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 577 records · Page 32
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2015

Tumor control probability and the utility of 4D vs 3D dose calculations for stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer

Four-dimensional (4D) dose calculations for lung cancer radiotherapy have been technically feasible for a number of years but have not become standard clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to determine if clinically significant differences in tumor control probability (TCP) exist between 3D and 4D dose calculations so as to inform the decision whether 4D dose calculations should be used routinely for treatment planning. Radiotherapy plans for Stage I-II lung cancer were created for 8 patients. Clinically acceptable treatment plans were created with dose calculated on the end-exhale 4D computed tomography (CT) phase using a Monte Carlo algorithm. Dose was then projected onto the remaining 9 phases of 4D-CT using the Monte Carlo algorithm and accumulated onto the end-exhale phase using commercially available deformable registration software. The resulting dose-volume histograms (DVH) of the gross tumor volume (GTV), planning tumor volume (PTV), and PTV{sub setup} were compared according to target coverage and dose. The PTV{sub setup} was defined as a volume including the GTV and a margin for setup uncertainties but not for respiratory motion. TCPs resulting from these DVHs were estimated using a wide range of alphas, betas, and tumor cell densities. Differences of up to 5 Gy were observed between 3D and 4D calculations for a PTV with highly irregular shape. When the TCP was calculated using the resulting DVHs for fractionation schedules typically used in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), the TCP differed at most by 5% between 4D and 3D cases, and in most cases, it was by less than 1%. We conclude that 4D dose calculations are not necessary for most cases treated with SBRT, but they might be valuable for irregularly shaped target volumes. If 4D calculations are used, 4D DVHs should be evaluated on volumes that include margin for setup uncertainty but not respiratory motion.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2015

Evaluations of secondary cancer risk in spine radiotherapy using 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT: A phantom study

This study evaluated the secondary cancer risk from volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for spine radiotherapy compared with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Computed tomography images of an Radiological Physics Center spine anthropomorphic phantom were exported to a treatment planning system (Pinnacle{sup 3}, version 9.4). Radiation treatment plans for spine were prepared using VMAT (dual-arc), 7-field IMRT (beam angles: 110°, 130°, 150°, 180°, 210°, 230°, and 250°), and 4-field 3DCRT technique. The mean and maximum doses, dose-volume histograms, and volumes receiving more than 2 and 4 Gy to organs at risk (OARs) were calculated and compared. The lifetime risk for secondary cancers was estimated according to the National Cancer Registry Programme Report 116. VMAT delivered the lowest maximum dose to the esophagus (4.03 Gy), bone (8.11 Gy), heart (2.11 Gy), spinal cord (6.45 Gy), and whole lung (5.66 Gy) as compared with other techniques (IMRT and 3DCRT). The volumes of OAR (esophagus) receiving more than 4 Gy were 0% for VMAT, 27.06% for IMRT, and up to 32.35% for 3DCRT. The estimated risk for secondary cancer in the respective OAR is considerably lower in VMAT compared with other techniques. The results of maximum doses and volumes of OARs suggest that the risk of secondary cancer induction for the spine in VMAT is lower than IMRT and 3DCRT, whereas VMAT has the best target coverage compared with the other techniques.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Patient performance–based plan parameter optimization for prostate cancer in tomotherapy

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of treatment-planning parameters on the quality of treatment plans in tomotherapy and to find the optimized planning parameter combinations when treating patients with prostate cancer under different performances. A total of 3 patients with prostate cancer with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or 3 were included in this study. For each patient, 27 treatment plans were created using a combination of planning parameters (field width of 1, 2.5, and 5 cm; pitch of 0.172, 0.287, and 0.43; and modulation factor of 1.8, 3, and 3.5). Then, plans were analyzed using several dosimetrical indices: the prescription isodose to target volume (PITV) ratio, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), target coverage index (TCI), modified dose HI (MHI), conformity number (CN), and quality factor (QF). Furthermore, dose-volume histogram of critical structures and critical organ scoring index (COSI) were used to analyze organs at risk (OAR) sparing. Interestingly, treatment plans with a field width of 1 cm showed more favorable results than others in the planning target volume (PTV) and OAR indices. However, the treatment time of the 1-cm field width was 3 times longer than that of plans with a field width of 5 cm. There was no substantial decrease in treatment time when the pitch was increased from 0.172 to 0.43, but the PTV indices were slightly compromised. As expected, field width had the most significant influence on all of the indices including PTV, OAR, and treatment time. For the patients with good performance who can tolerate a longer treatment time, we suggest a field width of 1 cm, pitch of 0.172, and modulation factor of 1.8; for the patients with poor performance status, field width of 5 cm, pitch of 0.287, and a modulation factor of 3.5 should be considered.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Comparison of doses received by the hippocampus in patients treated with single isocenter– vs multiple isocenter–based stereotactic radiation therapy to the brain for multiple brain metastases

