Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “histogram”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 559 records · Page 31
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2013

Single-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (sVMAT) as adjuvant treatment for gastric cancer: Dosimetric comparisons with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)

To compare the dosimetric differences between the single-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (sVMAT), 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques in treatment planning for gastric cancer as adjuvant radiotherapy. Twelve patients were retrospectively analyzed. In each patient's case, the parameters were compared based on the dose-volume histogram (DVH) of the sVMAT, 3D-CRT, and IMRT plans, respectively. Three techniques showed similar target dose coverage. The maximum and mean doses of the target were significantly higher in the sVMAT plans than that in 3D-CRT plans and in the 3D-CRT/IMRT plans, respectively, but these differences were clinically acceptable. The IMRT and sVMAT plans successfully achieved better target dose conformity, reduced the V{sub 20/30}, and mean dose of the left kidney, as well as the V{sub 20/30} of the liver, compared with the 3D-CRT plans. And the sVMAT technique reduced the V{sub 20} of the liver much significantly. Although the maximum dose of the spinal cord were much higher in the IMRT and sVMAT plans, respectively (mean 36.4 vs 39.5 and 40.6 Gy), these data were still under the constraints. Not much difference was found in the analysis of the parameters of the right kidney, intestine, and heart. The IMRT and sVMAT plans achieved similar dose distribution to the target, but superior to the 3D-CRT plans, in adjuvant radiotherapy for gastric cancer. The sVMAT technique improved the dose sparings of the left kidney and liver, compared with the 3D-CRT technique, but showed few dosimetric advantages over the IMRT technique. Studies are warranted to evaluate the clinical benefits of the VMAT treatment for patients with gastric cancer after surgery in the future.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2013

Spot-scanning beam proton therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy for ipsilateral head and neck malignancies: A treatment planning comparison

Radiation therapy for head and neck malignancies can have side effects that impede quality of life. Theoretically, proton therapy can reduce treatment-related morbidity by minimizing the dose to critical normal tissues. We evaluated the feasibility of spot-scanning proton therapy for head and neck malignancies and compared dosimetry between those plans and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans. Plans from 5 patients who had undergone IMRT for primary tumors of the head and neck were used for planning proton therapy. Both sets of plans were prepared using computed tomography (CT) scans with the goals of achieving 100% of the prescribed dose to the clinical target volume (CTV) and 95% to the planning TV (PTV) while maximizing conformity to the PTV. Dose-volume histograms were generated and compared, as were conformity indexes (CIs) to the PTVs and mean doses to the organs at risk (OARs). Both modalities in all cases achieved 100% of the dose to the CTV and 95% to the PTV. Mean PTV CIs were comparable (0.371 IMRT, 0.374 protons, p = 0.953). Mean doses were significantly lower in the proton plans to the contralateral submandibular (638.7 cGy IMRT, 4.3 cGy protons, p = 0.002) and parotid (533.3 cGy IMRT, 48.5 cGy protons, p = 0.003) glands; oral cavity (1760.4 cGy IMRT, 458.9 cGy protons, p = 0.003); spinal cord (2112.4 cGy IMRT, 249.2 cGy protons, p = 0.002); and brainstem (1553.52 cGy IMRT, 166.2 cGy protons, p = 0.005). Proton plans also produced lower maximum doses to the spinal cord (3692.1 cGy IMRT, 2014.8 cGy protons, p = 0.034) and brainstem (3412.1 cGy IMRT, 1387.6 cGy protons, p = 0.005). Normal tissue V{sub 10}, V{sub 30}, and V{sub 50} values were also significantly lower in the proton plans. We conclude that spot-scanning proton therapy can significantly reduce the integral dose to head and neck critical structures. Prospective studies are underway to determine if this reduced dose translates to improved quality of life.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2013

Comparison of whole-field simultaneous integrated boost VMAT and IMRT in the treatment of nasopharyngeal cancer

