Radiobiological evaluation of dose calculation algorithms in RapidArc planning of esophageal cancer treatment plans

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of current study is to investigate the impact of tissue heterogeneity corrections in Acuros XB algorithm (AXB) and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) on RapidArc esophageal cancer treatment plans using equivalent uniform dose (EUD) calculations and tumor control probability (TCP). Methods:Ten esophageal cancer cases were selected for the current study. All cases were planned using RapidArc technique in Eclipse treatment planning system (10.0.28). The treatment plans were inversely optimized using progressive resolution optimizer and each optimized plan was calculated using AAA with tissue heterogeneity correction. The AAA plans were then normalized such that prescription dose covered 95% of the planning target volume (PTV). The AXB plans were generated by recalculating the normalized AAA plans using AXB with tissue heterogeneity correction for identical monitor units and beam parameters as in the corresponding AAA plans. The EUD and TCP calculations were then performed on the AAA and AXB plans.Results: For PTV, the EUD values in AXB plans were always lower than in AAA plans with an average difference of 1.3%. Similarly, AXB calculations produced smaller magnitude of EUD for the organs at risk (OARs) compared to AAA calculations. On average, in AXB plans, the lung EUD was lower by 3.5%, the liver EUD was lower by 2.3%, the heart EUD was lower by 2.8%, and the spinal cord EUD was lower by 1.8%. The TCP of AXB plans was lower by average difference of 7.1% compared to that of AAA plans. Conclusion:In comparison to AAA calculations, the preliminary results presented in the current study showed that AXB calculations produced lower EUD and TCP for the PTV as well as lower EUD for OARs in the esophageal cancer treatment plans created by RapidArc planning technique.

The photon dose calculation algorithm used in breast radiotherapy has significant impact on the parameters of radiobiological models

“…AAA -(PBC-MB) (N = 30) -0.9 a ±0.2 -0.6 a ±0.5 -5.9 a ±5.9 -24.9 a ±7.8 (22) γ 50 = 1.3%/%, (22) and α/β = 4.6 Gy. (20) NTCPs Fibrosis are calculated with D 50 = 62.4 Gy, (25) γ 50 = 1.47%/%, (25) s = 0.12, (25) and α/β = 3 Gy. PBC-MB has known NTCP Fibrosis outcome.…”

Comparison of treatment plans: a retrospective study by the method of radiobiological evaluation

“…The EUD-based calculations were performed by using a freely available MatLab program (The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA, USA), Eudmodel.m [21]. The cumulative DVHs of 120 plans exported from Eclipse along with various radiobiological factors ( Table 2) for different sites were given as input to the above program [23][24][25][26][27].…”

Chemoradiation Compared to Surgery Alone in Patients With Non- Metastatic Esophageal Carcinoma

“…Accurate radiation dose calculation algorithms must apply tissue heterogeneity corrections that account for the electronic disequilibrium effect (caused by lung involvement) near tissue heterogeneity interface (Rana & Rogers, 2013). The present study used 3DCRTH in the CRT group, and used Clarkson radiation dose calculation algorithm that is based on the principle that the scattered component of the depth dose, which depends on the field size and shape, can be calculated separately from the primary component, which is independent of the field size and shape (Khan, 2010).…”

“…The present study used 3DCRTH in the CRT group, and used Clarkson radiation dose calculation algorithm that is based on the principle that the scattered component of the depth dose, which depends on the field size and shape, can be calculated separately from the primary component, which is independent of the field size and shape (Khan, 2010). More accurate algorithms as Acuros XB and anisotropic analytical algorithms were developed for dose predictions when heterogeneous media are involved (Rana & Rogers, 2013;Amankwaa-Frempong et al, 2014). www.ccsenet.org/cco Cancer and Clinical Oncology Vol.…”