To investigate the doses received by the hippocampus and normal brain tissue during a course of stereotactic radiation therapy using a single isocenter (SI)–based or multiple isocenter (MI)–based treatment planning in patients with less than 4 brain metastases. In total, 10 patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrating 2-3 brain metastases were included in this retrospective study, and 2 sets of stereotactic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plans (SI vs MI) were generated. The hippocampus was contoured on SPGR sequences, and doses received by the hippocampus and the brain were calculated and compared between the 2 treatment techniques. A total of 23 lesions in 10 patients were evaluated. The median tumor volume, the right hippocampus volume, and the left hippocampus volume were 3.15, 3.24, and 2.63 mL, respectively. In comparing the 2 treatment plans, there was no difference in the planning target volume (PTV) coverage except in the tail for the dose-volume histogram (DVH) curve. The only statistically significant dosimetric parameter was the V{sub 100}. All of the other measured dosimetric parameters including the V{sub 95}, V{sub 99}, and D{sub 100} were not significantly different between the 2 treatment planning techniques. None of the dosimetric parameters evaluated for the hippocampus revealed any statistically significant difference between the MI and SI plans. The total brain doses were slightly higher in the SI plans, especially in the lower dose region, although this difference was not statistically different. The use of SI-based treatment plan resulted in a 35% reduction in beam-on time. The use of SI treatments for patients with up to 3 brain metastases produces similar PTV coverage and similar normal tissue doses to the hippocampus and the brain when compared with MI plans. SI treatment planning should be considered in patients with multiple brain metastases undergoing stereotactic treatment.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Clinical and dosimetric implications of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for early-stage glottic carcinoma

Conventional parallel-opposed radiotherapy (PORT) is the established standard technique for early-stage glottic carcinoma. However, case reports have reported the utility of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with or without image guidance (image-guided radiotherapy, IGRT) in select patients. The proposed advantages of IMRT/VMAT include sparing of the carotid artery, thyroid gland, and the remaining functional larynx, although these benefits remain unclear. The following case study presents a patient with multiple vascular comorbidities treated with VMAT for early-stage glottic carcinoma. A detailed explanation of the corresponding treatment details, dose-volume histogram (DVH) analysis, and a review of the relevant literature are provided. Conventional PORT remains the standard of care for early-stage glottic carcinoma. IMRT or VMAT may be beneficial for select patients, although great care is necessary to avoid a geographical miss. Clinical data supporting the benefit of CRT are lacking. Therefore, these techniques should be used with caution and only in selected patients.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Using individual patient anatomy to predict protocol compliance for prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy

If a prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan has protocol violations, it is often a challenge knowing whether this is due to unfavorable anatomy or suboptimal planning. This study aimed to create a model to predict protocol violations based on patient anatomical variables and their potential relationship to target and organ at risk (OAR) end points in the setting of definitive, dose-escalated IMRT/VMAT prostate planning. Radiotherapy plans from 200 consecutive patients treated with definitive radiation for prostate cancer using IMRT or VMAT were analyzed. The first 100 patient plans (hypothesis-generating cohort) were examined to identify anatomical variables that predict for dosimetric outcome, in particular OAR end points. Variables that scored significance were further assessed for their ability to predict protocol violations using a Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis. These results were then validated in a second group of 100 patients (validation cohort). In the initial analysis of the hypothesis-generating cohort, percentage of rectum overlap in the planning target volume (PTV) (%OR) and percentage of bladder overlap in the PTV (%OB) were highlighted as significant predictors of rectal and bladder dosimetry. Lymph node treatment was also significant for bladder outcomes. For the validation cohort, CART analysis showed that %OR of < 6%, 6% to 9% and > 9% predicted a 13%, 63%, and 100% rate of rectal protocol violations respectively. For the bladder, %OB of < 9% vs > 9% is associated with 13% vs 88% rate of bladder constraint violations when lymph nodes were not treated. If nodal irradiation was delivered, plans with a %OB of < 9% had a 59% risk of violations. Percentage of rectum and bladder within the PTV can be used to identify individual plan potential to achieve dose-volume histogram (DVH) constraints. A model based on these factors could be used to reduce planning time, improve work flow, and strengthen plan quality and consistency.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Pancreatic cancer planning: Complex conformal vs modulated therapies