To study the feasibility of using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to deliver whole-field simultaneous integrated boost (WF-SIB) to treat patients with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC). WF-SIB intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans, one-arc WF-SIB VMAT plans, and two-arc WF-SIB VMAT plans were generated with identical objective functions for 8 patients with NPC of various stages. Isodose distributions and dose-volume histograms were evaluated. Dosimetric and biological quality indices of clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk (OARs) were calculated to study the optimization capability of these 3 modalities in the treatment of patients with NPC. The optimization time, delivery time, required monitor units (MUs), and delivery accuracy were also compared to investigate the feasibility of these 3 modalities. There was no significant difference (p = 0.92) in target coverage (TC) between WF-SIB IMRT (99.00 ± 0.79) and two-arc WF-SIB VMAT (97.98 ± 1.29). However, both had higher TC than one-arc VMAT plans (89.92 ± 6.32, p < 0.01). IMRT demonstrated the best protection of the spinal cord, whereas two-arc VMAT showed the minimum D{sub max} to OARs. No other significant differences were observed among these 3 modalities on CTV coverage and OAR sparing. The delivery and MU efficiency of one-arc and two-arc WF-SIB VMAT were greatly improved compared with WF-SIB IMRT. The optimization time of one-arc and two-arc WF-SIB VMAT plans were 5 and 10 times greater than that of WF-SIB IMRT, respectively. The delivery accuracy of WF-SIB VMAT was not affected by the increased freedom. For patients with NPC, one-arc WF-SIB VMAT might not be able to achieve sufficient TC, whereas two-arc WF-SIB VMAT was able to achieve reasonable TC. No significant advantage on OAR protection was demonstrated by VMAT compared with IMRT. WF-SIB VMAT has significantly shorter delivery times, but WF-SIB IMRT may still be the first treatment choice for patients with NPC.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Bilateral implant reconstruction does not affect the quality of postmastectomy radiation therapy

To determine if the presence of bilateral implants, in addition to other anatomic and treatment-related variables, affects coverage of the target volume and dose to the heart and lung in patients receiving postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). A total of 197 consecutive women with breast cancer underwent mastectomy and immediate tissue expander (TE) placement, with or without exchange for a permanent implant (PI) before radiation therapy at our center. PMRT was delivered with 2 tangential beams + supraclavicular lymph node field (50 Gy). Patients were grouped by implant number: 51% unilateral (100) and 49% bilateral (97). The planning target volume (PTV) (defined as implant + chest wall + nodes), heart, and ipsilateral lung were contoured and the following parameters were abstracted from dose-volume histogram (DVH) data: PTV D{sub 95%} > 98%, Lung V{sub 20}Gy > 30%, and Heart V{sub 25}Gy > 5%. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) were performed to determine the association of variables with these parameters. The 2 groups were well balanced for implant type and volume, internal mammary node (IMN) treatment, and laterality. In the entire cohort, 90% had PTV D{sub 95%} > 98%, indicating excellent coverage of the chest wall. Of the patients, 27% had high lung doses (V{sub 20}Gy > 30%) and 16% had high heart doses (V{sub 25}Gy > 5%). No significant factors were associated with suboptimal PTV coverage. On MVA, IMN treatment was found to be highly associated with high lung and heart doses (both p < 0.0001), but implant number was not (p = 0.54). In patients with bilateral implants, IMN treatment was the only predictor of dose to the contralateral implant (p = 0.001). In conclusion, bilateral implants do not compromise coverage of the target volume or increase lung and heart dose in patients receiving PMRT. The most important predictor of high lung and heart doses in patients with implant-based reconstruction, whether unilateral or bilateral, is treatment of the IMNs. Refinement of radiation techniques in reconstructed patients who require comprehensive nodal irradiation is warranted.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2014

Critical dose and toxicity index of organs at risk in radiotherapy: Analyzing the calculated effects of modified dose fractionation in non–small cell lung cancer

To increase the efficacy of radiotherapy for non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), many schemes of dose fractionation were assessed by a new “toxicity index” (I), which allows one to choose the fractionation schedules that produce less toxic treatments. Thirty-two patients affected by non resectable NSCLC were treated by standard 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) with a strategy of limited treated volume. Computed tomography datasets were employed to re plan by simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The dose distributions from plans were used to test various schemes of dose fractionation, in 3DCRT as well as in IMRT, by transforming the dose-volume histogram (DVH) into a biological equivalent DVH (BDVH) and by varying the overall treatment time. The BDVHs were obtained through the toxicity index, which was defined for each of the organs at risk (OAR) by a linear quadratic model keeping an equivalent radiobiological effect on the target volume. The less toxic fractionation consisted in a severe/moderate hyper fractionation for the volume including the primary tumor and lymph nodes, followed by a hypofractionation for the reduced volume of the primary tumor. The 3DCRT and IMRT resulted, respectively, in 4.7% and 4.3% of dose sparing for the spinal cord, without significant changes for the combined-lungs toxicity (p < 0.001). Schedules with reduced overall treatment time (accelerated fractionations) led to a 12.5% dose sparing for the spinal cord (7.5% in IMRT), 8.3% dose sparing for V{sub 20} in the combined lungs (5.5% in IMRT), and also significant dose sparing for all the other OARs (p < 0.001). The toxicity index allows to choose fractionation schedules with reduced toxicity for all the OARs and equivalent radiobiological effect for the tumor in 3DCRT, as well as in IMRT, treatments of NSCLC.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

