Dosimetric impact of Acuros XB deterministic radiation transport algorithm for heterogeneous dose calculation in lung cancer

Improving VMAT dose calculation accuracy and planning quality via a GPU-accelerated Fourier transform dose calculation algorithm

BACKGROUND

Inverse planning typically utilizes fast, less accurate dose calculation algorithms during the iterative optimization process, thus leading to dose calculation errors (DCEs) and suboptimal plans that often require dose normalization and/or plan re-optimization.

PURPOSE

A graphic processing unit (GPU) accelerated Fourier transform dose calculation (FTDC) was recently commissioned at our institution during the Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems) v18.0 upgrade. We hypothesize that FTDC could reduce DCEs and planning failure rates (PFRs) compared to its predecessor, multi-resolution dose calculation (MRDC), while improving efficiency through utilization of GPUs.

METHODS

Fifty lung SBRT plans were optimized with MRDC and FTDC dose calculation algorithms. Acuros XB (AXB) was then used for final dose calculations. DCEs for target and organ-at-risk (OAR) were calculated as the percent difference between AXB and dose calculated at the final optimization step. Plan quality was assessed using an in-house planning scorecard where PFRs were calculated as the percentage of plans that had a plan score less than 90% with optimal plans scored at 100%.

RESULTS

FTDC showed excellent agreement with AXB in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage, as PTV D95% DCEFTDC averaged 0.8% ± 0.9%, compared to DCEMRDC's -2.5% ± 3.2%. DCEs for thoracic OARs were reduced with less variation when optimizing with FTDC as compared to MRDC. FTDC had a PFR of 10% (5 out of 50) versus MRDC's 32% (16 out of 50). The subsequent re-optimization rate resulted from a plan normalization of 3% or greater was 4% for FTDC compared to MRDC's 38%. FTDC with GPU acceleration reduced optimization time by 75% on average compared to MRDC without GPU acceleration.

CONCLUSIONS

FTDC shows more accurate dose calculation accuracy compared to MRDC. Its use during the optimization process improved planning quality and efficiency assisted with GPUs.

New index for quantitative comparison of dose distributions in radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Delivery of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) requires patient specific quality assurance (QA) tests. These tests normally include a two-fold comparison of dose distributions: (a) comparison of planned dose created in the employed treatment planning system (TPS) and dose computed by using third-party software; (b) comparison of planned (predicted) and delivered doses.

PURPOSE

We describe a new approach to compare dose distributions in radiotherapy.

METHODS

The suggested approach employs a novel dose congruency index (DCI) to evaluate differences between compared dose distributions. The new index is dependent on dose and dose increment (δ D $\delta D$ ). The "pass" and "fail" criteria for dose congruency assessment are given by the conditionsD C I ≤ 1 $DCI \le 1$ andD C I > 1 $DCI > 1$ , respectively. The employment of DCI was demonstrated by comparing 3D dose distirbutions in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and stereotactic intracranial radiosurgery (SRS). The DCI was also computed for predicted and measured portal doses.

RESULTS

For the compared SBRT dose distributions, the DCI computed withδ D $\delta D$  = 1%, 1.5%, and 2% of the prescribed dose resulted in passing rates (i.e., relative number of dose levels withD C I ≤ 1 $DCI \le 1$ ) of 34%, 61.5%, and 100%, respectively. For the compared SRS dose distributions, the DCI withδ D $\delta D$  = 1%, 1.5%, and 2% of the prescribed dose had passing rates of 25.3%, 33%, and 41.8%, respectively. For the compared 2D distributions, the DCI passing rates averaged over the two arcs employed in the studied case, were as follows: 14.5% forδ D $\delta D$  = 1%, 48.8% forδ D $\delta D$  = 1.5%, and 85.5% forδ D $\delta D$  = 2%.

CONCLUSIONS

It is demonstrated that the suggested index can be used to compare 2D and 3D dose distributions in radiotherapy.

Dosimetric Impact of AAA and AXB Dose Calculation Algorithm in VMAT Treatment Planning for Rectal Tumors

Aim

The study aims to compare the accuracy of Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and acuros XB (AXB) dose calculation algorithms for radiotherapy (RT) planning of rectal tumors.

Materials and Methods

Treatment plans from 20 patients with previously treated rectal cancer were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent VMAT treatment planning using the AAA algorithm in Eclipse (v15.6) system. These plans were recalculated with AXB in Eclipse (v15.6) while maintaining the original multileaf collimator fluence. Dosimetric parameters and gamma analysis (3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm criteria) were compared between the two algorithms. A paired two-tailed t-test was used to statistically compare dosimetric and gamma analysis results between the AAA and AXB algorithms.

Results

The results indicate that AAA could be potentially overestimating the dose to planning target volume (PTV). While the mean bowel dose was marginally lower in AAA plans (P = 0.013), doses to other organs at risk (OARs) were slightly higher, suggesting a general overestimation trend. This implies that AAA could be potentially overestimating the dose to OARs and PTV as compared to AXB. The statistical analysis of the Gamma parameters also shows a significant change.

Conclusion

The results indicate that the dose calculation accuracy of AXB is superior to AAA for rectal cancer RT.

Investigating the Potential of X-Ray-Based Cancer Treatment Equipment for the Sterile Insect Technique in Aedes aegypti Control Programs

The sterile insect technique (SIT) stands as an eco-friendly approach for mosquito control, but it is impeded by the limited availability of γ-ray radiation source. This research sought to investigate a different radiation source-the Varian Clinac 23EX linear accelerator, which is frequently used for X-ray therapy in cancer treatment. Evaluation parameters including emergence rate, average survival time, induced sterility (IS), male mating competitiveness of irradiated males and fecundity (the number of eggs per female per batch), and the egg hatch rate of females mated with irradiated males were assessed to gauge the application potential of this cancer treatment equipment in the realm of the SIT. The results indicated that X-rays from radiation therapy equipment can effectively suppress the hatch rate of offspring mosquitoes without adversely affecting the emergence rate of irradiated males or the fecundity of females. In addition, at an X-ray dose of 60 Gy, the induced sterility in Ae. aegypti was comparable to the sterility induced by 40 Gy of γ-rays with both treatments resulting in 99.6% sterility. Interestingly, when a release ratio of 7:1 (irradiated males:unirradiated males) was used to competitively mate with females, the IS results resulted by 60 Gy X-rays and 40 Gy γ-rays were still at 70.3% and 73.7%, respectively. In conclusion, the results underscored the potential of the Varian Clinac 23EX linear accelerator as an X-ray source in SIT research.

Are offline ART decisions for NSCLC impacted by the type of dose calculation algorithm?

Introduction

Decisions for plan-adaptations may be impacted by a transitioning from one dose-calculation algorithm to another. This study examines the impact on dosimetric-triggered offline adaptation in LA-NSCLC in the context of a transition from superposition/convolution dose calculation algorithm (Type-B) to linear Boltzmann equation solver dose calculation algorithms (Type-C).

Materials & Methods

Two dosimetric-triggered offline adaptive treatment workflows are compared in a retrospective planning study on 30 LA-NSCLC patients. One workflow uses a Type-B dose calculation algorithm and the other uses Type-C. Treatment plans were re-calculated on the anatomy of a mid-treatment synthetic-CT utilizing the same algorithm utilized for pre-treatment planning. Assessment for plan-adaptation was evaluated through a decision model based on target coverage and OAR constraint violation. The impact of algorithm during treatment planning was controlled for by recalculating the Type-B plan with Type-C.

Results

In the Type-B approach, 13 patients required adaptation due to OAR-constraint violations, while 15 patients required adaptation in the Type-C approach. For 8 out of 30 cases, the decision to adapt was opposite in both approaches. None of the patients in our dataset encountered CTV-target underdosage that necessitated plan-adaptation. Upon recalculating the Type-B approach with the Type-C algorithm, it was shown that 10 of the original Type-B plans revealed clinically relevant dose reductions (≥3%) on the CTV in their original plans. This re-calculation identified 21 plans in total that required ART.

