Yadav Poonam, DesRosiers Colleen M, Mitra Raj K, Srivastava Shiv P, Das Indra J
Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwest Memorial Hospital, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Indiana University Health, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
J Clin Med. 2023 Jan 23;12(3):906. doi: 10.3390/jcm12030906.
Dose-calculation algorithms are critical for radiation treatment outcomes that vary among treatment planning systems (TPS). Modern algorithms use sophisticated radiation transport calculation with detailed three-dimensional beam modeling to provide accurate doses, especially in heterogeneous medium and small fields used in IMRT/SBRT. While the dosimetric accuracy in heterogeneous mediums (lung) is qualitatively known, the accuracy is unknown. The aim of this work is to analyze the calculated dose in lung patients and compare the validity of dose-calculation algorithms by measurements in a low-Z phantom for two main classes of algorithms: type A (pencil beam) and type B (collapse cone). The CT scans with volumes (target and organs at risk, OARs) of a lung patient and a phantom build to replicate the human lung data were sent to nine institutions for planning. Doses at different depths and field sizes were measured in the phantom with and without inhomogeneity correction across multiple institutions to understand the impact of clinically used dose algorithms. Wide dosimetric variations were observed in target and OAR coverage in patient plans. The correction factor for collapsed cone algorithms was less than pencil beam algorithms in the small fields used in SBRT. The pencil beam showed ≈70% variations between measured and calculated correction factors for various field sizes and depths. For large field sizes the trends of both types of algorithms were similar. The differences in measured versus calculated dose for type-B algorithms were within ±10%. Significant variations in the target and OARs were observed among various TPS. The results suggest that the pencil beam algorithm does not provide an accurate dose and should not be considered with small fields (IMRT/SBRT). Type-B collapsed-cone algorithms provide better agreement with measurements, but still vary among various systems.
剂量计算算法对于不同治疗计划系统(TPS)的放射治疗结果至关重要。现代算法采用复杂的辐射传输计算和详细的三维射束建模来提供准确的剂量,尤其是在适形调强放疗/立体定向体部放疗(IMRT/SBRT)中使用的非均匀介质和小射野情况下。虽然在非均匀介质(肺部)中的剂量学准确性在定性上是已知的,但具体准确性尚不清楚。本研究的目的是分析肺部患者的计算剂量,并通过在低Z值模体中的测量来比较两种主要算法类型(A类(笔形束)和B类(坍缩锥))剂量计算算法的有效性。将一名肺部患者的带有体积(靶区和危及器官,OARs)的CT扫描数据以及为复制人体肺部数据而构建的模体发送给九个机构进行计划制定。在有和没有不均匀性校正的情况下,在多个机构的模体中测量不同深度和射野大小的剂量,以了解临床使用的剂量算法的影响。在患者计划的靶区和OAR覆盖方面观察到了广泛的剂量学差异。在SBRT中使用的小射野中,坍缩锥算法的校正因子小于笔形束算法。对于各种射野大小和深度,笔形束算法的测量校正因子与计算校正因子之间显示出约70%的差异。对于大射野大小,两种算法类型的趋势相似。B类算法的测量剂量与计算剂量之间的差异在±10%以内。在各种TPS之间观察到靶区和OARs存在显著差异。结果表明,笔形束算法不能提供准确的剂量,在小射野(IMRT/SBRT)情况下不应使用。B类坍缩锥算法与测量结果的一致性更好,但在不同系统之间仍然存在差异。