A study on planning organ at risk volume for the rectum using cone beam computed tomography in the treatment of prostate cancer

In this study, we analyzed planning organ at risk volume (PRV) for the rectum using a series of cone beam computed tomographies (CBCTs) acquired during the treatment of prostate cancer and evaluated the dosimetric effect of different PRV definitions. Overall, 21 patients with prostate cancer were treated radically with 78 Gy in 39 fractions had in total 418 CBCTs, each acquired at the end of the first 5 fractions and then every alternate fraction. The PRV was generated from the Boolean sum volume of the rectum obtained from first 5 fractions (PRV-CBCT-5) and from all CBCTs (PRV-CBCT-All). The PRV margin was compared at the superior, middle, and inferior slices of the contoured rectum to compare PRV-CBCT-5 and PRV-CBCT-All. We also compared the dose received by the planned rectum (Rectum-computed tomography [CT]), PRV-CBCT-5, PRV-CBCT-All, and average rectum (CBCT-AV-dose-volume histogram [DVH]) at critical dose levels. The average measured rectal volume for all 21 patients for Rectum-CT, PRV-CBCT-5, and PRV-CBCT-All was 44.3 ± 15.0, 92.8 ± 40.40, and 121.5 ± 36.7 cm{sup 3}, respectively. For PRV-CBCT-All, the mean ± standard deviation displacement in the anterior, posterior, right, and left lateral directions in centimeters was 2.1 ± 1.1, 0.9 ± 0.5, 0.9 ± 0.8, and 1.1 ± 0.7 for the superior rectum; 0.8 ± 0.5, 1.1 ± 0.5, 1.0 ± 0.5, and 1.0 ± 0.5 for the middle rectum; and 0.3 ± 0.3; 0.9 ± 0.5; 0.4 ± 0.2, and 0.5 ± 0.3 for the inferior rectum, respectively. The first 5 CBCTs did not predict the PRV for individual patients. Our study shows that the PRV margin is different for superior, middle, and the inferior parts of the rectum, it is wider superiorly and narrower inferiorly. A uniform PRV margin does not represent the actual rectal variations during treatment for all treatment fractions. The large variation in interpatient rectal size implies a potential role for adaptive radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2014

Multicriteria optimization informed VMAT planning

We developed a patient-specific volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) optimization procedure using dose-volume histogram (DVH) information from multicriteria optimization (MCO) of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans. The study included 10 patients with prostate cancer undergoing standard fractionation treatment, 10 patients with prostate cancer undergoing hypofractionation treatment, and 5 patients with head/neck cancer. MCO-IMRT plans using 20 and 7 treatment fields were generated for each patient on the RayStation treatment planning system (clinical version 2.5, RaySearch Laboratories, Stockholm, Sweden). The resulting DVH of the 20-field MCO-IMRT plan for each patient was used as the reference DVH, and the extracted point values of the resulting DVH of the MCO-IMRT plan were used as objectives and constraints for VMAT optimization. Weights of objectives or constraints of VMAT optimization or both were further tuned to generate the best match with the reference DVH of the MCO-IMRT plan. The final optimal VMAT plan quality was evaluated by comparison with MCO-IMRT plans based on homogeneity index, conformity number of planning target volume, and organ at risk sparing. The influence of gantry spacing, arc number, and delivery time on VMAT plan quality for different tumor sites was also evaluated. The resulting VMAT plan quality essentially matched the 20-field MCO-IMRT plan but with a shorter delivery time and less monitor units. VMAT plan quality of head/neck cancer cases improved using dual arcs whereas prostate cases did not. VMAT plan quality was improved by fine gantry spacing of 2 for the head/neck cancer cases and the hypofractionation-treated prostate cancer cases but not for the standard fractionation–treated prostate cancer cases. MCO-informed VMAT optimization is a useful and valuable way to generate patient-specific optimal VMAT plans, though modification of the weights of objectives or constraints extracted from resulting DVH of MCO-IMRT or both is necessary.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2014

Correlating planned radiation dose to the cochlea with primary site and tumor stage in patients with head and neck cancer treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy

The aim of the study was to determine tumor characteristics that predict higher planned radiation (RT) dose to the cochlea in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). From 2004 to 2012, 99 patients with HNC underwent definitive IMRT to a median dose of 69.96 Gy in 33 fractions, with the right and left cochlea-vestibular apparatus contoured for IMRT optimization as avoidance structures. If disease involvement was adjacent to the cochlea, preference was given to tumor coverage by prescription dose. Descriptive statistics were calculated for dose-volume histogram planning data, and mean planning dose to the cochlea (from left or right cochlea, receiving the greater amount of RT dose) was correlated to primary site and tumor stage. Mean (standard deviation) cochlear volume was 1.0 (0.60) cm{sup 3} with maximum and mean planned doses of 31.9 (17.5) Gy and 22.1 (13.7) Gy, respectively. Mean planned dose (Gy) to cochlea by tumor site was as follows: oral cavity (18.6, 14.4), oropharynx (21.7, 9.1), nasopharynx (36.3, 10.4), hypopharynx (14.9, 7.1), larynx (2.1, 0.62), others including the parotid gland, temporal bone, and paranasal sinus (33.6, 24.0), and unknown primary (25.6, 6.7). Average mean planned dose (Gy) to the cochlea in T0-T2 and T3-T4 disease was 22.0 and 29.2 Gy, respectively (p = 0.019). By site, a significant difference was noted for nasopharynx and others (31.6 and 50.7, p = 0.012) but not for oropharynx, oral cavity, and hypopharynx. Advanced T category predicted for higher mean cochlear dose, particularly for nasopharyngeal, parotid gland, temporal bone, and paranasal sinus HNC sites.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2014

Bolus-dependent dosimetric effect of positioning errors for tangential scalp radiotherapy with helical tomotherapy

The dosimetric effect of errors in patient position is studied on-phantom as a function of simulated bolus thickness to assess the need for bolus utilization in scalp radiotherapy with tomotherapy. A treatment plan is generated on a cylindrical phantom, mimicking a radiotherapy technique for the scalp utilizing primarily tangential beamlets. A planning target volume with embedded scalplike clinical target volumes (CTVs) is planned to a uniform dose of 200 cGy. Translational errors in phantom position are introduced in 1-mm increments and dose is recomputed from the original sinogram. For each error the maximum dose, minimum dose, clinical target dose homogeneity index (HI), and dose-volume histogram (DVH) are presented for simulated bolus thicknesses from 0 to 10 mm. Baseline HI values for all bolus thicknesses were in the 5.5 to 7.0 range, increasing to a maximum of 18.0 to 30.5 for the largest positioning errors when 0 to 2 mm of bolus is used. Utilizing 5 mm of bolus resulted in a maximum HI value of 9.5 for the largest positioning errors. Using 0 to 2 mm of bolus resulted in minimum and maximum dose values of 85% to 94% and 118% to 125% of the prescription dose, respectively. When using 5 mm of bolus these values were 98.5% and 109.5%. DVHs showed minimal changes in CTV dose coverage when using 5 mm of bolus, even for the largest positioning errors. CTV dose homogeneity becomes increasingly sensitive to errors in patient position as bolus thickness decreases when treating the scalp with primarily tangential beamlets. Performing a radial expansion of the scalp CTV into 5 mm of bolus material minimizes dosimetric sensitivity to errors in patient position as large as 5 mm and is therefore recommended.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2014

Assessing the feasibility of volumetric-modulated arc therapy using simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-VMAT): An analysis for complex head-neck, high-risk prostate and rectal cancer cases