To compare the roles of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric- modulated arc therapy (VMAT) therapy as compared to simple and complex 3-dimensional chemoradiotherpy (3DCRT) planning for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. In all, 12 patients who received postoperative radiotherapy (8) or neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (4) were evaluated retrospectively. Radiotherapy planning was performed for 4 treatment techniques: simple 4-field box, complex 5-field 3DCRT, 5 to 6-field IMRT, and single-arc VMAT. All volumes were approved by a single observer in accordance with Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) Pancreas Contouring Atlas. Plans included tumor/tumor bed and regional lymph nodes to 45 Gy; with tumor/tumor bed boosted to 50.4 Gy, at least 95% of planning target volume (PTV) received the prescription dose. Dose-volume histograms (DVH) for multiple end points, treatment planning, and delivery time were assessed. Complex 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT plans significantly (p < 0.05) decreased mean kidney dose, mean liver dose, liver (V{sub 30}, V{sub 35}), stomach (D{sub 10}%), stomach (V{sub 45}), mean right kidney dose, and right kidney (V{sub 15}) as compared with the simple 4-field plans that are most commonly reported in the literature. IMRT plans resulted in decreased mean liver dose, liver (V{sub 35}), and left kidney (V{sub 15}, V{sub 18}, V{sub 20}). VMAT plans decreased small bowel (D{sub 10}%, D{sub 15}%), small bowel (V{sub 35}, V{sub 45}), stomach (D{sub 10}%, D{sub 15}%), stomach (V{sub 35}, V{sub 45}), mean liver dose, liver (V{sub 35}), left kidney (V{sub 15}, V{sub 18}, V{sub 20}), and right kidney (V{sub 18}, V{sub 20}). VMAT plans significantly decreased small bowel (D{sub 10}%, D{sub 15}%), left kidney (V{sub 20}), and stomach (V{sub 45}) as compared with IMRT plans. Treatment planning and delivery times were most efficient for simple 4-field box and VMAT. Excluding patient setup and imaging, average treatment delivery was within 10 minutes for simple and complex 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT treatments. This article shows significant improvements in 3D plan performance with complex planning over the more frequently compared 3- or 4-field simple 3D planning techniques. VMAT plans continue to demonstrate potential for the most organ sparing. However, further studies are required to identify if dosimetric benefits associated with inverse optimized planning can be translated into clinical benefits and if these treatment techniques are value-added therapies for this group of patients with cancer.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Technical solutions to reduce mediastinal irradiation in young patients undergoing treatment for lymphomas: Preliminary experience

This study aims at optimizing treatment planning in young patients affected by lymphoma (Stage II to III) by using an inclined board (IB) that allows reducing doses to the organs at risk. We evaluated 19 young patients affected by stage I to III lymphomas, referred to our Department for consolidation radiotherapy (RT) treatment on the mediastinum. Patients underwent 2 planning computed tomography (CT) scans performed in different positions: flat standard position and inclined position. A direct comparison between the different treatment plans was carried out analyzing dosimetric parameters obtained from dose-volume histograms generated for each plan. Comparison was performed to evaluate the sparing obtained on breast and heart. Dosimetric evaluation was performed for the following organs at risk (OARs): mammary glands, lungs, and heart. A statistically significant advantage was reported for V{sub 5}, V{sub 20}, and V{sub 30} for the breast when using the inclined board. A similar result was obtained for V{sub 5} and V{sub 10} on the heart. No advantage was observed in lung doses. The use of a simple device, such as an inclined board, allows the optimization of treatment plan, especially in young female patients, by ensuring a significant reduction of the dose delivered to breast and heart.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

The comparison of 5-field conformal radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of prostate cancer: The best for femoral head sparing