Discussion

In our study, nearly one-third of the cases would have a different decision for plan-adaption when utilizing Type-C instead of Type-B. There was no substantial increase in the total number of plan-adaptations for LA-NSCLC. However, Type-C is more sensitive to altered anatomy during treatment compared to Type-B. Recalculating Type-B plans with the Type-C algorithm revealed an increase from 13 to 21 cases triggering ART.

Inverse planning of lung radiotherapy with photon and proton beams using a discrete ordinates Boltzmann solver

Objective. A discrete ordinates Boltzmann solver has recently been developed for use as a fast and accurate dose engine for calculation of photon and proton beams. The purpose of this study is to apply the algorithm to the inverse planning process for photons and protons and to evaluate the impact that this has on the quality of the final solution.Approach.The method was implemented into an iterative least-squares inverse planning optimiser, with the Boltzmann solver used every 20 iterations over the total of 100 iterations. Elemental dose distributions for the intensity modulation and the dose changes at the intermediate iterations were calculated by a convolution algorithm for photons and a simple analytical model for protons. The method was evaluated for 12 patients in the heterogeneous tissue environment encountered in radiotherapy of lung tumours. Photon arc and proton arc treatments were considered in this study. The results were compared with those for use of the Boltzmann solver solely at the end of inverse planning or not at all.Main results.Application of the Boltzmann solver at the end of inverse planning shows the dose heterogeneity in the planning target volume to be greater than calculated by convolution and empirical methods, with the median root-mean-square dose deviation increasing from 3.7 to 5.3 for photons and from 1.9 to 3.4 for proton arcs. Use of discrete ordinates throughout inverse planning enables homogeneity of target coverage to be maintained throughout, the median root-mean-square dose deviation being 3.6 for photons and 2.3 for protons. Dose to critical structures is similar with discrete ordinates and conventional methods. Time for inverse planning with discrete ordinates takes around 1-2 h using a contemporary computing environment.Significance.By incorporating the Boltzmann solver into an iterative least squares inverse planning optimiser, accurate dose calculation in a heterogeneous medium is obtained throughout inverse planning, with the result that the final dose distribution is of the highest quality.

A discrete ordinates Boltzmann solver for application to inverse planning of photons and protons

The aim of this work is to develop a discrete ordinates Boltzmann solver that can be used for calculation of absorbed dose from both photons and protons within an inverse planning optimiser, so as to perform accurate dose calculation throughout the whole of the inverse planning process. With photons, five transport sweeps were performed to obtain scattered photon fluence, and unscattered electron fluence was then obtained and used as a fixed source for solution of the electron transport equations. With protons, continuous slowing down was treated as a fixed source, and five transport sweeps were used to calculate scattered fluence. The total electron or proton fluence was multiplied by the stopping power ratio for the transport medium to obtain absorbed dose. The method was evaluated in homogeneous media and in a lung case where the planning target volume was surrounded by low-density lung material. Photon arc, proton passive scattering and proton arc treatments were considered. The results were compared to a clinically validated convolution dose calculation for photons, and with an analytical method for protons. In water-equivalent media, the discrete ordinates method agrees with the alternative algorithms to within 2%. Convergence is found to be sufficiently complete for water-, lung- and bone-equivalent materials after five iterations. The dose calculated by the relatively simple angular quadrature is seen to be very close to that calculated by a more comprehensive quadrature. For inhomogeneous lung plans, the method shows more heterogeneity of dose to the planning target volume than the comparative methods. The discrete ordinates Boltzmann solver provides a general framework for dose calculation with both photons and protons. The method is suitable for incorporation into an inverse planning optimiser, so that accurate dose calculation in a heterogeneous medium can be obtained throughout inverse planning, with the result that the final dose distribution is as predicted by the optimiser.

Verification of Qfix Encompass™ couch modeling using the Acuros XB algorithm and HypeArc™ using a high-spatial-resolution two-dimensional diode array

We modeled the Qfix Encompass™ immobilization system and further verified the calculated dose distribution of the AcurosXB (AXB) dose calculation algorithm using SRS MapCHECKⓇ (SRSMC) in the HyperArc™ (HA) clinical plan. An Encompass system with a StereoPHAN™ QA phantom was scanned by SOMATOM go.Sim and imported to an Eclipse™ treatment planning system to create a treatment plan for Encompass modeling. The Encompass modeling was performed in the StereoPHAN with a pinpoint ion chamber for 6 MV and 6 MV flattening filter free (6 MV FFF), and 2 × 2 cm2, 4 × 4 cm2, and 6 × 6 cm2 irradiation field sizes. The dose calculation algorithm used was AXB ver. 15.5 with a 1.0 mm calculation grid size. The Hounsfield unit (HU) values of the Encompass modeling were set to 400, -100, -200, and -300 for Encompass, and -400, -600, -700, and -800 for the Encompass base. We evaluated the dose distribution after Encompass modeling by SRSMC using gamma analysis in 12 patients. We adopted HU values of -200 for Encompass, -800 for Encompass base for 6 MV, and -200 for Encompass and -700 for Encompass. Base for 6 MV FFF was adopted as the HU values for the Encompass modeling based on the measurement results. The proposed Encompass modeling resulted in a mean pass rate evaluation >98% for both 6 MV and 6 MV FFF when the 1%/1 mm criterion was used, demonstrating that the proposed HU value can be adopted to calculate more accurate dose distributions.

A hybrid method to improve efficiency of patient specific SRS and SBRT QA using 3D secondary dose verification

PURPOSE

Patient Specific QA (PSQA) by direct phantom measurement for all intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) cases is labor intensive and an inefficient use of the Medical Physicist's time. The purpose of this work was to develop a hybrid quality assurance (QA) technique utilizing 3D dose verification as a screening tool to determine if a measurement is necessary.

METHODS

This study utilized Sun Nuclear DoseCHECK (DC), a 3D secondary verification software, and Fraction 0, a trajectory log IMRT QA software. Twenty-two Lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and thirty single isocentre multi-lesion SRS (MLSRS) plans were retrospectively analysed in DC. Agreement of DC and the TPS dose for selected dosimetric criteria was recorded. Calculated 95% confidence limits (CL) were used to establish action limits. All cases were delivered and measured using the Sun Nuclear stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) MapCheck. Trajectory logs of the delivery were used to calculate Fraction 0 results for the same criteria calculated by DC. Correlation of DC and Fraction 0 results were calculated. Phantom measured QA was compared to Fraction 0 QA results for the cases which had DC criteria action limits exceeded.

RESULTS

Correlation of DC and Fraction 0 results were excellent, demonstrating the same action limits could be used for both and DC can predict Fraction 0 results. Based on the calculated action limits, zero lung SBRT cases and six MLSRS cases were identified as requiring a measurement. All plans that passed the DC screening had a passing measurement based PSQA and agreed with Fraction 0 results.

CONCLUSION

Using 95% CL action limits of dosimetric criteria, a 3D secondary dose verification can be used to determine if a measurement is required for PSQA. This method is efficient for it is part of the normal clinical workflow when verifying any clinical treatment. In addition, it can drastically reduce the number of measurements needed for PSQA.

Assessing the Effect of Directional Bremsstrahlung Splitting on the Output Spectra and Parameters Using BEAMnrc Monte Carlo Simulation Package

Introduction:

EGSnrc software package is one of the computational packages for Monte Carlo simulation in radiation therapy and has several subset codes. Directional bremsstrahlung splitting (DBS) is a technique that applies braking radiations in interactions in this software. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of this technique on the simulation time, uncertainty, particle number of phase-space data, and photon beam spectrum resulting from a medical linear accelerator (LINAC).

