Benchmarking Monte-Carlo dose calculation for MLC CyberKnife treatments

Autor: S. Mueller, Diem Vuong, M. Malthaner, Daniel Schmidhalter, W. Kilby, Peter Manser, Werner Volken, Paul-Henry Mackeprang, Daniel Frei, Daniel M. Aebersold, Michael K. Fix, D. Henzen
Rok vydání: 2019
Předmět:
lcsh:Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine
Male
Organs at Risk
Lung Neoplasms
lcsh:R895-920
Monte Carlo method
CyberKnife
610 Medicine & health
Context (language use)
TPS
Radiosurgery
lcsh:RC254-282
Imaging phantom
030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging
law.invention
03 medical and health sciences
0302 clinical medicine
law
Cyberknife
Medicine
Humans
Radiology
Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Radiation treatment planning
QA
Monte Carlo
business.industry
Phantoms
Imaging
Radiotherapy Planning
Computer-Assisted
Research
Dose calculation
Prostatic Neoplasms
Collimator
Radiotherapy Dosage
Gold standard (test)
lcsh:Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens
Prognosis
Benchmarking
Oncology
030220 oncology & carcinogenesis
Radiotherapy
Intensity-Modulated
Nuclear medicine
business
Quality assurance
Monte Carlo Method
Algorithms
Zdroj: Radiation Oncology (London, England)
Radiation Oncology, Vol 14, Iss 1, Pp 1-11 (2019)
Mackeprang, Paul-Henry; Vuong, D; Volken, Werner; Henzen, Dominik; Schmidhalter, Daniel; Malthaner, Marco; Müller, Silvan Andreas; Frei, Daniel; Kilby, W; Aebersold, Daniel; Fix, Michael; Manser, Peter (2019). Benchmarking Monte-Carlo dose calculation for MLC CyberKnife treatments. Radiation oncology, 14(1), p. 172. BioMed Central 10.1186/s13014-019-1370-5
ISSN: 1748-717X
DOI: 10.1186/s13014-019-1370-5
Popis: Background Vendor-independent Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation (IDC) for patient-specific quality assurance of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) based CyberKnife treatments is used to benchmark and validate the commercial MC dose calculation engine for MLC based treatments built into the CyberKnife treatment planning system (Precision MC). Methods The benchmark included dose profiles in water in 15 mm depth and depth dose curves of rectangular MLC shaped fields ranging from 7.6 mm × 7.7 mm to 115.0 mm × 100.1 mm, which were compared between IDC, Precision MC and measurements in terms of dose difference and distance to agreement. Dose distributions of three phantom cases and seven clinical lung cases were calculated using both IDC and Precision MC. The lung PTVs ranged from 14 cm3 to 93 cm3. Quantitative comparison of these dose distributions was performed using dose-volume parameters and 3D gamma analysis with 2% global dose difference and 1 mm distance criteria and a global 10% dose threshold. Time to calculate dose distributions was recorded and efficiency was assessed. Results Absolute dose profiles in 15 mm depth in water showed agreement between Precision MC and IDC within 3.1% or 1 mm. Depth dose curves agreed within 2.3% / 1 mm. For the phantom and clinical lung cases, mean PTV doses differed from − 1.0 to + 2.3% between IDC and Precision MC and gamma passing rates were > =98.1% for all multiple beam treatment plans. For the lung cases, lung V20 agreed within ±1.5%. Calculation times ranged from 2.2 min (for 39 cm3 PTV at 1.0 × 1.0 × 2.5 mm3 native CT resolution) to 8.1 min (93 cm3 at 1.1 × 1.1 × 1.0 mm3), at 2% uncertainty for Precision MC for the 7 examined lung cases and 4–6 h for IDC, which, however, is not optimized for efficiency but used as a gold standard for accuracy. Conclusions Both accuracy and efficiency of Precision MC in the context of MLC based planning for the CyberKnife M6 system were benchmarked against MC based IDC framework. Precision MC is used in clinical practice at our institute.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje