) was observed for all target volumes with acceptable level of NTCP values. ConclusionSufficient dose escalation and increased in TCP for target volumes or effective planning benefits can be achieved by revising the spinal cord tolerance dose in intensity modulated SIB treatment of locally advanced H&N cancers.

Dosimetric comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and RapidArc in low grade mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the salivary gland: a single institutional experience

AbstractPurpose:To report a single-institution experience of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and RapidArc treatment plans for the patients treated with low grade mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) of the salivary gland while sparing the organs at risk (OARs) within tolerance limits.Material and Methods:Twenty-five patients with MEC were selected to develop and analyse the treatment plans using both of the techniques. Dose distributions were calculated using Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA). Plans were generated to deliver the dose of 6000 cGy in 30 fractions. For IMRT, seven angle plans were used and for RapidArc, two half arcs were used with the same 6 MV photon beam. Quality of treatment plans was evaluated by using parameters such as, coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), unified dosimetry index (UDI), dose volume histogram, delivery time and OARs sparing for IMRT and RapidArc plans.Results:The analysis revealed that IMRT and RapidArc coverages are 0·90 and 0·94, respectively; CIs are 1·15 and 1·10, respectively; HIs are 1·12 and 1·07, respectively; GIs are 0·94 and 0·98, respectively. Average UDI values for RapidArc and IMRT are 1·09 and 1·11, respectively. Integral dose comparison shows better OAR sparing for RapidArc. RapidArc plans have the shorter beam on time (45%) in comparison with IMRT plans.Conclusion:Planning constraints were achieved in both techniques. However, RapidArc showed better quality treatment plan, OARs sparing and shorter delivery time as compared to IMRT.

Automated intensity modulated treatment planning: The expedited constrained hierarchical optimization (ECHO) system.

To develop and implement a fully automated approach to intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning. The optimization algorithm is developed based on a hierarchical constrained optimization technique and is referred internally at our institution as expedited constrained hierarchical optimization (ECHO). Beamlet contributions to regions-of-interest are precomputed and captured in the influence matrix. Planning goals are of two classes: hard constraints that are strictly enforced from the first step (e.g., maximum dose to spinal cord), and desirable goals that are sequentially introduced in three constrained optimization problems (better planning target volume (PTV) coverage, lower organ at risk (OAR) doses, and smoother fluence map). After solving the optimization problems using external commercial optimization engines, the optimal fluence map is imported into an FDA-approved treatment planning system (TPS) for leaf sequencing and accurate full dose calculation. The dose-discrepancy between the optimization and TPS dose calculation is then calculated and incorporated into optimization by a novel dose correction loop technique using Lagrange multipliers. The correction loop incorporates the leaf sequencing and scattering effects into optimization to improve the plan quality and reduce the calculation time. The resultant optimal fluence map is again imported into TPS for leaf sequencing and final dose calculation for plan evaluation and delivery. The workflow is automated using application program interface (API) scripting, requiring user interaction solely to prepare the contours and beam arrangement prior to launching the ECHO plug-in from the TPS. For each site, parameters and objective functions are chosen to represent clinical priorities. The first site chosen for clinical implementation was metastatic paraspinal lesions treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). As a first step, 75 ECHO paraspinal plans were generated retrospectively and compared with clinically treated plans generated by planners using VMAT (volumetric modulated arc therapy) with 4 to 6 partial arcs. Subsequently, clinical deployment began in April, 2017. In retrospective study, ECHO plans were found to be dosimetrically superior with respect to tumor coverage, plan conformity, and OAR sparing. For example, the average PTV D95%, cord and esophagus max doses, and Paddick Conformity Index were improved, respectively, by 1%, 6%, 14%, and 15%, at a negligible 3% cost of the average skin D10cc dose. Hierarchical constrained optimization is a powerful and flexible tool for automated IMRT treatment planning. The dosimetric correction step accurately accounts for detailed dosimetric multileaf collimator and scattering effects. The system produces high-quality, Pareto optimal plans and avoids the time-consuming trial-and-error planning process.