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) allowed the simultaneous delivery of different doses to different target volumes within a single fraction, an approach called simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). As consequence, the fraction dose to the boost volume can be increased while keeping low doses to the elective volumes, and the number of fractions and overall treatment time will be reduced, translating into better radiobiological effectiveness. In recent years, volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has been shown to provide similar plan quality with respect to fixed-field IMRT but with large reduction in treatment time and monitor units (MUs) number. However, the feasibility of VMAT when used with SIB strategy has few investigations to date. We explored the potential of VMAT in a SIB strategy for complex cancer sites. A total of 15 patients were selected, including 5 head-and-neck, 5 high-risk prostate, and 5 rectal cancer cases. Both a double-arc VMAT and a 7-field IMRT plan were generated for each case using Oncentra MasterPlan treatment planning system for an Elekta Precise linac. Dosimetric indexes for targets and organs at risk (OARs) were compared based on dose-volume histograms. Conformity index, homogeneity index, and dose-contrast index were used for target analyses. The equivalent uniform doses and the normal tissue complication probabilities were calculated for main OARs. MUs number and treatment time were analyzed to score treatment efficiency. Pretreatment dosimetry was performed using 2-dimensional (2D)-array dosimeter. SIB-VMAT plans showed a high level of fluence modulation needed for SIB treatments, high conformal dose distribution, similar target coverage, and a tendency to improve OARs sparing compared with the benchmark SIB-IMRT plans. The median treatment times reduced from 13 to 20 minutes to approximately 5 minutes for all cases with SIB-VMAT, with a MUs reduction up to 22.5%. The 2D-array ion-chambers' measurements reported an agreement of more than 95% for a criterion of 3% to 3 mm. SIB-VMAT was able to combine the advantages of conventional SIB-IMRT with its highly conformal dose distribution and OARs sparing and the advantages of 3D-conformal radiotherapy with its fast delivery.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Dosimetric evaluation of MapCHECK 2 and 3DVH in the IMRT delivery quality assurance process

Based on per-field data, 3 dose-volume histogram (DVH) is designed to calculate 3-dimensional (3D) dose using patient-computed tomography (CT) for an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) delivery quality assurance (DQA) process measured with diode detector arrays. In this study, the characteristics and suitability of 3DVH for an IMRT DQA process were evaluated by assessment of clinically applied results. The DQA plans were prepared with a 2D diode detector array (MapCHECK 2) for 20 IMRT patients (10 with head and neck cancer and 10 with prostate cancer), and the matching rate between the calculated dose and the measured dose was analyzed. The relative dose differences between the original IMRT plan and the recalculated plan by 3DVH were evaluated for tumor target and organs at risk (OARs). Confidence limits (CLs) were determined for quantification of the degree of agreement that should be expected in each DQA method. The individual CLs for DQA accuracy of 3D dosimetric evaluation in the tumor target and OARs were also calculated to evaluate the differences compared with conventional 2D-based DQA results. The matching rates were sufficient to validate the accuracy of IMRT DQA analyses and the calculated CL values were reasonable values considering the normal criteria of our institution. The 3DVH analysis generally had better matching rate than per-field measurement analysis and the CL values for OARs were better than those for the planning target volume (PTV). The usefulness of the 3DVH tool was verified for IMRT DQA from the point of view of dose evaluation in the corresponding patient's CT data. It also enables dosimetric evaluation in each important structure (PTV and OARs), which can promote more effective evaluation of DQA error in terms of tumor treatment and side effects.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Dosimetric comparison of 3D conformal, IMRT, and V-MAT techniques for accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI)

