RESUMO
Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine measured and calculated dose distributions in a thin-chest-wall phantom and estimate the variations in the dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters used in plan evaluation for patient geometries with chest-wall thicknesses <15 mm with and without bolus implementation. Methods and Materials: Measurements were made using thermoluminescent dosimeters in a chest-wall phantom. The Monte Carlo method, anisotropic analytical algorithm, and Acuros XB Eclipse algorithms were used to calculate dose distributions for clinical plans. DVH parameters for clinical target volume tumor (CTVT) and planning target volume (PTV) and mean doses were evaluated for 15 patients with a chest-wall thickness of 8 to 15 mm with and without partial bolus and for 10 patients with a chest-wall thickness of 20 to 25 mm without bolus. Results: Measurements showed that the dose at a depth of 2 to 12 mm at the beam entrance and laterally was within 90% of the dose at 8 mm depth. Monte Carlo and Acuros XB calculations were well aligned with the experimental data, whereas the anisotropic analytical algorithm underestimated the beam entrance and lateral doses. The DVH parameters for the patients with a thin chest wall were sensitive to calculation algorithm, resolution, body structure definition, and patient geometry. The parameters CTVTV95%, CTVTD98%, and PTVD98% were much lower than the tolerance criteria. Partial bolus improved the values for all algorithms and decreased the variations due to patient geometry. Dose calculations for patients with a chest-wall thickness of 20 to 25 mm resulted in sufficient target coverage and low dependence on patient geometry and calculation algorithm without the use of bolus. Conclusions: Dose calculations using advanced algorithms and resolution <2 mm are recommended for patients with a thin chest wall. Specific DVH criteria or the implementation of partial bolus was needed to facilitate plan development and evaluation for this patient group.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Tumor biology and patient smoking status have clear effects on the benefit of breast radiotherapy. This study developed treatment evaluation strategies that integrated dosimetry, tumor aggressiveness and smoking status for patients undergoing hypo-fractionated whole breast irradiation with simultaneous integrated boost. MATERIALS/METHODS: The evaluation method Plan Quality Metrics (PQM) was adapted for breast cancer. Radiotherapy (RT) benefit was assessed for three levels of tumor aggressiveness; RT risk was estimated using mean dose to organs at risk and published Excess Relative Risk per Gy data for lung cancer and cardiac mortality for smokers and non-smokers. Risk for contralateral breast cancer was also evaluated. PQM and benefit/risk was applied to four patient groups (nâ¯=â¯10 each). Plans using 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), 3DCRT plus intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), 3DCRT plus volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and VMAT were evaluated for each patient. RESULTS: 3DCRT-IMRT hybrid planning resulted in higher PQM score (median 87.0 vs. 3DCRT 82.4, pâ¯<â¯0.01), better dose conformity, lower doses to the heart, lungs and contralateral breast. Survival benefit was most predominant for patients with high-risk breast cancer (>7% and >4.5% gain for non-smokers and smokers). For smokers with intermediate- or low-risk breast cancer, RT induced mortality risk dominated for all techniques. When considering the risk of local recurrence, RT benefitted also smokers (>5% and >2% for intermediate- and low-risk cancer). CONCLUSIONS: PQM methodology was suggested for breast cancer radiotherapy evaluation. Further validation is needed. RT was beneficial for all patients with high risk of recurrence. A survival benefit for smokers with low or intermediate risk of recurrence could not be confirmed.