Quality assurance of intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment planning: a dosimetric comparison

AbstractAimThe purpose of this study was to analyse the comparison of intensity-modulated radiation therapy quality assurance (IMRT QA) using Gafchromic® EBT3 film, Electronic portal imaging device (EPID) and MapCHECK®2.BackgroundPretreatment authentication is the main apprehension in advanced radiation therapy treatment plans such as IMRT.Materials and methodsA total of 20 patients were planned on Eclipse treatment planning system using 6 and 15 MV separately.ResultsGamma index of EBT3 film results shows the following average passing rates: 97% for 6 MV and 96·6% for 15 MV using criteria of ±5% of 3 mm, ±3% of 3 mm and ±3% of 2 mm for brain. However, by using ±5% of 3 mm and ±3% of 3 mm criteria, the average passing rates were 95·4% on 6 MV and 95·2% on 15 MV for prostate. For EPID, the results show the average passing rates as 97·8% for 6 MV and 97·2% for 15 MV in for brain. In cases in which ±5% of 3 mm and ±3% of 3 mm were used, the average passing rates were 96·6% for 6 MVand 96·1% for 15 MV for prostate. MapCHECK®2 results show average passing rates of 96·4% for 6 and 96·2% for 15 MV, respectively, for brain using criteria of ±5% of 3 mm, ±3% of 3 mm and ±3% of 2 mm, whereas for ±5% of 3 mm and ±3% of 3 mm the average rates are 95·2% for 6 and 94·7% for 15 MV in prostate.ConclusionsThe EPID results are better than the other methods, and hence EPID can be used effectively for IMRT pretreatment verifications.

MS 16.05 High-Dose Boost Radiation Using SBRT/ IMRT

MS 16.05 High-Dose Boost Radiation Using SBRT/ IMRT

A virtual dosimetry audit – Towards transferability of gamma index analysis between clinical trial QA groups

PurposeQuality assurance (QA) for clinical trials is important. Lack of compliance can affect trial outcome. Clinical trial QA groups have different methods of dose distribution verification and analysis, all with the ultimate aim of ensuring trial compliance. The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of different processes to inform future dosimetry audit reciprocity. MaterialsSix clinical trial QA groups participated. Intensity modulated treatment plans were generated for three different cases. A range of 17 virtual ‘measurements’ were generated by introducing a variety of simulated perturbations (such as MLC position deviations, dose differences, gantry rotation errors, Gaussian noise) to three different treatment plan cases. Participants were blinded to the ‘measured’ data details. Each group analysed the datasets using their own gamma index (γ) technique and using standardised parameters for passing criteria, lower dose threshold, γ normalisation and global γ. ResultsFor the same virtual ‘measured’ datasets, different results were observed using local techniques. For the standardised γ, differences in the percentage of points passing with γ < 1 were also found, however these differences were less pronounced than for each clinical trial QA group’s analysis. These variations may be due to different software implementations of γ. ConclusionsThis virtual dosimetry audit has been an informative step in understanding differences in the verification of measured dose distributions between different clinical trial QA groups. This work lays the foundations for audit reciprocity between groups, particularly with more clinical trials being open to international recruitment.

Independent 3D dose calculation for IMRT based on simplification of beam model and collapsed-cone convolution/superposition algorithm

Objective To realize independent 3D dose calculation for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) by building a two-source beam model of medical linear accelerator combined with a collapsed-cone convolution/superposition (CCCS) algorithm. Methods Two-source beam models of medical linear accelerators (Varian and Elekta) were built to calculate the 3D dose distributions using the CCCS algorithm. Scp, percent depth dose, and off-axis dose distribution were compared with the scanning data of ion chamber to confirm the calculation model. Twelve intensity-modulated treatment plans from each accelerator (a total of 24 plans) were selected for comparison. The calculation results of treatment planning system (TPS) were independently validated, and further compared with the measurement results of detector matrix. Results The dose deviations at the center of rectangle fields were lower than 1%, the deviation between doses at the same position in the field was not higher than 1%, and the positional deviation in the penumbra region was not higher than 1 mm. Gamma analysis based on 3%/3 mm standard was used to compare the results calculated by detectors and TPS.The pass rates were higher than 90%. Conclusions The independent 3D dose calculation for IMRT based on two-source beam model combined with CCCS algorithm has been successfully set up. The comparison between regular field and IMRT plan indicates that this method and calculation model can be used for independent 3D dose calculation of clinical plan. Key words: Clinical linear accelerators beam model; Independent dose calculation; Quality assurance