Materials and methods:

The gantry of the accelerator, including the materials and geometries of different parts, was simulated using the BEAMnrc code (a subset code in the EGSnrc package). The phase-space data were recorded in different parts of the LINAC. The DBS values (1, 10, 100, and 1000) were changed, and their effects were evaluated on the simulation parameters and output spectra.

Results:

Increasing the DBS value from 1 to 1000 resulted in an increase in the simulation time from 1.778 to 11.310 hours, and increasing the number of particles in the phase-space plane (5 590 732-180 328 382). When the DBS had been picked up from 1 to 100, the simulation uncertainty decreased by about 1.29%. In addition, the DBS increment value from 100 to 1000 leads to an increase in uncertainty and simulation time of about 0.71% and 315%, respectively.

Conclusion:

Although using the DBS technique reduces the simulation time or uncertainty, increasing the DBS from a specific value, equal to 100 in our study, increases simulation uncertainties and times. Therefore, we propose considering a specific DBS value as we obtained for the Monte Carlo simulation of photon beams produced by linear accelerators.

Early-onset osteoradionecrosis following adjuvant volumetric-modulated arc therapy to an osteocutaneous free fibula flap with customized titanium plate

BACKGROUND

Computerized surgical planning (CSP) in osseous reconstruction of head and neck cancer defects has become a mainstay of treatment. However, the consequences of CSP-designed titanium plating systems on planning adjuvant radiation remains unclear.

METHODS

Two patients underwent head and neck cancer resection and maxillomandibular free fibula flap reconstruction with CSP-designed plates and immediate placement of osseointegrated dental implants. Surgical treatment was followed by adjuvant intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).

RESULTS

Both patients developed osteoradionecrosis (ORN), and one patient had local recurrence. The locations of disease occurred at the areas of highest titanium plate burden, possibly attributed to IMRT dosing inaccuracy caused by the CSP-designed plating system.

CONCLUSION

Despite proven benefits of CSP-designed plates in osseous free flap reconstruction, there may be an underreported risk to adjuvant IMRT treatment planning leading to ORN and/or local recurrence. Future study should investigate alternative plating methods and materials to mitigate this debilitating outcome.

The radiobiological effect of using Acuros XB vs anisotropic analytical algorithm on hepatocellular carcinoma stereotactic body radiation therapy

The purpose of this work was to study the radiobiological effect of using Acuros XB (AXB) vs Analytic Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Seventy SBRT volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for HCC were calculated using AAA and AXB respectively with the same treatment parameters. Published tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models were used to quantify the effect of dosimetric difference between AAA and AXB on TCP, NTCP and uncomplicated tumor control probability (UTCP). There was an average decrease of 2.5% in 6-month TCP. Normal liver has the largest average decrease in NTCP which was 59.7%. Bowels followed with 26.6% average decrease in NTCP. Duodenum, stomach and esophagus had 10.2%, 5.1%, and 4.3% average decrease in NTCP. There was an average decrease of 1.8% and up to 7.2% in 6-month UTCP. There was an overall decrease in TCP, NTCP, and UTCP for HCC SBRT plans calculated using AXB compared to AAA which could be clinically significant.

Verification of rebuild-up effect on superficial cardiac lesion of ventricular tachycardia using 3-D printed phantom in volumetric-modulated arc therapy planning

The aim of the study was to evaluate dose distributions on the superficial cardiac lesion surrounded by low-density lungs. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique was applied to optimize the dose distribution using the anisotropic analytic algorithm (AAA) and Acuros XB algorithm (AXB) using the 3-D printed cardiac phantom. We used four full and half arcs with 6-MV and 15-MV photons to investigate the rebuild-up effect near the planning target volume (PTV). Depending on the calculation algorithm (AAA vs. AXB) for full arcs plans, V₉₅ of PTV differed by 27% for 6-MV and 29% for 15-MV, and D₉₅ for 6-MV and 15-MV shows 24% and 30%, respectively. The maximum doses in the AXB plans on PTV were 5.1% higher than those in AAA plans at 6-MV, and 3.8% higher at 15-MV. In addition, half arcs treatment plans showed a very similar tendency with full arcs plans. Film dosimetry showed significant differences from the planned results in the AAA plans. Particularly, the dose mismatch occurred between the cardiac PTV and the left lung interface. In the case of 6-MV plans calculated by AAA, the maximum dose increased from 4.1 to 7.7% in the PTV. Furthermore, it showed that 50% of the width of dose profiles was reduced by 1.3 cm in the 6-MV plan. Conversely, in the case of the plans using the AXB algorithm, the maximum dose increased by 2.0–5.0%. In contrast to the AAA algorithm, the dose patterns at the interface demonstrated a good agreement with the plans. Dose fluctuation on the interface between superficial cardiac lesions and low-density lungs can lead to an error in the estimation of accurate dose delivery for the case of VT SBRT.

The effect on tumour control probability of using AXB algorithm in replacement of AAA for SBRT of hepatocellular carcinoma located at lung-liver boundary region

Objective:

To retrospectively analyze the clinical impact on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) located at lung–liver boundary due to the use of Acuros XB algorithm (AXB) in replacement of anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA).

Methods:

23 SBRT volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for HCC located at lung–liver boundary were calculated using AAA and AXB respectively with the same treatment parameters. The dose–volume data of the planned target volumes (PTVs) were compared. A published tumour control probability (TCP) model was used to calculate the effect of dosimetric difference between AAA and AXB on tumour control probability.

Results:

For dose calculated by AXB (Dose to medium), the D95% and D98% of the PTV were on average 2.4 and 3.1% less than that calculated by AAA. For dose calculated by AXB (dose to water), the D95% and D98% of the PTV were on average 1.8%, and 2.7% less than that calculated by AAA. Up to 5% difference in D95% and 8% difference in D98% were observed in the worst cases. The significant decrease in D95% calculated by AXB compared to AAA could result in a % decrease in 2 year TCP up to 8% in the worst case (from 46.8 to 42.9%).

Conclusion:

The difference in dose calculated by AAA and AXB could lead to significant difference in TCP for HCC SBRT located at lung–liver boundary region.

Advances in knowledge:

The difference in calculated dose and tumour control probability for HCC SBRT between AAA and AXB algorithm at lung–liver boundary region was compared.

New dosimetric guidelines for linear Boltzmann transport equations through comparative evaluation of stereotactic body radiation therapy for lung treatment planning

PURPOSE

To propose guidelines for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) when using Acuros XB (AXB) equivalent to the existing ones developed for convolution algorithms such as analytic anisotropic algorithm (AAA), considering the difference between the algorithms.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 30 lung patients previously treated with SBRT. The original AAA plans, which were developed using dynamic conformal arcs, were recalculated and then renormalized for planning target volume (PTV) coverage using AXB. The recalculated and renormalized plans were compared to the original plans based on V100% and V90% PTV coverage, as well as V105%, conformality index, D2cm , Rx/Dmax , R50, and Dmin . These metrics were analyzed nominally and on variations according to RTOG and NRG guidelines. Based on the relative difference between each metric in the AAA and AXB plans, new guidelines were developed. The relative differences in our cohort were compared to previously documented AAA to AXB comparisons found in the literature.

RESULTS

AAA plans recalculated in AXB had a significant reduction in most dosimetric metrics. The most notable changes were in V100% (4%) and the conformality index (7.5%). To achieve equal PTV coverage, AXB required an average of 1.8% more monitor units (MU). This fits well with previously published data. Applying the new guidelines to the AXB plans significantly increased the number of minor violations with no change in major violations, making them comparable to those of the original AAA plans.

CONCLUSION

The relative difference found between AAA and AXB for SBRT lung plans has been shown to be consistent with previous works. Based on these findings, new guidelines for lung SBRT are recommended when planning with AXB.

