On the conversion from dose-to-medium to dose-to-water in heterogeneous phantoms with Acuros XB and Monte Carlo calculations

Abstract

The method implemented in Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm to convert dose-to-medium (Dm) to dose-to-water (Dw) is usually based on the Bragg-Gray cavity theory. Acuros XB (AXB) reports also Dm and Dw but the method to calculate Dw is based on the energy deposition cross sections for water in place of those for the local media. For both algorithms, the calculation of Dw in non-water media is similar to the dose received in a small volume of water, small enough not to disturb the fluence of charged particles. Recently, two new methods revised the Bragg-Gray cavity theory, one proposed by Andreo and the other by Reynaert et al. In this context, comparisons between AXB and MC were carried out in terms of dose-to-medium () and dose-to-water (), respectively. Multilayer slab heterogeneous phantoms made of lung, bone and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) were investigated and measurements were carried out using radiochromic films. These latter were then compared to and to Dw which would be obtained according to the conversion methods proposed by Andreo and Reynaert et al agreed with for all cases (±1%). In lung, all Dw calculations and film measurements were in agreement. By contrast, and differed notably in bone (4.5%) and PTFE (3.5%), and both algorithms overestimated film measurements. These findings demonstrate that the conversion method is different between AXB and MC. Furthermore, films were not able to give dose in a small volume of water according to the definition of and . Applying either the fluence correction factor suggested by Andreo or the mass energy absorption ratios proposed by Reynaert et al, resulted in a good agreement (<1%) with film measurements. According to the method used for the conversion, different Dw could be obtained which might lead to several issues in clinical context.

Evaluation of novel AI‐based extended field‐of‐view CT reconstructions

“…The phantom (Fig. 4) was printed using PLA (Polylactide-(C3H4O2)n, q % 1.1 g/ cm 3 ) with 27 cm height, 9 cm length, and with 56 cm width which exceeds the sFoV of 50 cm. A fused deposition modeling (FDM) printer was used and settings adjusted (data not shown) until a homogeneity superior to 20 HU (1STD) within a 1 cm 2 area (sFoV) was achieved.…”

“…Radiotherapy treatment plans are based on medical imaging from which CT is the most used technique for both tissue delineation and dose calculation 1,2 . Modern dose calculation algorithms can precisely calculate dose distributions and optimize treatment plans to deliver a highly conformal dose to the patient using material composition and density extracted from CT images as input 3–5 . In addition to dose calculation, CT images are often used for manual and automated tissue delineation, 6 surface tracking during treatment, 7 prediction on portal imaging and treatment verification 8 .…”

“… 1 , 2 Modern dose calculation algorithms can precisely calculate dose distributions and optimize treatment plans to deliver a highly conformal dose to the patient using material composition and density extracted from CT images as input. 3 , 4 , 5 In addition to dose calculation, CT images are often used for manual and automated tissue delineation, 6 surface tracking during treatment, 7 prediction on portal imaging and treatment verification. 8 Therefore, the accuracy of CT reconstruction regarding body contours and accurate Hounsfield unit (HU) can affect several aspects of radiotherapy treatments.…”

Correlation between the γ passing rates of IMRT plans and the volumes of air cavities and bony structures in head and neck cancer

“…Other experiments demonstrated that both algorithms produced acceptable accuracy with respect to the measured data [32][33][34][35]. However, dosimetric measurements introduced several challenges, such as the position of measurement and the particle disequilibrium caused by the inserted material [36].…”

Dosimetric Evaluation of the Treatment Plan on Indigenous Heterogeneous Phantoms using Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm and Acuros-XB Algorithm for Different Photon Energies

“…The AXB estimation is medium sensitive and relies on its composition and characterization; the AXB establishes radiation transport in the medium. On the contrary, the AAA deals with the medium as water of various densities [ 16 , 17 ]. Kumar et al [ 18 ] reported that AXB computation was more accurate compared to AAA in dealing with low-density mediums.…”