Validation of a modern second‐check dosimetry system using a novel verification phantom

PurposeTo evaluate the Mobius second‐check dosimetry system by comparing it to ionization‐chamber dose measurements collected in the recently released Mobius Verification Phantom™ (MVP). For reference, a comparison of these measurements to dose calculated in the primary treatment planning system (TPS), Varian Eclipse with the AcurosXB dose algorithm, is also provided. Finally, patient dose calculated in Mobius is compared directly to Eclipse to demonstrate typical expected results during clinical use of the Mobius system.MethodsSeventeen anonymized intensity‐modulated clinical treatment plans were selected for analysis. Dose was recalculated on the MVP in both Eclipse and Mobius. These calculated doses were compared to doses measured using an A1SL ionization‐chamber in the MVP. Dose was measured and analyzed at two different chamber positions for each treatment plan. Mobius calculated dose was then compared directly to Eclipse using the following metrics; target mean dose, target D95%, global 3D gamma pass rate, and target gamma pass rate. Finally, these same metrics were used to analyze the first 36 intensity modulated cases, following clinical implementation of the Mobius system.ResultsThe average difference between Mobius and measurement was 0.3 ± 1.3%. Differences ranged from −3.3 to + 2.2%. The average difference between Eclipse and measurement was −1.2 ± 0.7%. Eclipse vs. measurement differences ranged from −3.0 to −0.1%. For the 17 anonymized pre‐clinical cases, the average target mean dose difference between Mobius and Eclipse was 1.0 ± 1.1%. Average target D95% difference was ‐0.9 ± 2.0%. Average global gamma pass rate, using a criteria of 3%, 2 mm, was 94.4 ± 3.3%, and average gamma pass rate for the target volume only was 80.2 ± 12.3%. Results of the first 36 intensity‐modulated cases, post‐clinical implementation of Mobius, were similar to those seen for the 17 pre‐clinical test cases.ConclusionMobius correctly calculated dose for each tested intensity modulated treatment plan, agreeing with measurement to within 3.5% for all cases analyzed. The dose calculation accuracy and independence of the Mobius system is sufficient to provide a rigorous second‐check of a modern TPS.

Effects of anatomical changes on pencil beam scanning proton plans in locally advanced NSCLC patients

Daily anatomical variations can cause considerable differences between delivered and planned dose. This study simulates and evaluates these effects in spot-scanning proton therapy for lung cancer patients. Robust intensity modulated treatment plans were designed on the mid-position CT scan for sixteen locally advanced lung cancer patients. To estimate dosimetric uncertainty, deformable registration was performed on their daily CBCTs to generate 4DCT equivalent scans for each fraction and to map recomputed dose to a common frame. Without adaptive planning, eight patients had an undercoverage of the targets of more than 2GyE (maximum of 14.1GyE) on the recalculated treatment dose from the daily anatomy variations including respiration. In organs at risk, a maximum increase of 4.7GyE in the D1 was found in the mediastinal structures. The effect of respiratory motion alone is smaller: 1.4GyE undercoverage for targets and less than 1GyE for organs at risk. Daily anatomical variations over the course of treatment can cause considerable dose differences in the robust planned dose distribution. An advanced planning strategy including knowledge of anatomical uncertainties would be recommended to improve plan robustness against interfractional variations. For large anatomical changes, adaptive therapy is mandatory.

SU‐D‐207A‐01: Female Pelvic Synthetic CT Generation Based On Joint Shape and Intensity Analysis

