Dose Calculation using Monte Carlo Algorithm of Monaco Treatment Planning System

Li, J.; Doemer, Anthony; Harrison, A; Galvin, James M.; Xiao, Ying

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.06.382

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The resulting dose distributions may be different from those calculated by traditional dose calculation algorithms, especially for tissues of heterogeneity [ 2 – 4 ]. In recent years, MC has been increasingly adopted in clinical application [ 5 – 7 ]. There are a number of reasons for using D w for reporting of MC calculated doses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical evaluation for the difference of absorbed doses calculated to medium and calculated to water by Monte Carlo method

Chen

Huang

et al. 2018

Radiat Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo evaluate the difference of absorbed doses calculated to medium and to water by a Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm based treatment planning system (TPS), and to assess the potential clinical impact to dose prescription.MethodsThirty patients, 10 nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC), 10 lung cancer and 10 bone metastases cases, were selected for this study. For each case, the treatment plan was generated using a commercial MC based TPS and dose was calculated to medium (Dm). The plan was recalculated for dose to water (Dw) using the same Monitor Units (MU) and control points. The differences between Dm and Dw were qualitatively evaluated by dose-volume parameters and by the plan subtraction method. All plans were measured using the MapCheck2, and gamma passing rates were calculated.ResultsFor NPC and Lung cases, the mean differences between Dw and Dm for the targets were less than 2% and the maximum difference was 3.9%. The maximum difference of D2% for the organs at risk (OARs) was 6.7%. The maximum differences between Dw and Dm were as high as 10% in certain high density regions. For bone metastases cases, the mean differences between Dw and Dm for the targets were more than 2.2% and the maximum difference was 7.1%. The differences between Dw and Dm for the OARs were basically negligible. At 3%&3 mm criterion, the gamma passing rate of Dw plan and Dm plan were close (> 94%).ConclusionThe differences between Dw and Dm has little clinical impact for most clinical cases. In bony structures the differences may become clinically significant if the target/OAR is receiving doses close to its tolerance limit which can potentially influence the selection or rejection of a particular plan.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical evaluation for the difference of absorbed doses calculated to medium and calculated to water by Monte Carlo method

Chen

Huang

et al. 2018

Radiat Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The latest developments in computational three-dimensional treatment-planning systems require wide varieties of accurate output factors and relative dose profiles. Especially the calculation accuracy of recent Monte Carlo algorithms for clinical photon and electron beams [5,11,12,20,23] significantly depend on the quality of submitted beam data. Furthermore, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and stereotactic treatment techniques require accurate beam data of small fields with a high spatial resolution, i.e., detectors with significantly lower volumes than standard ionization chambers [1,7,13,19].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Silicon Diodes as an Alternative to Diamond Detectors for Depth Dose Curves and Profile Measurements of Photon and Electron Radiation

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Dose Calculation using Monte Carlo Algorithm of Monaco Treatment Planning System

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Clinical evaluation for the difference of absorbed doses calculated to medium and calculated to water by Monte Carlo method

Clinical evaluation for the difference of absorbed doses calculated to medium and calculated to water by Monte Carlo method

Silicon Diodes as an Alternative to Diamond Detectors for Depth Dose Curves and Profile Measurements of Photon and Electron Radiation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About