The purpose is to dosimetrically compare the following 3 delivery techniques: 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT), and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (V-MAT) in the treatment of accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI). Overall, 16 patients with T1/2N0 breast cancer were treated with 3D-CRT (multiple, noncoplanar photon fields) on the RTOG 0413 partial-breast trial. These cases were subsequently replanned using static gantry IMRT and V-MAT technology to understand dosimetric differences among these 3 techniques. Several dosimetric parameters were used in plan quality evaluation, including dose conformity index (CI) and dose-volume histogram analysis of normal tissue coverage. Quality assurance studies including gamma analysis were performed to compare the measured and calculated dose distributions. The IMRT and V-MAT plans gave more conformal target dose distributions than the 3D-CRT plans (p < 0.05 in CI). The volume of ipsilateral breast receiving 5 and 10 Gy was significantly less using the V-MAT technique than with either 3D-CRT or IMRT (p < 0.05). The maximum lung dose and the ipsilateral lung volume receiving 10 (V{sub 10}) or 20 Gy (V{sub 20}) were significantly less with both V-MAT and IMRT (p < 0.05). The IMRT technique was superior to 3D-CRT and V-MAT of low dose distributions in ipsilateral lung (p < 0.05 in V{sub 5} and D{sub 5}). The total mean monitor units (MUs) for V-MAT (621.0 ± 111.9) were 12.2% less than those for 3D-CRT (707.3 ± 130.9) and 46.5% less than those for IMRT (1161.4 ± 315.6) (p < 0.05). The average machine delivery time was 1.5 ± 0.2 minutes for the V-MAT plans, 7.0 ± 1.6 minutes for the 3D-CRT plans, and 11.5 ± 1.9 minutes for the IMRT plans, demonstrating much less delivery time for V-MAT. Based on this preliminary study, V-MAT and IMRT techniques offer improved dose conformity as compared with 3D-CRT techniques without increasing dose to the ipsilateral lung. In terms of MU and delivery time, V-MAT is significantly more efficient for APBI than for conventional 3D-CRT and static-beam IMRT.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Dosimetric effect of Elekta Beam Modulator micromultileaf in three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer

The purpose of this study is to analyze the dosimetric effect of Elekta Beam Modulator in 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer. We compared treatment plans developed with 2 different Elekta multileaf collimators (MLC): Beam Modulator micro-MLC (mMLC) (4-mm leaf width at the isocenter) and standard MLC (10-mm leaf width at the isocenter). The comparison was performed for 15 patients with localized prostate cancer in 3DCRT and IMRT delivery; a total of 60 treatment plans were processed. The dose-volume histograms were used to provide the quantitative comparison between plans. In particular, we analyzed differences between rectum and bladder sparing in terms of a set of appropriate Vx (percentage of organ at risk [OAR] volume receiving the x dose) and differences between target conformity and coverage in terms of coverage factor and conformation number. Our analysis demonstrates that in 3DCRT there is an advantage in the use of Elekta Beam Modulator mMLC in terms of organ sparing; in particular, a significant decrease in rectal V{sub 60} and V{sub 50} (p = 0.001) and in bladder V{sub 70} and V{sub 65} (p = 0.007 and 0.002, respectively) was found. Moreover, a better target dose conformity was obtained (p = 0.002). IMRT plans comparison demonstrated no significant differences between the use of the 4 or 10-mm MLCs. Our analysis shows that in 3DCRT the use of the Elekta Beam Modulator mMLC gives a gain in target conformity and in OARs dose sparing whereas in IMRT plans there is no advantage.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

A treatment planning approach to spatially fractionated megavoltage grid therapy for bulky lung cancer

The purpose of this study was to explore the treatment planning methods of spatially fractionated megavoltage grid therapy for treating bulky lung tumors using multileaf collimator (MLC). A total of 5 patients with lung cancer who had gross tumor volumes ranging from 277 to 635 cm{sup 3} were retrospectively chosen for this study. The tumors were from 6.5 to 9.6 cm at shortest dimension. Several techniques using either electronic compensation or intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) were used to create a variety of grid therapy plans on the Eclipse treatment planning system. The dose prescription point was calculated to the volume, and a dose of 20 Gy with 6-MV/15-MV beams was used in each plan. The dose-volume histogram (DVH) curves were obtained to evaluate dosimetric characteristics. In addition, DVH curves from a commercially available cerrobend grid collimator were also used for comparison. The linear-quadratic radiobiological response model was used to assess therapeutic ratios (TRs) and equivalent uniform doses (EUD) for all generated plans. A total of 6 different grid therapy plans were created for each patient. Overall, 4 plans had different electronic compensation techniques: Ecomps-Tubes, Ecomps-Circles, Ecomps-Squares, and Ecomps-Weave; the other 2 plans used IMRT and IMRT-Weave techniques. The DVH curves and TRs demonstrated that these MLC-based grid therapy plans can achieve dosimetric properties very similar to those of the cerrobend grid collimator. However, the MLC-based plans have larger EUDs than those with the cerrobend grid collimator. In addition, the field shaping can be performed for targets of any shape in MLC-based plans. Thus, they can deliver a more conformal dose to the targets and spare normal structures better than the cerrobend grid collimator can. The plans generated by the MLC technique demonstrated the advantage over the standard cerrobend grid collimator on accommodating targets and sparing normal structures. Overall, 6 different plans showed 6 different dosimetric parameters. However, an optimal grid therapy plan selection from among these 6 types requires more information from clinical trials and radiobiological studies.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Left-sided breast cancer irradiation using rotational and fixed-field radiotherapy