Purpose:To develop a method for generating female pelvic synthetic CT (MRCT) images from a single MR scan and evaluate its utility in radiotherapy.Methods:Under IRB‐approval, an imaging sequence (T1_VIBE_Dixon) was acquired for 10 patients. This sequence yields 3 useful image volumes of different contrast (“in‐phase” T1‐weighted, fat and water). A previously published pelvic bone shape model was used to generate a rough bone mask for each patient. A modified fuzzy c‐means classification was performed on the multi spectral MR data, with a regularization term that utilizes the prior knowledge provided by the bone mask and addresses the intensity overlap between different tissue types. A weighted sum of classification probabilities with attenuation values yielded MRCT volumes. The mean absolute error (MAE) between MRCT and real CT on various regions was calculated following deformable alignment (Velocity). Intensity modulated Treatment plans based on actual CT and MRCT were made and compared.Results:The average/standard deviation of MAE across 10 patients was 10.1/6.7 HU for muscle, 6.7/4.6 HU for fat, 136.9/53.5 HU for bony tissues under 850 HU (97% of total bone volume), 188.9/119.3 HU for bony tissues above 850 HU and 17.3/13.3 HU for intrapelvic soft tissues. Calculated doses were comparable for plans generated on CT and calculated using MRCT densities or vice versa, with differences in PTV D99% (mean/σ) of (–0.1/0.2 Gy) and (0.3/0.2 Gy), PTV D0.5cc of (–0.3/0.2 Gy) and (–0.4/1.7 Gy). OAR differences were similarly small for comparable structures, with differences in bowel V50Gy of (–0.3/0.2%) and (0.0/0.2%), femur V30Gy of (0.7/1.2%) and (0.2/1.2%), sacrum V20GY of (0.0/0.1%) and (–0.1/1.1%) and mean pelvic V20Gy of (0.0/0.1%) and (0.6/1.8%).Conclusion:MRCT based on a single imaging sequence in the female pelvis is feasible, with acceptably small variations in attenuation estimates and calculated doses to target and critical organs.Work supported by NIHR01EB016079

A general model for stray dose calculation of static and intensity-modulated photon radiation.

There is an increasing number of cancer survivors who are at risk of developing late effects caused by ionizing radiation such as induction of second tumors. Hence, the determination of out-of-field dose for a particular treatment plan in the patient's anatomy is of great importance. The purpose of this study was to analytically model the stray dose according to its three major components. For patient scatter, a mechanistic model was developed. For collimator scatter and head leakage, an empirical approach was used. The models utilize a nominal beam energy of 6 MeV to describe two linear accelerator types of a single vendor. The parameters of the models were adjusted using ionization chamber measurements registering total absorbed dose in simple geometries. Whole-body dose measurements using thermoluminescent dosimeters in an anthropomorphic phantom for static and intensity-modulated treatment plans were compared to the 3D out-of-field dose distributions calculated by a combined model. The absolute mean difference between the whole-body predicted and the measured out-of-field dose of four different plans was 11% with a maximum difference below 44%. Computation time of 36 000 dose points for one field was around 30 s. By combining the model-calculated stray dose with the treatment planning system dose, the whole-body dose distribution can be viewed in the treatment planning system. The results suggest that the model is accurate, fast and can be used for a wide range of treatment modalities to calculate the whole-body dose distribution for clinical analysis. For similar energy spectra, the mechanistic patient scatter model can be used independently of treatment machine or beam orientation.

Dosimetric impact of different multileaf collimators on prostate intensity modulated treatment planning

AimThe main purpose of this study is to perform a dosimetric comparison on target volumes and organs at risks (OARs) between prostate intensity modulated treatment plans (IMRT) optimized with different multileaf collimators (MLCs). BackgroundThe use of MLCs with a small leaf width in the IMRT optimization may improve conformity around the tumor target whilst reducing the dose to normal tissues. Materials and methodsTwo linacs mounting MLCs with 5 and 10mm leaf-width, respectively, implemented in Pinnacle3 treatment planning system were used for this work. Nineteen patients with prostate carcinoma undergoing a radiotherapy treatment were enrolled. Treatment planning with different setup arrangements (7 and 5 beams) were performed for each patient and each machine. Dose volume histograms (DVHs) cut-off points were used in the treatment planning comparison. ResultsComparable planning target volume (PTV) coverage was obtained with 7- and 5-beam configuration (both with 5 and 10mm MLC leaf-width). The comparison of bladder and rectum DVH cut-off points for the 5-beam arrangement shows that 52.6% of the plans optimized with a larger leaf-width did not satisfy at least one of the OARs’ constraints. This percentage is reduced to 10.5% for the smaller leaf-width. If a 7-beam arrangement is used the value of 52.6% decreases to 21.1% while the value of 10.5% remains unchanged. ConclusionMLCs collimators with different widths and number of leaves lead to a comparable prostate treatment planning if a proper adjustment is made of the number of gantry angles.

