Limited accuracy of dose calculation for large fields at deep depths using the BrainSCAN v5.21 treatment-planning system

被引:1
|
作者
Hsi, Wen C.
Zhang, Yunkai
Kirk, Michael C.
Bernard, Damian
Chu, James C. H.
机构
[1] Rush Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Phys Med, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
[2] Rush Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
来源
关键词
radiation treatment-planning system; BrainSCAN; BrainLAB; quality assurance;
D O I
10.1120/jacmp.2024.25333
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
The Varian 120 multileaf collimator (MLC) has a leaf thickness of 5 mm projected at the isocenter plane and can deliver a radiation beam of large field size ( up to 30 cm) to be used in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Often the dose must be delivered to depths greater than 20 cm. Therefore, during the commissioning of the BrainSCAN v5.21 or any radiation treatment-planning (RTP) systems, extensive testing of dose and monitor unit calculations must encompass the field sizes ( 1 cm to 30 cm) and the prescription depths ( 1 cm to 20 cm). Accordingly, the central-axis percent depth doses (PDDs) and off-axis percentage profiles must be measured at several depths for various field sizes. The data for this study were acquired with a 6-MV X-ray beam from a Varian 2100EX LINAC with a water phantom at a source-to-surface distance (SSD) of 100 cm. These measurements were also used to generate a photon beam module, based on a photon pencil beam dose-calculation algorithm with a fast-Fourier transform method. To commission the photon beam module used in our BrainSCAN RTP system, we performed a quantitative comparison of measured and calculated central-axis depth doses and off-axis profiles. Utilizing the principles of dose difference and distance-to-agreement introduced by Van Dyk et al. [ Commissioning and quality assurance of treatment planning computers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993; 26: 261- - 273], agreements between calculated and measured doses are < 2% and < 2 mm for the regions of low- and high-dose gradients, respectively. However, large errors ( up to similar to 5% and similar to 7% for 20-cm and 30-cm fields, respectively, at the depth 20 cm) were observed for monitor unit calculations. For a given field size, the disagreement increased with the depth. Similarly, for a given depth the disagreement also increased with the field size. These large systematic errors were caused by using the tissue maximum ratio (TMR) in BrainSCAN v5.21 without considering increased field size as depth increased. These errors have been reported to BrainLAB.
引用
收藏
页码:12 / 18
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Dose calculation accuracy in the presence of high-Z materials using megavoltage CT for treatment planning
    Hecox, R.
    Gibbons, J.
    Followill, D.
    Ibbott, G.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2006, 33 (06) : 2087 - 2088
  • [22] Independent calculation of dose distributions for helical tomotherapy using a conventional treatment planning system
    Klueter, Sebastian
    Schubert, Kai
    Lissner, Steffen
    Sterzing, Florian
    Oetzel, Dieter
    Debus, Juergen
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 41 (08) : 130 - 141
  • [23] Improved peripheral dose calculation accuracy for a small MLC field brought by the latest commercial treatment planning system
    Chow, J. C. L.
    Grigorov, G. N.
    Jiang, R.
    JOURNAL OF RADIOTHERAPY IN PRACTICE, 2006, 5 (02) : 121 - 128
  • [24] Patient-specific treatment planning system for BNCT based on dose calculation using MCNP
    Jung, S. H.
    Kim, S. Y.
    Park, S. H.
    Kim, J. K.
    Choi, I. S.
    Kim, K. O.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2007, 34 (06) : 2479 - 2479
  • [25] Accuracy of Step-Function Based CBCT-Density Calibration and Dose Calculation in a Raystation Treatment Planning System
    Gopal, A.
    Xu, H.
    Kalavagunta, C.
    Chen, S.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2017, 44 (06)
  • [26] Using a Second Treatment Planning System for Dose Calculation Verifications in IMRT Patient Specific Quality Assurance
    Anjum, M.
    Parker, W.
    Ruo, R.
    Aldahlawi, I.
    Afzal, M.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (09) : 4318 - 4318
  • [27] Treatment planning system and dose delivery accuracy in extracranial stereotactic radiotherapy using Elekta body frame
    Dawod, Tamer
    Bremer, Michael
    Karstens, Johann H.
    Werner, Martin
    POLISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS AND ENGINEERING, 2010, 16 (01): : 23 - 34
  • [28] Evaluation of the accuracy of various dose calculation algorithms of a commercial treatment planning system in the presence of hip prosthesis and comparison with Monte Carlo
    Mohammadi, Kheirollah
    Hassani, Mohsen
    Ghorbani, Mahdi
    Farhood, Bagher
    Knaup, Courtney
    JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND THERAPEUTICS, 2017, 13 (03) : 501 - 509
  • [29] Dose calculation models for proton treatment planning using a dynamic beam delivery system: an attempt to include density heterogeneity effects in the analytical dose calculation
    Schaffner, B
    Pedroni, E
    Lomax, A
    PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1999, 44 (01): : 27 - 41
  • [30] Commissioning of Halcyon enhanced leaf model in the Eclipse treatment planning system: Focus on simple slit fields and VMAT dose calculation
    Miyasaka, Ryohei
    Shirai, Mari
    Igari, Mitsunobu
    Kojima, Yume
    Kozawa, Yuki
    Kawachi, Toru
    Hara, Ryusuke
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2025,