Advances in anthropomorphic thorax phantoms for radiotherapy: a review

A phantom is a highly specialized device, which mimic human body, or a part of it. There are three categories of phantoms: physical phantoms, physiological phantoms, and computational phantoms. The phantoms have been utilized in medical imaging and radiotherapy for numerous applications. In radiotherapy, the phantoms may be used for various applications such as quality assurance (QA), dosimetry, end-to-end testing, etc. In thoracic radiotherapy, unique QA problems including tumor motion, thorax deformation, and heterogeneities in the beam path have complicated the delivery of dose to both tumor and organ at risks (OARs). Also, respiratory motion is a major challenge in radiotherapy of thoracic malignancies, which can be resulted in the discrepancies between the planned and delivered doses to cancerous tissue. Hence, the overall treatment procedure needs to be verified. Anthropomorphic thorax phantoms, which are made of human tissue-mimicking materials, can be utilized to obtain the ground truth to validate these processes. Accordingly, research into new anthropomorphic thorax phantoms has accelerated. Therefore, the review is intended to summarize the current status of the commercially available and in-house-built anthropomorphic physical/physiological thorax phantoms in radiotherapy. The main focus is on anthropomorphic, deformable thorax motion phantoms. This review also discusses the applications of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology for the fabrication of thorax phantoms.

A comparative analysis of Acuros XB and the analytical anisotropic algorithm for volumetric modulation arc therapy

Background

This study aimed to verify the dosimetric impact of Acuros XB (AXB) (AXB, Varian Medical Systems Palo Alto CA, USA), a two model-based algorithm, in comparison with Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA ) calculations for prostate, head and neck and lung cancer treatment by volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT ), without primary modification to AA. At present, the well-known and validated AA algorithm is clinically used in our department for VMAT treatments of different pathologies. AXB could replace it without extra measurements. The treatment result and accuracy of the dose delivered depend on the dose calculation algorithm.

Materials and method

Ninety-five complex VMAT plans for different pathologies were generated using the Eclipse version 15.0.4 treatment planning system (TPS). The dose distributions were calculated using AA and AXB (dose-to-water, AXB_w and dose-to-medium, AXB_m), with the same plan parameters for all VMAT plans. The dosimetric parameters were calculated for each planning target volume (PTV) and involved organs at risk (OA R). The patient specific quality assurance of all VMAT plans has been verified by Octavius^®-4D phantom for different algorithms.

Results

The relative differences among AA, AXB_w and AXB_m, with respect to prostate, head and neck were less than 1% for PTV D_95%. However, PTV D_95% calculated by AA tended to be overestimated, with a relative dose difference of 3.23% in the case of lung treatment. The absolute mean values of the relative differences were 1.1 ± 1.2% and 2.0 ± 1.2%, when comparing between AXB_w and AA, AXB_m and AA, respectively. The gamma pass rate was observed to exceed 97.4% and 99.4% for the measured and calculated doses in most cases of the volumetric 3D analysis for AA and AXB_m, respectively.

Conclusion

This study suggests that the dose calculated to medium using AXB_m algorithm is better than AAA and it could be used clinically. Switching the dose calculation algorithm from AA to AXB does not require extra measurements.

Dosimetric Impact of Acuros XB Dose-to-Water and Dose-to-Medium Reporting Modes on Lung Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and Its Dependency on Structure Composition

Purpose

Our purpose was to assess the dosimetric effect of switching from the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) to Acuros XB (AXB), with dose-to-medium (Dm) and dose-to-water (Dw) reporting modes, in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy patients and determine whether planning-target-volume (PTV) dose prescriptions and organ-at-risk constraints should be modified under these circumstances.

Methods and Materials

We included 54 lung stereotactic body radiation therapy patients. We delineated the PTV, the ipsilateral lung, the contralateral lung, the heart, the spinal cord, the esophagus, the trachea, proximal bronchi, the ribs, and the great vessels. We performed dose calculations with AAA and AXB, then compared clinically relevant dose-volume parameters. Paired t tests were used to analyze differences of means. We propose a method, based on the composition of the involved structures, for predicting differences between AXB Dw and Dm calculations.

Results

The largest difference between the algorithms was 4%. Mean dose differences between AXB Dm and AXB Dw depended on the average composition of the volumes. Compared with AXB, AAA underestimated all PTV dose-volume parameters (-0.7 Gy to -0.1 Gy) except for gradient index, which was significantly higher (4%). It also underestimated V₅ of the contralateral lung (-0.3%). Significant differences in near-maximum doses (D₂) to the ribs were observed between AXB Dm and AAA (1.7%) and between AXB Dw and AAA (-1.6%). AAA-calculated D₂ was slightly higher in the remaining organs at risk.

Conclusions

Differences between AXB and AAA are below the threshold of clinical detectability (5%) for most patients. For a small subgroup, the difference in maximum doses to the ribs between AXB Dw and AXB Dm may be clinically significant. The differences in dose volume parameters between AXB Dw and AXB Dm can be predicted with reference to structure composition.

The influence of Acuros XB on dose volume histogram metrics and tumour control probability modelling in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Radiation therapy plans are assessed using dose volume metrics derived from clinical toxicity and outcome data. In this study, plans for patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) are examined in the context of the implementation of the Acuros XB (AXB) dose calculation algorithm focussing on the impact on common metrics.

METHODS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated for twenty patients, using the Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) and recalculated with AXB for both dose to water (D_w) and dose to medium (D_m). Standard dose volume histogram (DVH) metrics for both targets and organs-at-risk (OARs) were extracted, in addition to tumour control probability (TCP) for targets.

RESULTS

Mean dose to the planning target volume (PTV) was not clinically different between the algorithms (within ±1.1 Gy) but differences were seen in the minimum dose, D_99% and D_98% as well as for conformity and homogeneity metrics. A difference in TCP was seen for AXB_Dm plans versus both AXB_Dw and AAA plans. No clinically relevant differences were seen in the lung metrics. For point doses to spinal cord and oesophagus, the AXB_Dm values were lower than AXB_Dw, by up to 1.0 Gy.

CONCLUSION

Normalisation of plans to the mean/median dose to the target does not need to be adjusted when moving from AAA to AXB. OAR point doses may decrease by up to 1 Gy with AXB_Dm, which can be accounted for in clinical planning. Other OAR metrics do not need to be adjusted.

A new dose quantity for evaluation and optimisation of MV photon dose distributions when using advanced algorithms: proof of concept and potential applications

Advanced algorithms used in MV photon radiotherapy model radiation transport in any media. They represent a step forward but introduce new uncertainties and questions, including whether to report the doses to water (D_w,m) or medium (D_m,m) voxels, and the impact of fluence changes introduced by surrounding media. These aspects can compromise consistency between both reporting modes and with previous algorithms in which clinical experience is based. This study introduces a new dose quantity, the dose-to-reference-like medium, to overcome the aforementioned shortcomings. It is linked to a reference medium, water in this study (D_w,m*), and defined as the absorbed dose in a voxel of this reference medium surrounded by a reference-like medium with the same radiation transport characteristics as the original one. We propose to derive D_w,m* distributions by post-processing D_w,m or D_m,m applying a correction factor (CF) to each voxel which depends on its composition. We present and justify a simple and straightforward method to obtain CFs that only involves two phantoms with the same density: one with the considered composition and the other with that of the reference medium. A proof of concept was performed in a clinical environment for Acuros XB (AXB) advanced algorithm and 6 MV photon beams. The CFs were derived for the tissues characterised in Acuros. D_w,m* was compared to D_w,m, D_m,m, and D_w,w from AAA analytical algorithm for some virtual and clinical cases. All the previous quantities presented limitations that can be solved by D_w,m*. This new quantity allows the applicability of evaluation parameters, traceability to clinical experience, and isolation of heterogeneity effects to identify optimum plans, offering useful characteristics for plan evaluation and optimisation in clinical practice. Additionally, it also has potential applications in automated treatment planning and multi-centre activities such as clinical trials, audits, benchmarking, and shared models for automation.