TH-CD-304-02: Clinical Uncertainty of in Vivo Dosimetry for Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Using Optically-Stimulated Luminescent Dosimeters

Purpose: Several studies have reported the physical properties of optically-stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLDs) and suggest their efficacy for clinical in vivo dosimetry, but few publications have assessed the clinical uncertainties associated with OSLD-based in vivo dosimetry for conformal and intensity-modulated treatment. The purpose of the current work is to identify and characterize clinical uncertainties for OSLD-based in vivo dosimetry. Methods: OSLDs are placed in dosimetrically-appropriate locations on a weekly basis, covered with small 5 mm bolus squares, exposed during patient treatment, read, and compared with doses predicted from the treatment planning system. Six (6) parameters were identified as significant contributors to uncertainty in the process: Inherent physical OSLD uncertainty (σ_ OSLD), OSLD reader uncertainty (σ_reader), dose calculation uncertainty in the build-up region (σ _calc), uncertainty of depth for planned dose (σ_d), dosimetric uncertainty due to daily image-guided shifts (σ_ s), and placement uncertainty (σ_p). σ_d, σ_ s, and σ_p were estimated by analyzing clinical OSLD dosimetry for inverse-planned intensity-modulated treatment plans (prostate, lung, and head-and-neck) and field-in-field intensity-modulated treatment plans (breast). Total uncertainty was estimated by summing the 6 components in quadrature. Results: σ_OSLD was defined by the manufacturer (±3.0%). σ_calc was assumed to be approximately ±5.0% at 5 mm depth from other works in the literature. σ_reader and σ_s were measured to be ±1.0 and ±5.8% at 5 mm depth respectively. σ_p was found to be ±3.6% for breast, ±4.2% for prostate, ±4.4% for lung, and ±10.6% for head-and-neck. Total uncertainty was ±9.0% for breast, ±11.5% for prostate, ±13.2% for lung, and ±16.1% for head-and-neck. Conclusion: Site-specific clinical uncertainty for a limited selection of sites ranged from ±9.0% to ±16.1%. The largest components were image-guided shifts and estimated placement uncertainty. A wider selection of anatomical sites, site-specific correction factors, and clinical tolerance/action level guidelines will be presented.

GPU-Monte Carlo based fast IMRT plan optimization

Purpose: Intensity-modulated radiation treatment (IMRT) plan optimization needs pre-calculated beamlet dose distribution. Pencil-beam or superposition/convolution type algorithms are typically used because of high computation speed. However, inaccurate beamlet dose distributions, particularly in cases with high levels of inhomogeneity, may mislead optimization, hindering the resulting plan quality. It is desire to use Monte Carlo (MC) methods for beamlet dose calculations. Yet, the long computational time from repeated dose calculations for a number of beamlets prevents this application. It is our objective to integrate a GPU-based MC dose engine in lung IMRT optimization using a novel two-steps workflow. Methods : A GPU-based MC code gDPM is used. Each particle is tagged with an index of a beamlet where the source particle is from. Deposit dose are stored separately for beamlets based on the index. Due to limited GPU memory size, a pyramid space is allocated for each beamlet, and dose outside the space is neglected. A two-steps optimization workflow is proposed for fast MC-based optimization. At first step, a rough dose calculation is conducted with only a few number of particle per beamlet. Plan optimization is followed to get an approximated fluence map. In the second step, more accurate beamlet doses are calculated, where sampled number of particles for a beamlet is proportional to the intensity determined previously. A second-round optimization is conducted, yielding the final result. Results: For a lung case with 5317 beamlets, 105 particles per beamlet in the first round, and 108 particles per beam in the second round are enough to get a good plan quality. The total simulation time is 96.4 sec. Conclusion : A fast GPU-based MC dose calculation method along with a novel two-step optimization workflow are developed. The high efficiency allows the use of MC for IMRT optimizations. -------------------------------- Cite this article as: Li Y, Tian Z, Shi F, Jiang S, Jia X. GPU-Monte Carlo based fast IMRT plan optimization. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol 2014; 2 (2):020244. DOI: 10.14319/ijcto.0202.44