Accuracy Evaluation of Collapsed Cone Convolution and Monte Carlo Dose Calculation Algorithms for Helical Tomotherapy Planning and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Planning in a Thorax Phantom
Keywords:
Collapsed cone convolution, Monte Carlo, Dose calculation algorithms, Tomotherapy, VMATAbstract
The accuracy of the radiation dose delivery to the tumor and organ at risk depends on the radiation dose calculation algorithm. This study evaluated the photon dose calculation accuracy of the Collapsed cone convolution for Helical tomotherapy planning and the Monte Carlo algorithm for the Volumetric modulated arc therapy planning. The computational results of the two algorithms were compared with the radiation dose measurements in a heterogeneity thorax phantom. In the experiment, the Helical tomotherapy plan and the Volumetric modulated arc therapy were planned. The three lesions of lung cancer in the thorax phantom were single lung lesion, multiple lung lesions and single mediastinal lesion. Then a two-step verification was performed. The first step, the points dose were measured with an ionization chambers and the second step the dose distribution were measured with a cylindrical diode array detectors (ArcCHECK). The results of the points dose verification showed that the mean different between measurement and calculation dose of the Collapsed cone convolution algorithm and the Monte Carlo algorithm were 4.14% (-0.25% to -5.63%) and 1.11% (0.87% to -1.81%), respectively, with statistically significant differences. For the verification of the radiation dose distribution at the 3% -3 mm gamma index threshold, it was found that the Collapsed cone algorithm and the Monte Carlo algorithm gamma passing rate were 95.8% and 99.9%, respectively, with no statistically significant difference. The results of this study showed that there was no statistically significant difference of the dose distribution calculation accuracy in a heterogeneity medium between the Monte Carlo algorithm and the Collapsed cone convolution algorithm. However, the points dose calculation of the Monte Carlo algorithm was significantly more accurate than the Collapsed convolution algorithm.
References
Ahnesjo, A. (1989). Collapsed cone convolution of radiant energy for photon dose calculation in heterogeneous media. Medical Physics, 16, 577-592.
Alghamdi, S., & Tajaldeen, A. (2019). Evaluation of dose calculation algorithms using different density materials for in-field and out-of-field conditions. Experimental Oncology, 41, 46–52.
Ardu, V., Broggi, S., Cattaneo, G.M., Mangili, P., & Calandrino, R. (2011). Dosimetric accuracy of tomotherapy dose calculation in thorax lesions. Radiation Oncology, 6:14.
Bunsong, C., Chitapanarux, I., & Wanwilairat, S. (2017). Dosimetry Characteristics and Gamma Passing Rate of ArcCHECK for Helical Tomotherapy Verification. (Masters dissertation). Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai. (In Thai).
International Atomic Energy Agency. (2017). Dosimetry of Small Static Fields Used in External Beam Radiotherapy Technical Reports Series No. 483. Vienna: IAEA in Austria.
International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. (2010). Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Photon-Beam Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT). Journal of the ICRU Report, 83, 10(1).
Juretic, A., Frobe, A., Brozic, J. M., Bilic, L.G., & Koretic, M.B. (2017). Dose Limitations for Radio therapy of Lung Cancer. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 12 (1S), 229-231.
Khaijaitrong, S., Thongsawad, S., Kaewlek, T., Masa-Nga, Y., & Tannanonta, C. (2019). Verification of collapsed cone convolution algorithm for dose calculation by computer - based system in treatment planning. Journal of Medicine and Health Science, 26(3), 15-32.
Kim, Y.L., Suh, T.S., Choe, B.Y., Choi, B.O., Chung, J.B., & Lee, J.W. (2016). Dose distribution evaluation of various dose calculation algorithms in inhomogeneous media. International Journal of Radiation Research, 14(4), 269-278.
Langen, K.M., Papanikolaou, N., Balog, J., Crilly, R., Followill, D., & Goddu, S.M. (2010). QA for Helical Tomotherapy: Report of the AAPM Task Group 148. Med Phys, 37(9), 4817-53.
Lof, V. (2015).The Difference Between a Collapsed Cone Based and a Monte Carlo Based Dose Calculation Algorithm. (Masters dissertation). KTH School of Engineering Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden.
Mackie, T.R., Scrimger, J.W., & Battista, J.J. (1985). A convolution method of calculating dose for 15MV x-ray. Medical Physics, 12, 169-177.
Narayanasamy, G., Saenz, D.L., Defoor, D., Papanikolaou, N., & Stathakis, S. (2017). DosimetricValidationof Monaco treatment planning system on an ElektaVersaHD linear accelerator. Medical Physics, 18(6), 123-129.
National Cancer Institute T. (2015). Hospital-Based Cancer Registry Annual Report. Pornsup Printing Co., LTD. Bangkok, Thailand. (In Thai).
Podgorsak, E.B. (2005). Radiation Oncology Physics: A Handbook for Teachers and Students. IAEA, Vienna.
Reynaert, N., Marck, S., Schaart, D., Zee, W., Tomsej, M., & Vroegindeweij, V.V. (2016). Monte Carlo Treatment Planning: An Introduction Report 16 of the Netherlands Commission on Radiation Dosimetry (NCS), Delft, Netherlands.
Snyder, J.E., Hyer, D.E., Flynn, R.T., Boczkowski, A., & Wang, D. (2019). The commissioning and Validation of Monaco treatment planning system on an ElektaVersaHD linear accelerator. Medical Physics, 20(1), 184-193.
Sterpin, E., Salvat, F., Olivera, G., & Vynckier, S. (2009). Monte Carlo evaluation of theconvolution/superposition algorithm of Hi-Art™ tomotherapy in heterogeneous phantoms and clinical cases. Medical Physics, 36(5), 1566-1575.
Sudloy, N., Tharavichitkul, E., & Wanwilairat, S. (2019). Dosimetry Characteristics and Gamma Passing Rate of ArcCHECK for Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Treatment Planning Verification. Journal of Thai Association of Radiation Oncology, 25(1), 43-57.
Zhao, Y., Mackenzie, M., Kirby, C., & Fallone, B.G. (2008). Monte Carlo evaluation of treatment planning system for tomotherapy in an anthropomorphic heterogeneous phantom and for clinical treatment plans. Medical Physics, 35, 5366-5374.