Effect of dental metal artifact conversion volume on dose distribution in head-and-neck volumetric-modulated arc therapy

Purpose

During treatment planning for head‐and‐neck volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT), manual contouring of the metal artifact area of artificial teeth is done, and the area is replaced with water computed tomography (CT) values for dose calculation. This contouring of the metal artifact areas, which is performed manually, is subject to human variability. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and analyze the effect of inter‐observer variation on dose distribution.

Methods

The subjects were 25 cases of cancer of the oropharynx for which VMAT was performed. Six radiation oncologists (ROs) performed metal artifact contouring for all of the cases. Gross tumor volume, clinical target volume, planning target volume (PTV), and oral cavity were evaluated. The contouring of the six ROs was divided into two groups, small and large groups. A reference RO was determined for each group and the dose distribution was compared with those of the other radiation oncologists by gamma analysis (GA).

As an additional experiment, we changed the contouring of each dental metal artifact area, creating enlarged contours (L), reduced contours (S), and undrawn contours (N) based on the contouring by the six ROs and compared these structure sets.

Results

The evaluation of inter‐observer variation showed no significant difference between the large and small groups, and the GA pass rate was 100%. Similar results were obtained comparing structure sets L and S, but in the comparison of structure sets L and N, there were cases with pass rates below 70%.

Conclusions

The results show that the artificial variability of manual artificial tooth metal artifact contouring has little effect on the dose distribution of VMAT. However, it should be noted that the dose distribution may change depending on the contouring method in cases where the overlap between PTV and metal artifact areas is large.

Validation of the preconfigured Varian Ethos Acuros XB Beam Model for treatment planning dose calculations: A dosimetric study

Varian (Palo Alto, California, United States) recently released an online adaptation treatment platform, Ethos, which has introduced a new Dose Preview and Automated Plan Generation module despite sharing identical beam data with the existing Halcyon linac. The module incorporates a preconfigured beam model and the Acuros XB algorithm (Ethos AXB model) to generate final dose calculations from an initial fluence optimization. In this study, we comprehensively validated the accuracy of the Ethos AXB model by comparing it against the Halcyon AXB model, the Halcyon Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) model, and measurements acquired on an Ethos linac. Results indicated that the Ethos AXB model demonstrated a comparable if not superior dosimetric accuracy to the Halcyon AXB model in basic and complex calculations, and at the same time its dosimetric accuracy in modulated and heterogeneous plans was better than that of the Halcyon AAA model. Despite the fact that the same algorithm was utilized, the Ethos AXB model and the Halcyon AXB model still exhibited variations across a range of tests, although these variations were predominantly insignificant in the clinical environment. The accuracy of the Ethos AXB model has been successfully verified in this study and is considered appropriate for the current clinical scope. On the basis of this study, clinical physicists can perform a data validation instead of a full data commissioning when implementing the Ethos system, thereby adopting a more efficient approach for Ethos installation.

An efficient planning technique for low dose whole lung radiation therapy for covid-19 pandemic patients

•

An efficient low dose whole lung RT technique developed for severe COVID-19 patients.

•

Empirical MU Calculation formula fitted from actual CT images of clinical patients.

•

Acceptable dose distribution verified by 3D dose calculation in real patient anatomy.

This study aimed to establish an efficient planning technique for low dose whole lung treatment that can be implemented rapidly and safely. The treatment technique developed here relied only on chest radiograph and a simple empirical monitor unit calculation formula. The 3D dose calculation in real patient anatomy, including both nonCOVID and COVID-19 patients, which took into account tissue heterogeneity showed that the dose delivered to lungs had reasonable uniformity even with this simple and quick setup.

6X acuros algorithm validation in the presence of inhomogeneities for VMAT treatment planning

Aim

To validate the Acuros®XB (AXB) dose calculation algorithm for a 6 MV beam from the Varian TrueBeam treatment units.

Background

Currently Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm (AAA) is clinically used on authors' department but AXB could replace it for VMAT treatments in regions where inhomogeneities and free air are present.

Materials and methods

Two steps are followed in the validation process of a new dose calculation algorithm. The first is to check the accuracy of algorithm for a homogenous phantom and regular fields. Multiple fields of increasing complexity have been acquired using a Mapcheck diode array. The accuracy of the algorithm was evaluated using the gamma analysis method. The second is to validate the algorithm in the presence of heterogeneous media. Planar absolute dose was measured with GafChromic®EBT2 film and was compared with the dose calculated by AXB. Gamma analysis was performed between Mapcheck measurements and AXB dose calculations, at a range of clinical source-surface distance.

Results

For SSDs ranging from 80 to 100 cm, the results show a minimum pass rate of 95% between AXB and Mapcheck acquisition. For open 6 MV photon beam interacting with a phantom with an air gap, the agreement after the air gap between AXB and GafChromic®EBT2 is less than 1% in the 3 × 3cm² field and less than 2% in the 10 × 10 cm² field.

Conclusions

AXB has advanced modelling of lateral electron transport that enables a more accurate dose calculation in heterogeneous regions and, compared with AAA, improves accuracy between different density interfaces. This will be of particular benefit for head/neck treatments.

Dosimetric comparison of different algorithms in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) plan for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Purposes

The main aim of the study was to investigate the dosimetric difference between acuros XB algorithm (AXB), anisotropic analytic algorithm (AAA), and pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) plan for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Patients and Methods

Thirty-eight NSCLC patients were included. GTV, PTV, and organs at risk were delineated by the radiation oncologists. Three optimized SBRT plans for each patients were gained using three algorithms of AXB, AAA, and PBC with the identical plan parameters. Dosimetric endpoints were collected and compared among the three plans, including dosimetric criteria: V100%, V90%, PTV D_min, D_max, D_mean, homogeneity index (HI), and Paddick conformity index (CI).

Results

AXB plan resulted in decreased V100% with a mean difference 6.14% compared with PBC plan (For V100%, AXB vs AAA vs PBC=93.44% vs 95.54% vs 99.58%, P<0.05). Three plans showed no significant difference as to the parameter V90%. AXB plan leaded to reduced D_min of PTV compared with other two algorithms (For D_min of PTV, AXB vs AAA vs PBC=4048cGy vs 4365Gy vs 4873Gy, P<0.05). PBC induced the enhanced trend of D_max of PTV compared with other two algorithms (D_max among three algorithms, P>0.05); and increased the D_mean of PTV in three algorithms with significant difference (For D_mean of PTV, AXB vs AAA vs PBC=5332cGy vs 5330Gy vs 5785Gy, P<0.05). AXB algorithm achieved a similar plan conformity with other two algorithms (For CI, AXB vs AAA vs PBC=0.80 vs 0.85 vs 0.71, P>0.05).

Conclusion

For SBRT plan of NSCLC, AAA and PBC algorithms overestimate target coverage, AXB algorithm is recommended for the SBRT plan of NSCLC.

