Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Maintaining dosimetric quality when switching to a Monte Carlo dose engine for head and neck volumetric-modulated arc therapy planning.
Feygelman, Vladimir; Latifi, Kujtim; Bowers, Mark; Greco, Kevin; Moros, Eduardo G; Isacson, Max; Angerud, Agnes; Caudell, Jimmy.
Afiliação
  • Feygelman V; Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.
  • Latifi K; Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.
  • Bowers M; Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.
  • Greco K; Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.
  • Moros EG; Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.
  • Isacson M; RaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
  • Angerud A; RaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
  • Caudell J; Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA.
J Appl Clin Med Phys ; 23(5): e13572, 2022 May.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35213089
ABSTRACT
Head and neck cancers present challenges in radiation treatment planning due to the large number of critical structures near the target(s) and highly heterogeneous tissue composition. While Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculations currently offer the most accurate approximation of dose deposition in tissue, the switch to MC presents challenges in preserving the parameters of care. The differences in dose-to-tissue were widely discussed in the literature, but mostly in the context of recalculating the existing plans rather than reoptimizing with the MC dose engine. Also, the target dose homogeneity received less attention. We adhere to strict dose homogeneity objectives in clinical practice. In this study, we started with 21 clinical volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans previously developed in Pinnacle treatment planning system. Those plans were recalculated "as is" with RayStation (RS) MC algorithm and then reoptimized in RS with both collapsed cone (CC) and MC algorithms. MC statistical uncertainty (0.3%) was selected carefully to balance the dose computation time (1-2 min) with the planning target volume (PTV) dose-volume histogram (DVH) shape approaching that of a "noise-free" calculation. When the hot spot in head and neck MC-based treatment planning is defined as dose to 0.03 cc, it is exceedingly difficult to limit it to 105% of the prescription dose, as we were used to with the CC algorithm. The average hot spot after optimization and calculation with RS MC was statistically significantly higher compared to Pinnacle and RS CC algorithms by 1.2 and 1.0 %, respectively. The 95% confidence interval (CI) observed in this study suggests that in most cases a hot spot of ≤107% is achievable. Compared to the 95% CI for the previous clinical plans recalculated with RS MC "as is" (upper limit 108%), in real terms this result is at least as good or better than the historic plans.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article