External radiotherapy is a standard treatment procedure for localized prostate cancer. Given the relatively high long term survival treatment complications have been brought in center of attention. In this planning study, between 2012 and 2014, CT simulation data of 90 consecutive high-risk prostate cancer patients were collected. In the first phase, all were planned for whole pelvis irradiation up to 46Gy in 23 daily fractions. In the second phase, only the prostate gland was the target of radiation. Next, the subjects were divided randomly into three groups and each received a unique 5field conformal radiation plan including Plan A (Gantry angle: 0, 60, 120, 240, and 300), Plan B (Gantry angles: 0, 90, 120, 240, and 270) and Plan C (Gantry angles: 0, 60, 90, 270, and 300). The total dose was 70Gy. For each patient, the rectum, bladder, and both femoral heads were contoured as the at risk organs (OAR). From dose volume histograms, the proportional dose of PTV V100, the bladder and rectum V80 and V90 and femoral head V50 and V100 were calculated in all subjects and compared across plans. A statistically significant difference in the femoral head V50 and V100 was found between our studied 5field plans so that in Plan A (beam angles: 0, 60, 120, 240 and 300) less dose was received by both heads of femur. This study suggests that 5 field treatment planning including an anterior, two anterior oblique and two posterior oblique portals to be more proper for 3D conformal radiotherapy in order to spare femoral head with acceptable PTV coverage, and bladder and rectal doses.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Neurovascular bundle–sparing radiotherapy for prostate cancer using MRI-CT registration: A dosimetric feasibility study

Purpose: Sexual dysfunction after radiotherapy for prostate cancer remains an important late adverse toxicity. The neurovascular bundles (NVB) that lie posterolaterally to the prostate are typically spared during prostatectomy, but in traditional radiotherapy planning they are not contoured as an organ-at-risk with dose constraints. Our goal was to determine the dosimetric feasibility of “NVB-sparing” prostate radiotherapy while still delivering adequate dose to the prostate. Methods: Twenty-five consecutive patients with prostate cancer (with no extraprostatic disease on pelvic magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) who that were treated with external beam radiotherapy, with the same primary planning target volume margins, to a dose of 79.2 Gy were evaluated. Pelvic MRI and simulation computed tomography scans were registered using dedicated software to allow for bilateral NVB target delineation on T2-weighted MRI. A volumetric modulated arc therapy plan was generated using the NVB bilaterally with 2 mm margin as an organ to spare and compared to the patient’s previously delivered plan. Dose-volume histogram endpoints for NVB, rectum, bladder, and planning target volume 79.2 were compared between the 2 plans using a 2-tailed paired t-test. Results: The V70 for the NVB was significantly lower on the NVB-sparing plan (p <0.01), while rectum and bladder endpoints were similar. Target V100% was similar but V{sub 105%} was higher for the NVB-sparing plans (p <0.01). Conclusions: “NVB-sparing” radiotherapy is dosimetrically feasible using CT-MRI registration, and for volumetric modulated arc therapy technology — target coverage is acceptable without increased dose to other normal structures, but with higher target dose inhomogeneity. The clinical impact of “NVB-sparing” radiotherapy is currently under study at our institution.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Pencil beam scanning proton therapy vs rotational arc radiation therapy: A treatment planning comparison for postoperative oropharyngeal cancer

Patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer are traditionally treated with photon radiotherapy. Proton therapy is currently being used clinically and may potentially reduce treatment-related toxicities by minimizing the dose to normal organs in the treatment of postoperative oropharyngeal cancer. The finite range of protons has the potential to significantly reduce normal tissue toxicity compared to photon radiotherapy. Seven patients were planned with both proton and photon modalities. The planning goal for both modalities was achieving the prescribed dose to 95% of the planning target volume (PTV). Dose-volume histograms were compared in which all cases met the target coverage goals. Mean doses were significantly lower in the proton plans for the oral cavity (1771 cGy photon vs 293 cGy proton, p < 0.001), contralateral parotid (1796 cGy photon vs 1358 proton, p < 0.001), and the contralateral submandibular gland (3608 cGy photon vs 3251 cGy proton, p = 0.03). Average total integral dose was 9.1% lower in proton plans. The significant dosimetric sparing seen with proton therapy may lead to reduced side effects such as pain, weight loss, taste changes, and dry mouth. Prospective comparisons of protons vs photons for disease control, toxicity, and patient-reported outcomes are therefore warranted and currently being pursued.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Dosimetric comparison of single-beam multi-arc and 2-beam multi-arc VMAT optimization in the Monaco treatment planning system