The irregular breathing effect on target volume and coverage for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy

The major challenge in treating a mobile target is obtaining the temporal and spatial information imaging and treatment details. This phantom study quantitatively evaluates the geometric and dosimetric effects of various treatment techniques under different respiratory patterns. The regular motion model was a sinusoidal waveform with a longitudinal range of ±1.5 cm and a period of 4 sec, while irregular motion models were generated by extracting signals from clinical cases. Helical CT for a static target and 4D CT with retrospective sorting were acquired. Phase bin, maximum, and average intensity projection (MIP and AIP) CT datasets were reconstructed. RapidArc and IMRT plans were generated on static and moving target CT datasets with different motion patterns using the phase-based gating and nongating treatment. Dose measurements were performed using EBT3 films. Dose profile and gamma analysis (±3%/1 mm criteria) were used for dose comparisons. For the irregular motions, internal target volume variations between AIP and MIP datasets (AIP/MIP) had slight differences (-6.2% to -7.7%) for gated plans, and larger differences (-12.3% to -15.2%) for nongated plans. Dosimetric measurements showed a high gamma passing rate (>98.5%) for the static plan in the target region, while the AIP and MIP gated plans had average passing rates of 92.2% ± 5.7% and 85.8% ± 9.5%, respectively. Nongated plans had significantly lower and deviated passing rates, while the AIP and MIP plans had passing rates of 43.6% ± 22.2% and 66.7% ± 28.2%, respectively (p < 0.05). Lung stereotactic body radiotherapy treatment delivered with the gated technique did not compromise the gross tumor volumes coverage, and was insensitive to the breathing irregularities and plan techniques. Adequate margins should be accounted to cover the mis-gating effect when using the phase-based gating under irregular motion.

Calculation of absorbed dose in radiotherapy by solution of the linear Boltzmann transport equations

Over the last decade, dose calculations which solve the linear Boltzmann transport equations have been introduced into clinical practice and are now in widespread use. However, knowledge in the radiotherapy community concerning the details of their function is limited. This review gives a general description of the linear Boltzmann transport equations as applied to calculation of absorbed dose in clinical radiotherapy. The aim is to elucidate the principles of the method, rather than to describe a particular implementation. The literature on the performance of typical algorithms is then reviewed, in many cases with reference to Monte Carlo simulations. The review is completed with an overview of the emerging applications in the important area of MR-guided radiotherapy.

Dosimetric evaluation of respiratory gated volumetric modulated arc therapy for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy using 3D printing technology

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of respiratory gated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) under simulation conditions similar to the actual clinical situation using patient-specific lung phantoms and realistic target movements.

Methods

Six heterogeneous lung phantoms were fabricated using a 3D-printer (3DISON, ROKIT, Seoul, Korea) to be dosimetrically equivalent to actual target regions of lung SBRT cases treated via gated VMAT. They were designed to move realistically via a motion device (QUASAR, Modus Medical Devices, Canada). Using the lung phantoms and a homogeneous phantom (model 500–3315, Modus Medical Devices), film dosimetry was performed with and without respiratory gating for VMAT delivery (TrueBeam STx; Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA). The measured results were analyzed with the gamma passing rates (GPRs) of 2%/1 mm criteria, by comparing with the calculated dose via the AXB and AAA algorithms of the Eclipse Treatment Planning System (version 10.0.28; Varian Medical Systems).

Results

GPRs were greater than the acceptance criteria 80% for all film measurements with the stationary and homogeneous phantoms in conventional QAs. Regardless of the heterogeneity of phantoms, there were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in GPRs obtained with and without target motions; the statistical significance (p = 0.031) was presented between both algorithms under the utilization of heterogeneous phantoms.

Conclusions

Dosimetric verification with heterogeneous patient-specific lung phantoms could be successfully implemented as the evaluation method for gated VMAT delivery. In addition, it could be dosimetrically confirmed that the AXB algorithm improved the dose calculation accuracy under patient-specific simulations using 3D printed lung phantoms.

Advanced dose calculation algorithms in lung cancer radiotherapy: Implications for SBRT and locally advanced disease in deep inspiration breath hold

PURPOSE

Evaluating performance of modern dose calculation algorithms in SBRT and locally advanced lung cancer radiotherapy in free breathing (FB) and deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH).

METHODS

For 17 patients with early stage and 17 with locally advanced lung cancer, a plan in FB and in DIBH were generated with Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA). Plans for early stage were 3D-conformal SBRT, 45 Gy in 3 fractions, prescribed to 95% isodose covering 95% of PTV and aiming for 140% dose centrally in the tumour. Locally advanced plans were volumetric modulated arc therapy, 66 Gy in 33 fractions, prescribed to mean PTV dose. Calculation grid size was 1 mm for SBRT and 2.5 mm for locally advanced plans. All plans were recalculated with AcurosXB with same MU as in AAA, for comparison on target coverage and dose to risk organs.

RESULTS

Lung volume increased in DIBH, resulting in decreased lung density (6% for early and 13% for locally-advanced group). In SBRT, AAA overestimated mean and near-minimum PTV dose (p-values < 0.01) compared to AcurosXB, with largest impact in DIBH (differences of up to 11 Gy). These clinically relevant differences may be a combination of small targets and large dose gradients within the PTV. In locally advanced group, AAA overestimated mean GTV, CTV and PTV doses by median less than 0.8 Gy and near-minimum doses by median 0.4-2.7 Gy. No clinically meaningful difference was observed for lung and heart dose metrics between the algorithms, for both FB and DIBH.

CONCLUSIONS

AAA overestimated target coverage compared to AcurosXB, especially in DIBH for SBRT.

Validation of the Acuros XB dose calculation algorithm versus Monte Carlo for clinical treatment plans

PURPOSE

The two distinct dose computation paradigms of Boltzmann equation solvers and Monte Carlo simulation both promise in principle maximum accuracy. In practice, clinically acceptable calculation times demand approximations and numerical short-cuts on one hand, and modeling the beam characteristics of a real linear accelerator to the required accuracy on the other. A thorough benchmark of both algorithm types therefore needs to start with beam modeling, and needs to include a number of clinically challenging treatment plans.

METHODS

The Acuros XB (v 13.7, Varian Medical Systems) and SciMoCa (v 1.0, Scientific RT) algorithms were commissioned for the same Varian Clinac accelerator for beam qualities 6 and 15 MV. Beam models were established with water phantom measurements and MLC calibration protocols. In total, 25 patients of five case classes (lung/three-dimensional (3D) conformal, lung/IMRT, head and neck/VMAT, cervix/IMRT, and rectum/VMAT) were randomly selected from the clinical database and computed with both algorithms. Statistics of 3D gamma analysis for various dose/distance-to-agreement (DTA) criteria and differences in selected DVH parameters were analyzed.

RESULTS

The percentage of points fulfilling a gamma evaluation was scored as the gamma agreement index (GAI), denoted as G(ΔD, DTA). G(3,3), G(2,2), and G(1,1) were evaluated for the full body, PTV, and selected organs at risk (OARs). For all patients, G(3,3) ≥ 99.9% and G(2,2) > 97% for the body. G(1,1) varied among the patients. However, for all patients, G(1,1) > 70% and G(1,1) > 80% for 68% of the patients. For each patient, the mean dose deviation was ΔD < 1% for the body, PTV, and all evaluated OARs, respectively. In dense bone and at off-axis distance > 10 cm, the Acuros algorithm yielded slightly higher doses. In the first layer of voxels of the patient surface, the calculated doses deviated between the algorithms. However, at the second voxel, good agreement was observed. The differences in D(98%PTV) were <1.9% between the two algorithms and for 76% of the patients, deviations were below 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, an outstanding agreement was found between the Boltzmann equation solver and Monte Carlo. High-accuracy dose computation algorithms have matured to a level that their differences are below common experimental detection thresholds for clinical treatment plans. Aside from residual differences which could be traced back to implementation details and fundamental cross-section data, both algorithms arrive at identical dose distributions.