The 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) technique is the standard for breast cancer radiotherapy. During treatment planning, not only the coverage of the planning target volume (PTV) but also the minimization of the dose to critical structures, such as the lung, heart, and contralateral breast tissue, need to be considered. Because of the complexity and variations of patient anatomy, more advanced radiotherapy techniques are sometimes desired to better meet the planning goals. In this study, we evaluated external-beam radiation treatment techniques for left breast cancer using various delivery platforms: fixed-field including TomoDirect (TD), static intensity-modulated radiotherapy (sIMRT), and rotational radiotherapy including Elekta volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and tomotherapy helical (TH). A total of 10 patients with left-sided breast cancer who did or did not have positive lymph nodes and were previously treated with 3DCRT/sIMRT to the entire breast were selected, their treatment was planned with Monaco VMAT, TD, and TH. Dosimetric parameters including PTV coverage, organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, dose-volume histograms, and target minimum/maximum/mean doses were evaluated. It is found that for plans providing comparable PTV coverage, the Elekta VMAT plans were generally more inhomogeneous than the TH and TD plans. For the cases with regional node involvement, the average mean doses administered to the heart were 9.2 (± 5.2) and 8.8 (± 3.0) Gy in the VMAT and TH plans compared with 11.9 (± 6.4) and 11.8 (± 9.2) Gy for the 3DCRT and TD plans, respectively, with slightly higher doses given to the contralateral lung or breast or both. On average, the total monitor units for VMAT plans are 11.6% of those TH plans. Our studies have shown that VMAT and TH plans offer certain dosimetric advantages over fixed-field IMRT plans for advanced breast cancer requiring regional nodal treatment. However, for early-stage breast cancer fixed-field radiotherapy is potentially more beneficial in terms of OAR sparing.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Initial experience of ArcCHECK and 3DVH software for RapidArc treatment plan verification

The purpose of this study was to perform delivery quality assurance with ArcCHECK and 3DVH system (Sun Nuclear, FL) and to evaluate the suitability of this system for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) (RapidArc [RA]) verification. This software calculates the delivered dose distributions in patients by perturbing the calculated dose using errors detected in fluence or planar dose measurements. The device is tested to correlate the gamma passing rate (%GP) and the composite dose predicted by 3DVH software. A total of 28 patients with prostate cancer who were treated with RA were analyzed. RA treatments were delivered to a diode array phantom (ArcCHECK), which was used to create a planned dose perturbation (PDP) file. The 3DVH analysis used the dose differences derived from comparing the measured dose with the treatment planning system (TPS)-calculated doses to perturb the initial TPS-calculated dose. The 3DVH then overlays the resultant dose on the patient's structures using the resultant “PDP” beams. Measured dose distributions were compared with the calculated ones using the gamma index (GI) method by applying the global (Van Dyk) normalization and acceptance criteria, i.e., 3%/3 mm. Paired differences tests were used to estimate statistical significance of the differences between the composite dose calculated using 3DVH and %GP. Also, statistical correlation by means of logistic regression analysis has been analyzed. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) analysis for patient plans revealed small differences between treatment plan calculations and 3DVH results for organ at risk (OAR), whereas planning target volume (PTV) of the measured plan was systematically higher than that predicted by the TPS. The t-test results between the planned and the estimated DVH values showed that mean values were incomparable (p < 0.05). The quality assurance (QA) gamma analysis 3%/3 mm showed that in all cases there were only weak-to-moderate correlations (Pearson r: 0.12 to 0.74). Moreover, clinically relevant differences increased with increasing QA passing rate, indicating that some of the largest dose differences occurred in the cases of high QA passing rates, which may be called “false negatives.” The clinical importance of any disagreement between the measured and the calculated dose is often difficult to interpret; however, beam errors (either in delivery or in TPS calculation) can affect the effectiveness of the patient dose. Further research is needed to determinate the role of a PDP-type algorithm to accurately estimate patient dose effect.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Dosimetric comparison of IMRT rectal and anal canal plans generated using an anterior dose avoidance structure

