scholarly journals Comparison of Different Algorithms in the Radiotherapy Plans of Breast Cancer

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 01048 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yonca Yahşi Çelen ◽  
Atilla Evcin
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Dose Calculation ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Average Dose ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Portal Dosimetry ◽  
Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Dose Calculation Algorithms ◽  
The Mean

It is aimed to evaluate portal dosimetry results of planned breast cancer patients with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (YART) of Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) dose calculation algorithms. The plans of 10 treated patients will receive 6 MV photon energy and a total of 25 fractions of 50 Gray dose using the inverse YART technique, which is reverse planned in the Eclipse (ver.13.6) treatment planning system with Varian Trilogy Linear Accelerator prescribing. For each plan, dose was calculated after optimization using PBC and then AAA algorithms. The quality controls of the plans were made using the Electronic Portal Imaging Device (EPID) by creating individual verification plans for each algorithm. In addition, the maximum and average dose values in the target volume were compared in inverse YART plans calculated using PBC and AAA. When treatment plans generated by AAA and PBC dose calculation algorithms are analyzed using EPID, for the PBC algorithm, the mean values of VArea and VAvg are 98.15 ± 1.07, 0.40 ± 0.048 and 98.72 ± 1.13, 0.37 ± 0.051, respectively, for the AAA algorithm. The PTV Dmax value for the PBC algorithm is 109.3 ± 1.09 and the DAvg value is 101.7 ± 0.51. For the AAA algorithm, the PTV Dmax value is 110.6 ± 1.12 and the DAvg value is 102.9 ± 0.62. When the mean values of portal dosimetry VArea and VAvg evaluated using PBC and AAA algorithms were compared, the differences between the algorithms were not statistically significant (p> 0.05). Differences between the algorithms for PTV Dmax and DAvg values are not statistically significant (p> 0.05).

scholarly journals Dosimetric Accuracy Comparison between ACUROSE XB, AAA and PBC Dose Calculation Algorithms in EclipseTM TPS Using a Heterogeneous Phantom

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arezoo Rooshenas ◽  
Somayeh Gholami ◽  
Mehdi Salehi Barough ◽  
Ehsan Mohammadi
Keyword(s):  
Heterogeneous Media ◽  
Dose Calculation ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Accuracy Comparison ◽  
Dosimetric Accuracy ◽  
Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Calculated Dose ◽  
Dose Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Heterogeneous Tissues

Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of different algorithms in EclipseTM Treatment Planning System (TPS) using a heterogeneous phantom. Materials and Methods: The method is based on the International Atomic Energy Agency's TEC-DOC 1583 report. The chest phantom of CIRS, PTW30010 ionization chamber and an electrometer (PTW, Freiburg) were used for the measurements. Three ACUROSE XB (AXB), Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) and Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) dose calculation algorithms available in Eclipse TM TPS were considered in this study. Results: Based on the measurements, the maximum differences between calculated dose by TPS and measured dose in TEC-DOC 1583 tests were 2.5%, 8.6% and 16.1% for the AXB, AAA and PBC algorithms in heterogeneous media, respectively. Conclusion: The Acuros XB algorithm has superior accuracy to predict the dose distribution in the heterogeneous tissues such as lung compared to AAA and PBC algorithms

Investigation of central electrode artefacts of ionisation chamber effect on dose calculation using advanced calculation algorithms AAA and Acuros XB

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
V. S. Shaiju ◽  
Rajesh Kumar ◽  
K. V. Rajasekhar ◽  
George Zacharia ◽  
Debjani Phani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy ◽  
Dose Calculation ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Central Electrode ◽  
Acuros Xb ◽  
Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Dose Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Ionisation Chamber ◽  
Electrode Artefact

Abstract Aim: To investigate the central electrode artefact effect of different ion chambers in the verification phantom using the dose calculation algorithms Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) and Acuros XB. Materials and methods: The dosimetric study was conducted using an in-house fabricated polymethyl methacrylate head phantom. The treatment planning system (TPS)-calculated doses in the phantom with detectors were compared against the dummy detector fillets using AAA and Acuros XB algorithm. The planned and measured doses were compared for the study. Results: The mean percentage variation in volumetric-modulated arc therapy plans using Acuros XB and the measurement in the head phantom are statistically significant (p-value = 0.001) for FC65 and CC13 chambers. In small volume chambers (A14SL and CC01), the measured and TPS-calculated dose shows a good agreement. Findings: The study confirmed the CT set of the phantom with detectors (FC65 and CC13) give more artefacts/heterogeneity caused a significant variation in dose calculation using Acuros XB. Therefore, the study suggests a method of using phantom CT set with the dummy detector for mean dose calculation for the Acuros XB algorithm.

Comparison of CCC and ETAR dose calculation algorithms in pituitary adenoma radiation treatment planning; Monte Carlo evaluation

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 447-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Tanha ◽  
S. R. Mahdavi ◽  
G. Geraily
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Pituitary Adenoma ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Radiation Treatment ◽  
Dose Calculation ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Dose Calculation Algorithms

AbstractAimsTo verify the accuracy of two common absorbed dose calculation algorithms in comparison to Monte Carlo (MC) simulation for the planning of the pituitary adenoma radiation treatment.Materials and methodsAfter validation of Linac's head modelling by MC in water phantom, it was verified in Rando phantom as a heterogeneous medium for pituitary gland irradiation. Then, equivalent tissue-air ratio (ETAR) and collapsed cone convolution (CCC) algorithms were compared for a conventional three small non-coplanar field technique. This technique uses 30 degree physical wedge and 18 MV photon beams.ResultsDose distribution findings showed significant difference between ETAR and CCC of delivered dose in pituitary irradiation. The differences between MC and dose calculation algorithms were 6.40 ± 3.44% for CCC and 10.36 ± 4.37% for ETAR. None of the algorithms could predict actual dose in air cavity areas in comparison to the MC method.ConclusionsDifference between calculation and true dose value affects radiation treatment outcome and normal tissue complication probability. It is of prime concern to select appropriate treatment planning system according to our clinical situation. It is further emphasised that MC can be the method of choice for clinical dose calculation algorithms verification.

SU-E-T-626: Accuracy of Dose Calculation Algorithms in MultiPlan Treatment Planning System in Presence of Heterogeneities

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (6Part21) ◽  
pp. 372-372
Author(s):  
C Moignier ◽  
C Huet ◽  
V Barraux ◽  
C Loiseau ◽  
K Sebe-Mercier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Dose Calculation ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Dose Calculation Algorithms

Accuracy of dose calculation algorithms in multiplan treatment planning system in presence of heterogeneities

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. e131
Author(s):  
C. Moignier ◽  
C. Huet ◽  
V. Barraux ◽  
C. Loiseau ◽  
K. Sebe-Mercier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Dose Calculation ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Dose Calculation Algorithms
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document