首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics >Impact of grid size on uniform scanning and IMPT plans in XiO treatment planning system for brain cancer
【2h】

Impact of grid size on uniform scanning and IMPT plans in XiO treatment planning system for brain cancer

机译:网格大小对XiO脑癌治疗计划系统中均匀扫描和IMPT计划的影响

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The main purposes of this study are to: 1) evaluate the accuracy of XiO treatment planning system (TPS) for different dose calculation grid size based on head phantom measurements in uniform scanning proton therapy (USPT); and 2) compare the dosimetric results for various dose calculation grid sizes based on real computed tomography (CT) dataset of pediatric brain cancer treatment plans generated by USPT and intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) techniques. For phantom study, we have utilized the anthropomorphic head proton phantom provided by Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC). The imaging, treatment planning, and beam delivery were carried out following the guidelines provided by the IROC. The USPT proton plan was generated in the XiO TPS, and dose calculations were performed for grid size ranged from 1 to 3 mm. The phantom containing thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLDs) and films was irradiated using uniform scanning proton beam. The irradiated TLDs were read by the IROC. The calculated doses from the XiO for different grid sizes were compared to the measured TLD doses provided by the IROC. Gamma evaluation was done by comparing calculated planar dose distribution of 3 mm grid size with measured planar dose distribution. Additionally, IMPT plan was generated based on the same CT dataset of the IROC phantom, and IMPT dose calculations were performed for grid size ranged from 1 to 3 mm. For comparative purpose, additional gamma analysis was done by comparing the planar dose distributions of standard grid size (3 mm) with that of other grid sizes (1, 1.5, 2, and 2.5 mm) for both the USPT and IMPT plans. For patient study, USPT plans of three pediatric brain cancer cases were selected. IMPT plans were generated for each of three pediatric cases. All patient treatment plans (USPT and IMPT) were generated in the XiO TPS for a total dose of 54 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE]). Treatment plans (USPT and IMPT) of each case was recalculated for grid sizes of 1, 1.5, 2, and 2.5 mm; these dosimetric results were then compared with that of 3 mm grid size. Phantom study results: There was no distinct trend exhibiting the dependence of grid size on dose calculation accuracy when calculated point dose of different grid sizes were compared to the measured point (TLD) doses. On average, the calculated point dose was higher than the measured dose by 1.49% and 2.63% for the right and left TLDs, respectively. The gamma analysis showed very minimal differences among planar dose distributions of various grid sizes, with percentage of points meeting gamma index criteria 1% and 1 mm to be from 97.92% to 99.97%. The