To describe a dosimetric method using an anterior dose avoidance structure (ADAS) during the treatment planning process for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for patients with anal canal and rectal carcinomas. A total of 20 patients were planned on the Elekta/CMS XiO treatment planning system, version 4.5.1 (Maryland Heights MO) with a superposition algorithm. For each patient, 2 plans were created: one employing an ADAS (ADAS plan) and the other replanned without an ADAS (non-ADAS plan). The ADAS was defined to occupy the volume between the inguinal nodes and primary target providing a single organ at risk that is completely outside of the target volume. Each plan used the same beam parameters and was analyzed by comparing target coverage, overall plan dose conformity using a conformity number (CN) equation, bowel dose-volume histograms, and the number of segments, daily treatment duration, and global maximum dose. The ADAS and non-ADAS plans were equivalent in target coverage, mean global maximum dose, and sparing of small bowel in low-dose regions (5, 10, 15, and 20 Gy). The mean difference between the CN value for the non-ADAS plans and ADAS plans was 0.04 ± 0.03 (p < 0.001). The mean difference in the number of segments was 15.7 ± 12.7 (p < 0.001) in favor of ADAS plans. The ADAS plan delivery time was shorter by 2.0 ± 1.5 minutes (p < 0.001) than the non-ADAS one. The ADAS has proven to be a powerful tool when planning rectal and anal canal IMRT cases with critical structures partially contained inside the target volume.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Radiobiologic comparison of helical tomotherapy, intensity modulated radiotherapy, and conformal radiotherapy in treating lung cancer accounting for secondary malignancy risks

The aim of the present study is to examine the importance of using measures to predict the risk of inducing secondary malignancies in association with the clinical effectiveness of treatment plans in terms of tumor control and normal tissue complication probabilities. This is achieved by using radiobiologic parameters and measures, which may provide a closer association between clinical outcome and treatment delivery. Overall, 4 patients having been treated for lung cancer were examined. For each of them, 3 treatment plans were developed based on the helical tomotherapy (HT), multileaf collimator-based intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (CRT) modalities. The different plans were evaluated using the complication-free tumor control probability (p{sub +}), the overall probability of injury (p{sub I}), the overall probability of control/benefit (p{sub B}), and the biologically effective uniform dose (D{sup ¯¯}). These radiobiologic measures were used to develop dose-response curves (p-D{sup ¯¯} diagram), which can help to evaluate different treatment plans when used in conjunction with standard dosimetric criteria. The risks for secondary malignancies in the heart and the contralateral lung were calculated for the 3 radiation modalities based on the corresponding dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of each patient. Regarding the overall evaluation of the different radiation modalities based on the p{sub +} index, the average values of the HT, IMRT, and CRT are 67.3%, 61.2%, and 68.2%, respectively. The corresponding average values of p{sub B} are 75.6%, 70.5%, and 71.0%, respectively, whereas the average values of p{sub I} are 8.3%, 9.3%, and 2.8%, respectively. Among the organs at risk (OARs), lungs show the highest probabilities for complications, which are 7.1%, 8.0%, and 1.3% for the HT, IMRT, and CRT modalities, respectively. Similarly, the biologically effective prescription doses (D{sub B}{sup ¯¯}) for the HT, IMRT, and CRT modalities are 64.0, 60.9, and 60.8 Gy, respectively. Regarding the risk for secondary cancer, for the heart, the lowest average risk is produced by IMRT (0.10%) compared with the HT (0.17%) and CRT (0.12%) modalities, whereas the 3 radiation modalities show almost equivalent results regarding the contralateral lung (0.8% for HT, 0.9% for IMRT, and 0.9% for CRT). The use of radiobiologic parameters in the evaluation of different treatment plans and estimation of their expected clinical outcome is shown to provide very useful clinical information. The radiobiologic analysis of the response probabilities showed that different radiation modalities appear to be more effective in different patient geometries and target sizes and locations. Furthermore, there is not a clear pattern between the plans that appear to be more effective for the treatment and the risk of secondary malignancy. It seems that radiobiologically based treatment planning taking into account the risk of secondary cancer can be established as an effective clinical tool for a more clinically relevant treatment optimization.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