RESUMO
Locoregional treatment of breast cancer involves adjacent, half blocked fields matched at isocenter. The objective of this work is to study the dosimetric effects of the uncertainties in jaw positioning for such a case, and how a treatment planning protocol including adjacent field overlap of 1 mm affects the dose distribution. A representative treatment plan, involving 6 and 15 photon beams, for a patient treated at our hospital is chosen. Monte Carlo method (EGSnrc/BEAMnrc) is used to simulate the treatment. Uncertainties in jaw positioning of ± 1 mm are addressed, which implies extremes in reality of 2 mm field gap/overlap when planning adjacent fields without overlap and 1 mm gap or 3 mm overlap for a planning protocol with 1 mm overlap. Dosimetric parameters for PTV, lung and body are analyzed. Treatment planning protocol with 1 mm overlap of the adjacent fields does not considerably counteract possible underdosage of the target in the case studied. PTV-V95% is for example reduced from 95% for perfectly aligned fields to 90% and 91% for 2 mm and 1 mm gap, respectively. However, the risk of overdosage in PTV and in healthy soft tissue is increased when following the protocol with 1 mm overlap. A 3 mm overlap compared to 2 mm overlap results in an increase in maximum dose to PTV, PTV-D2%, from 113% to 121%. V120% for 'Body-PTV' is also increased from 5 cm(3) to 14 cm(3). A treatment planning protocol with 1 mm overlap does not considerably improve the coverage of PTV in the case of erroneous jaw positions causing gap between fields, but increases the overdosage in PTV and doses to healthy tissue, in the case of overlapping fields, for the case investigated.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/radioterapia , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Imageamento Tridimensional , Método de Monte Carlo , Aceleradores de Partículas , Fótons/uso terapêutico , Dosagem Radioterapêutica , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/estatística & dados numéricos , Radioterapia Adjuvante/métodos , Radioterapia Adjuvante/estatística & dados numéricos , IncertezaRESUMO
The aim is to study beam characteristics at large distances when focusing on the electron component. In particular, to investigate the utility of spoilers with various thicknesses as an electron source, as well as the effect of different spoiler-to-surface distances (STSD) on the beam characteristics and, consequently, on the dose in the superficial region. A MC model of a 15 MV Varian accelerator, validated earlier by experimental data at isocenter and extended distances used in large-field total body irradiation, is applied to evaluate beam characteristics at distances larger than 400 cm. Calculations are carried out using BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc code packages and phase space data are analyzed by the beam data processor BEAMdp. The electron component of the beam is analyzed at isocenter and extended distances, with and without spoilers as beam modifiers, assuming vacuum or air surrounding the accelerator head. Spoiler thickness of 1.6 cm is found to be optimal compared to thicknesses of 0.8 cm and 2.4 cm. The STSD variations should be taken into account when treating patients, in particular when the treatment protocols are based on a fixed distance to the patient central sagittal plane, and also, in order to maintain high dose in the superficial region.
Assuntos
Modelos Biológicos , Modelos Estatísticos , Método de Monte Carlo , Aceleradores de Partículas/instrumentação , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/métodos , Irradiação Corporal Total/instrumentação , Irradiação Corporal Total/métodos , Simulação por Computador , Desenho de Equipamento , Análise de Falha de Equipamento , Humanos , Dosagem Radioterapêutica , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Espalhamento de Radiação , Sensibilidade e EspecificidadeRESUMO
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to examine experimentally and by the Monte Carlo method the accuracy of the Eclipse Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) and Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) algorithms in the superficial region (0-2 cm) of the breast for tangential photon beams in a phantom case as well as in a number of patient geometries. The aim is also to identify differences in how the patient computer tomography data are handled by the treatment planning system and in the Monte Carlo simulations in order to reduce influences of these effects on the evaluation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Measurements by thermoluminescent dosimeters and gafchromic film are performed for six MV tangential irradiation of the cylindrical solid water phantom. Tangential treatment of seven patients is investigated considering open beams. Dose distributions are obtained by the Eclipse PBC and AAA algorithms. Monte Carlo calculations are carried out by BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc code package. Calculations are performed with a calculation grid of 1.25×1.25×5 mm(3) for PBC and 2×2×5 mm(3) for AAA and Monte Carlo, respectively. Dose comparison is performed in both dose and spatial domains by the normalized dose difference method. RESULTS: Experimental profiles from the surface toward the geometrical center of the cylindrical phantom are obtained at the beam entrance and exit as well as laterally. Full dose is received beyond 2 mm in the lateral superficial region and beyond 7 mm at the beam entrance. Good agreement between experimental, Monte Carlo and AAA data is obtained, whereas PBC is seen to underestimate the entrance dose the first 3-4 mm and the lateral dose by more than 5% up to 8 mm depth. In the patient cases considered, AAA and Monte Carlo show agreement within 3% dose and 4 mm spatial tolerance. PBC systematically underestimates the dose at the breast apex. The dimensions of region out of tolerance vary with the local breast shape. Different interpretations of patient boundaries in Monte Carlo and the Eclipse are found to influence the evaluation. Computer tomography marker wire may introduce local disturbance effects on the comparison as well. These factors are not related to the accuracy of the calculation algorithms and their effect is taken into account in the evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of AAA in the case of the solid water phantom is comparable with that of the Monte Carlo method. The AAA-Monte Carlo differences in the patient cases considered are within 3%, 4 mm tolerance. The PBC algorithm does not give equivalent results. In the phantom case, PBC underestimates the lateral dose by more than 5% up to 8 mm depth. The PBC-Monte Carlo differences in the patient cases are outside the tolerance at the breast apex. The dimension of region varies with the breast shape being typically 8-10 mm long and 6-8 mm deep.