gamma evaluation using 2% and 2 mm criteria showed both the IMPT and USPT plans have 100% points meeting the criteria. Patient study results: In USPT, there was no very distinct relationship between the absolute difference in mean planning target volume (PTV) dose and grid size, whereas in IMPT, it was found that the decrease in grid size slightly increased the PTV maximum dose and decreased the PTV mean dose and PTV D50%. For the PTV doses, the average differences were up to 0.35 Gy (RBE) and 1.47 Gy (RBE) in the USPT and IMPT plans, respectively. Dependency on grid size was not very clear for the organs at risk (OARs), with average difference ranged from −0.61 Gy (RBE) to 0.53 Gy (RBE) in the USPT plans and from −0.83 Gy (RBE) to 1.39 Gy (RBE) in the IMPT plans. In conclusion, the difference in the calculated point dose between the smallest grid size (1 mm) and the largest grid size (3 mm) in phantom for USPT was typically less than 0.1%. Patient study results showed that the decrease in grid size slightly increased the PTV maximum dose in both the USPT and IMPT plans. However, no distinct trend was obtained between the absolute difference in dosimetric parameter and dose calculation grid size for the OARs. Grid size has a large effect on dose calculation efficiency, and use of 2 mm or less grid size can increase the dose calculation time significantly. It is recommended to use grid size either 2.5 or 3 mm for dose calculations of pediatric brain cancer plans generated by USPT and IMPT techniques in XiO TPS.PACS numbers: 87.55.D‐, 87.55.ne, 87.55.dk
机译:这项研究的主要目的是:1)基于统一扫描质子治疗(USPT)中的头部幻像测量,评估XiO治疗计划系统(TPS)对于不同剂量计算网格大小的准确性; 2)根据USPT和强度调制质子治疗(IMPT)技术生成的小儿脑癌治疗计划的真实计算机断层扫描(CT)数据集,比较各种剂量计算网格大小的剂量学结果。对于体模研究,我们利用了成像和放射肿瘤学核心(IROC)提供的拟人化头部质子体模。成像,治疗计划和光束传输均按照IROC提供的指南进行。 USPT质子计划是在XiO TPS中生成的,并对网格大小为1到3 mm的网格进行了剂量计算。使用均匀的扫描质子束辐照包含幻影的热致发光剂量计(TLD)和胶片。 IROC读取了辐照的TLD。将XiO针对不同网格尺寸计算出的剂量与IROC提供的测得的TLD剂量进行比较。通过将计算出的3 mm网格大小的平面剂量分布与测得的平面剂量分布进行比较来进行γ评估。此外,基于IROC体模的相同CT数据集生成IMPT计划,并对网格尺寸为1到3 mm的网格进行IMPT剂量计算。为了进行比较,针对USPT和IMPT计划,通过比较标准网格尺寸(3 mm)的平面剂量分布与其他网格尺寸(1、1.5、2和2.5 mm)的平面剂量分布,进行了额外的伽马分析。为了进行患者研究,选择了3例小儿脑癌病例的USPT计划。针对三个儿科病例中的每一个,均制定了IMPT计划。所有患者治疗计划(USPT和IMPT)均在XiO TPS中生成,总剂量为54 Gy(相对生物学有效性[RBE])。重新计算了每种情况的治疗计划(USPT和IMPT),网格尺寸分别为1、1.5、2和2.5毫米;然后将这些剂量学结果与3 mm网格大小的结果进行比较。幻影研究结果:将不同栅格尺寸的计算点剂量与测量点(TLD)剂量进行比较时,没有明显的趋势显示栅格大小对剂量计算精度的依赖性。平均而言,右侧和左侧TLD的计算点剂量分别比测量剂量高1.49%和2.63%。伽马分析显示各种网格大小的平面剂量分布之间的差异非常小,满足伽马指数标准1%和1 mm的点的百分比为97.92%至99.97%。使用2%和2 mm的标准进行的伽马评估显示IMPT和USPT计划均具有100%的分数满足标准。患者研究结果:在USPT中,平均计划目标体积(PTV)剂量与网格大小之间的绝对差异之间没有非常明显的关系,而在IMPT中,发现网格大小的减小会稍微增加PTV最大剂量和降低了PTV平均剂量和PTV D50%。对于PTV剂量,在USPT和IMPT计划中,平均差异分别高达0.35 Gy(RBE)和1.47 Gy(RBE)。风险器官(OAR)对网格大小的依赖性不是很清楚,在USPT计划中的平均差异范围为-0.61 Gy(RBE)至0.53 Gy(RBE),以及-0.83 Gy(RBE)至1.39 Gy( IMPT计划中的RBE)。总之,对于USPT,幻象中最小网格尺寸(1 mm)和最大网格尺寸(3 mm)之间的计算点剂量差异通常小于0.1%。病人研究结果表明,在USPT和IMPT计划中,网格尺寸的减小都会稍微增加PTV最大剂量。但是,在剂量参数的绝对差异和OAR的剂量计算网格大小之间没有获得明显的趋势。网格尺寸对剂量计算效率有很大影响,使用2 mm或更小的网格尺寸会显着增加剂量计算时间。建议在XiO TPS中使用USPT和IMPT技术生成的小儿脑癌计划的剂量计算使用2.5毫米或3毫米的网格大小.PACS编号:87.55.D-,87.55.ne,87.55.dk

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号