Verification of Acuros XB dose algorithm using 3D printed low-density phantoms for clinical photon beams

The transport-based dose calculation algorithm Acuros XB (AXB) has been shown to accurately account for heterogeneities primarily through comparisons with Monte Carlo simulations. This study aims to provide additional experimental verification of AXB for clinically relevant flattened and unflattened beam energies in low density phantoms of the same material. Polystyrene slabs were created using a bench-top 3D printer. Six slabs were printed at varying densities from 0.23 to 0.68 g/cm3 , corresponding to different density humanoid tissues. The slabs were used to form different single and multilayer geometries. Dose was calculated with Eclipse™ AXB 11.0.31 for 6MV, 15MV flattened and 6FFF (flattening filter free) energies for field sizes of 2 × 2 and 5 × 5 cm2 . EBT3 film was inserted into the phantoms, which were irradiated. Absolute dose profiles and 2D Gamma analyses were performed for 96 dose planes. For all single slab configurations and energies, absolute dose differences between the AXB calculation and film measurements remained <3% for both fields in the high-dose region, however, larger disagreement was seen within the penumbra. For the multilayered phantom, percentage depth dose with AXB was within 5% of discrete film measurements. The Gamma index at 2%/2 mm averaged 98% in all combinations of fields, phantoms and photon energies. The transport-based dose algorithm AXB is in good agreement with the experimental measurements for small field sizes using 6MV, 6FFF and 15MV beams adjacent to various low-density heterogeneous media. This work provides preliminary experimental grounds to support the use of AXB for heterogeneous dose calculation purposes.

Dosimetric evaluation of magnetic resonance-generated synthetic CT for radiation treatment of rectal cancer

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess the dosimetric equivalence of magnetic resonance (MR)-generated synthetic CT (synCT) and simulation CT for treatment planning in radiotherapy of rectal cancer.

Methods

This study was conducted on eleven patients who underwent whole-body PET/MR and PET/CT examination in a prospective IRB-approved study. For each patient synCT was generated from Dixon MR using a model-based method. Standard treatment planning directives were used to create a four-field box (4F), an oblique four-field (O4F) and a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan on synCT for treatment of rectal cancer. The plans were recalculated on CT with the same monitor units (MUs) as that of synCT. Dose-volume metrics of planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) as well as gamma analysis of dose distributions were evaluated to quantify the difference between synCT and CT plans. All plans were calculated using the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA). The VMAT plans on synCT and CT were also calculated using the Acuros XB algorithm for comparison with the AAA calculation.

Results

Medians of absolute differences in PTV metrics between synCT and CT plans were 0.2%, 0.2% and 0.3% for 4F, O4F and VMAT respectively. No significant differences were observed in OAR dose metrics including bladder V40Gy, mean dose in bladder, bowel V45Gy and femoral head V30Gy in any techniques. Gamma analysis with 2%/2mm dose difference/distance to agreement criteria showed median passing rates of 99.8% (range: 98.5 to 100%), 99.9% (97.2 to 100%), and 99.9% (99.4 to 100%) for 4F, O4F and VMAT, respectively. Using Acuros XB dose calculation, 2%/2mm gamma analysis generated a passing rate of 99.2% (97.7 to 99.9%) for VMAT plans.

Conclusion

SynCT enabled dose calculation equivalent to conventional CT for treatment planning of 3D conformal treatment as well as VMAT of rectal cancer. The dosimetric agreement between synCT and CT calculated doses demonstrated the potential of MR-only treatment planning for rectal cancer using MR generated synCT.

Variation of the prescription dose using the analytical anisotropic algorithm in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy

PURPOSE

The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate the dosimetric variation regarding the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) relative to other algorithms in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). We conducted a multi-institutional study involving six institutions using a secondary check program and compared the AAA to the Acuros XB (AXB) in two institutions.

METHODS

All lung SBRT plans (128 patients) were generated using the AAA, pencil beam convolution with the Batho (PBC-B) and adaptive convolve (AC). All institutions used the same secondary check program (simple MU analysis [SMU]) implemented by a Clarkson-based dose calculation algorithm. Measurement was performed in a heterogeneous phantom to compare doses using the three different algorithms and the SMU for the measurements. A retrospective analysis was performed to compute the confidence limit (CL; mean±2SD) for the dose deviation between the AAA, PBC, AC and SMU. The variations between the AAA and AXB were evaluated in two institutions, then the CL was acquired.

RESULTS

In comparing the measurements, the AAA showed the largest systematic dose error (3%). In calculation comparisons, the CLs of the dose deviation were 8.7±9.9% (AAA), 4.2±3.9% (PBC-B) and 5.7±4.9% (AC). The CLs of the dose deviation between the AXB and the AAA were 1.8±1.5% and -0.1±4.4%, respectively, in the two institutions.

CONCLUSIONS

The CL of the AAA showed much larger variation than the other algorithms. Relative to the AXB, larger systematic and random deviations still appeared. Thus, care should be taken in the use of AAA for lung SBRT.

Comparative Analysis of Local Control Prediction Using Different Biophysical Models for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Undergoing Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

PURPOSE

The consistency for predicting local control (LC) data using biophysical models for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment of lung cancer is unclear. This study aims to compare the results calculated from different models using the treatment planning data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Treatment plans were designed for 17 patients diagnosed with primary non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using 5 different fraction schemes. The Martel model, Ohri model, and the Tai model were used to predict the 2-year LC value. The Gucken model, Santiago model, and the Tai model were employed to estimate the 3-year LC data.

RESULTS

We found that the employed models resulted in completely different LC prediction except for the Gucken and the Santiago models which exhibited quite similar 3-year LC data. The predicted 2-year and 3-year LC values in different models were not only associated with the dose normalization but also associated with the employed fraction schemes. The greatest difference predicted by different models was up to 15.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that different biophysical models influence the LC prediction and the difference is not only correlated to the dose normalization but also correlated to the employed fraction schemes.

Heterogeneity correction for intensity-modulated frameless SRS in pituitary and cavernous sinus tumors: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Frameless immobilization allows for planning and quality assurance of intensity-modulated radiosurgery (IM-SRS) plans. We tested the hypothesis that IM-SRS planning with uniform tissue density corrections results in dose inaccuracy compared to heterogeneity-corrected algorithms.

METHODS

Fifteen patients with tumors of the pituitary or cavernous sinus underwent frameless IM-SRS. Treatment planning CT and MRI scans were obtained and fused to delineate the tumor, optic nerves, chiasm, and brainstem. The plan was developed with static gantry IM-SRS fields using a pencil beam (PB), analytical anisotropic (AAA), and Acuros XB (AXB) algorithms. We evaluated measures of target coverage as well as doses to organs at risk (OAR) for each algorithm. We compared the results of each algorithm in the cases where PTV overlapped OAR (n = 10) to cases without overlapping OAR with PTV (n = 5). Utilizing film dosimetry, we measured the dose distribution for each algorithm through a uniform density target to a rando phantom with non-uniform density of air, tissue, and bone.

RESULTS

There was no difference in target coverage measured by DMaxPTV, DMinPTV, D95%PTV, or the isodose surface (IDS) covering 95% of the PTV regardless of algorithm. However, there were differences in dose to OAR. PB predicted higher (p < 0.05) Dmax for the brainstem, chiasm, right optic nerve, and left optic nerve. In cases of PTV overlapping an optic nerve (n = 7), PB was unable to limit dose to 8 Gy while achieving PTV coverage (PB 855 cGy vs. AAA 769 cGy, p = 0.05 vs. AXB 658 cGy, p = 0.03). Within the rando phantom, the PB and AAA algorithms over-estimated the dose delivered in the bone-tissue-air interface of the sinus (+17%), while the AXB algorithm closely predicted the actual dose delivered through the inhomogeneous tissue (+/- 1 % max, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing frameless SRS benefit from heterogeneity corrected dose plans when the lesion lies in areas of widely varying tissue density and near critical normal structures such as the skull base. Film dosimetry confirms that the AXB dose calculation algorithm more accurately predicts actual dose delivered though tissues of varying densities than PB or AAA dose calculation algorithms.

Comparative evaluation of modern dosimetry techniques near low- and high-density heterogeneities

The purpose of this study is to compare performance of several dosimetric methods in heterogeneous phantoms irradiated by 6 and 18 MV beams. Monte Carlo (MC) calculations were used, along with two versions of Acuros XB, anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), EBT2 film, and MOSkin dosimeters. Percent depth doses (PDD) were calculated and measured in three heterogeneous phantoms. The first two phantoms were a 30×30×30 cm3 solid‐water slab that had an air‐gap of 20×2.5×2.35 cm3. The third phantom consisted of 30×30×5 cm3 solid water slabs, two 30×30×5 cm3 slabs of lung, and one 30×30×1 cm3 solid water slab. Acuros XB, AAA, and MC calculations were within 1% in the regions with particle equilibrium. At media interfaces and buildup regions, differences between Acuros XB and MC were in the range of +4.4% to −12.8%. MOSkin and EBT2 measurements agreed to MC calculations within ∼2.5%, except for the first centimeter of buildup where differences of 4.5% were observed. AAA did not predict the backscatter dose from the high‐density heterogeneity. For the third, multilayer lung phantom, 6 MV beam PDDs calculated by all TPS algorithms were within 2% of MC. 18 MV PDDs calculated by two versions of Acuros XB and AAA differed from MC by up to 2.8%, 3.2%, and 6.8%, respectively. MOSkin and EBT2 each differed from MC by up to 2.9% and 2.5% for the 6 MV, and by −3.1% and ∼2% for the 18 MV beams. All dosimetric techniques, except AAA, agreed within 3% in the regions with particle equilibrium. Differences between the dosimetric techniques were larger for the 18 MV than the 6 MV beam. MOSkin and EBT2 measurements were in a better agreement with MC than Acuros XB calculations at the interfaces, and they were in a better agreement to each other than to MC. The latter is due to their thinner detection layers compared to MC voxel sizes.

PACS numbers: 87.55.K‐, 87.55.kd, 87.55.km, 87.53.Bn, 87.55.k

Dosimetric comparison of Acuros XB with collapsed cone convolution/superposition and anisotropic analytic algorithm for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy of thoracic spinal metastases

The aim of this study is to compare the recent Eclipse Acuros XB (AXB) dose calculation engine with the Pinnacle collapsed cone convolution/superposition (CCC) dose calculation algorithm and the Eclipse anisotropic analytic algorithm (AAA) for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SAbR) treatment planning of thoracic spinal (T‐spine) metastases using IMRT and VMAT delivery techniques. The three commissioned dose engines (CCC, AAA, and AXB) were validated with ion chamber and EBT2 film measurements utilizing a heterogeneous slab‐geometry water phantom and an anthropomorphic phantom. Step‐and‐shoot IMRT and VMAT treatment plans were developed and optimized for eight patients in Pinnacle, following our institutional SAbR protocol for spinal metastases. The CCC algorithm, with heterogeneity corrections, was used for dose calculations. These plans were then exported to Eclipse and recalculated using the AAA and AXB dose calculation algorithms. Various dosimetric parameters calculated with CCC and AAA were compared to that of the AXB calculations. In regions receiving above 50% of prescription dose, the calculated CCC mean dose is 3.1%–4.1% higher than that of AXB calculations for IMRT plans and 2.8%–3.5% higher for VMAT plans, while the calculated AAA mean dose is 1.5%–2.4% lower for IMRT and 1.2%–1.6% lower for VMAT. Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) were observed for most GTV and PTV indices between the CCC and AXB calculations for IMRT and VMAT, while differences between the AAA and AXB calculations were not statistically significant. For T‐spine SAbR treatment planning, the CCC calculations give a statistically significant overestimation of target dose compared to AXB. AAA underestimates target dose with no statistical significance compared to AXB. Further study is needed to determine the clinical impact of these findings.

PACS number: 87.55.D‐, 87.53.Ly

Dose calculation of Acuros XB and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm in lung stereotactic body radiotherapy treatment with flattening filter free beams and the potential role of calculation grid size

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to appraise the dose differences between Acuros XB (AXB) and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment for lung cancer with flattening filter free (FFF) beams. Additionally, the potential role of the calculation grid size (CGS) on the dose differences between the two algorithms was also investigated.

METHODS

SBRT plans with 6X and 10X FFF beams produced from the CT scan data of 10 patients suffering from stage I lung cancer were enrolled in this study. Clinically acceptable treatment plans with AAA were recalculated using AXB with the same monitor units (MU) and identical multileaf collimator (MLC) settings. Furthermore, different CGS (2.5 mm and 1 mm) in the two algorithms was also employed to investigate their dosimetric impact. Dose to planning target volumes (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) between the two algorithms were compared. PTV was separated into PTV_soft (density in soft-tissue range) and PTV_lung (density in lung range) for comparison.

RESULTS

The dose to PTV_lung predicted by AXB was found to be 1.33 ± 1.12% (6XFFF beam with 2.5 mm CGS), 2.33 ± 1.37% (6XFFF beam with 1 mm CGS), 2.81 ± 2.33% (10XFFF beam with 2.5 mm CGS) and 3.34 ± 1.76% (10XFFF beam with 1 mm CGS) lower compared with that by AAA, respectively. However, the dose directed to PTV_soft was comparable. For OARs, AXB predicted a slightly lower dose to the aorta, chest wall, spinal cord and esophagus, regardless of whether the 6XFFF or 10XFFF beam was utilized. Exceptionally, dose to the ipsilateral lung was significantly higher with AXB.

CONCLUSIONS

AXB principally predicts lower dose to PTV_lung compared to AAA and the CGS contributes to the relative dose difference between the two algorithms.

Comparison of Acuros (AXB) and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) for dose calculation in treatment of oesophageal cancer: effects on modelling tumour control probability

AIM

To investigate systematic changes in dose arising when treatment plans optimised using the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) are recalculated using Acuros XB (AXB) in patients treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) for locally advanced oesophageal cancers.

BACKGROUND

We have compared treatment plans created using AAA with those recalculated using AXB. Although the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) is currently more widely used in clinical routine, Acuros XB (AXB) has been shown to more accurately calculate the dose distribution, particularly in heterogeneous regions. Studies to predict clinical outcome should be based on modelling the dose delivered to the patient as accurately as possible.

METHODS

CT datasets from ten patients were selected for this retrospective study. VMAT (Volumetric modulated arc therapy) plans with 2 arcs, collimator rotation ± 5-10° and dose prescription 50 Gy / 25 fractions were created using Varian Eclipse (v10.0). The initial dose calculation was performed with AAA, and AXB plans were created by re-calculating the dose distribution using the same number of monitor units (MU) and multileaf collimator (MLC) files as the original plan. The difference in calculated dose to organs at risk (OAR) was compared using dose-volume histogram (DVH) statistics and p values were calculated using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. The potential clinical effect of dosimetric differences in the gross tumour volume (GTV) was evaluated using three different TCP models from the literature.

RESULTS

PTV Median dose was apparently 0.9 Gy lower (range: 0.5 Gy - 1.3 Gy; p < 0.05) for VMAT AAA plans re-calculated with AXB and GTV mean dose was reduced by on average 1.0 Gy (0.3 Gy -1.5 Gy; p < 0.05). An apparent difference in TCP of between 1.2% and 3.1% was found depending on the choice of TCP model. OAR mean dose was lower in the AXB recalculated plan than the AAA plan (on average, dose reduction: lung 1.7%, heart 2.4%). Similar trends were seen for CRT plans.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in dose distribution are observed with VMAT and CRT plans recalculated with AXB particularly within soft tissue at the tumour/lung interface, where AXB has been shown to more accurately represent the true dose distribution. AAA apparently overestimates dose, particularly the PTV median dose and GTV mean dose, which could result in a difference in TCP model parameters that reaches clinical significance.