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric and practical effects of the Monaco treatment planning system “max arcs-per-beam” optimization parameter in pelvic radiotherapy treatments. We selected for this study a total of 17 previously treated patients with a range of pelvic disease sites including prostate (9), bladder (1), uterus (3), rectum (3), and cervix (1). For each patient, 2 plans were generated, one using an arc-per-beam setting of “1” and another with an arc-per-beam setting of “2” using the volumes and constraints established from the initial clinical treatments. All constraints and dose coverage objects were kept the same between plans, and all plans were normalized to 99.7% to ensure 100% of the planning target volume (PTV) received 95% of the prescription dose. Plans were evaluated for PTV conformity, homogeneity, number of monitor units, number of control points, and overall plan acceptability. Treatment delivery time, patient-specific quality assurance procedures, and the impact on clinical workflow were also assessed. We found that for complex-shaped target volumes (small central volumes with extending arms to cover nodal regions), the use of 2 arc-per-beam (2APB) parameter setting achieved significantly lower average dose-volume histogram values for the rectum V{sub 20} (p = 0.0012) and bladder V{sub 30} (p = 0.0036) while meeting the high dose target constraints. For simple PTV shapes, we found reduced monitor units (13.47%, p = 0.0009) and control points (8.77%, p = 0.0004) using 2APB planning. In addition, we found a beam delivery time reduction of approximately 25%. In summary, the dosimetric benefit, although moderate, was improved over a 1APB setting for complex PTV, and equivalent in other cases. The overall reduced delivery time suggests that the use of mulitple arcs per beam could lead to reduced patient-on-table time, increased clinical throughput, and reduced medical physics quality assurance effort.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Evaluation of deformed image-based dose calculations for adaptive radiotherapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma

The ultimate goal of adaptive radiotherapy (ART) is to deliver truly customized radiation treatments. Currently, the quality of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images is still inferior to that of conventional CT images in contour delineations and dose calculations for replanning purposes. This retrospective study aims to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of using deformed conventional CT images for dose calculations, in the hope of inferring the feasibility of ART using planning CT (PCT) images that deformed to up-to-date CBCT images for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Thirty consecutive patients with NPC who had undergone 1 replan in their radiotherapy treatments were selected. The pretreatment PCT images were deformed to match the mid-treatment PCT images by deformable image registration. The same volumetric modulated arc therapy plan was then calculated on the deformed PCT images. The resulting dose distributions and dose volume histograms of the tumors and organs at risk (OARs) were compared with the original plan. Five dose levels, D{sub 98%}, D{sub 95%}, D{sub 50%}, D{sub 5%}, and D{sub 2%}, were recorded for 9 NPC targets. Four dose levels, D{sub max}, D{sub 10%}, D{sub 50%}, and D{sub mean}, were recorded for 15 OARs. The greatest percentage difference in observed dose for D{sub 98%}, D{sub 95%}, D{sub 50%}, D{sub 5%}, and D{sub 2%} of the targets were 1.71%, 1.55%, 0.64%, 0.97%, and 1.13%, respectively. The greatest percentage difference in observed dose for D{sub max}, D{sub 10%}, D{sub 50%}, and D{sub mean} of the OARs were -26.51% (left optic nerve), -17.06% (left optic nerve), 56.70% (spinal cord), and 18.97% (spinal cord), respectively. In addition, 29 of 45 (64%) dosimetric end points of the targets showed statistically significant dose differences (p p < 0.05). Dose calculations using deformed PCT images could result in significant dose uncertainties in target volumes and OARs. Larger dose deviations were found in OARs in comparison with target volumes. The spinal cord and optic nerve showed the greatest percentage dose differences and the clinical significance has yet to be determined. Deformable registration error was believed to be the problem causing the dose deviations. Owing to unknown clinical significanceof dose deviation results obtained from this study, a conventional CT scan is still required for replanning in patients with NPC who are experiencing significant anatomical changes during the course of radiation treatment.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2017

Dosimetric benefits of automation in the treatment of lower thoracic esophageal cancer: Is manual planning still an alternative option?

This study aimed to design automated volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans in Pinnacle auto-planning and compare it with manual plans for patients with lower thoracic esophageal cancer (EC). Thirty patients with lower thoracic EC were randomly selected for replanning VMAT plans using auto-planning in Pinnacle treatment planning system (TPS) version 9.10. Historical plans of these patients were then compared. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) statistics, dose uniformity, and dose homogeneity were analyzed to evaluate treatment plans. Auto-planning was superior in terms of conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) for planning target volume (PTV), significantly improving 8.2% (p = 0.013) and 25% (p = 0.007) compared with manual planning, respectively, and decreasing dose of heart and liver irradiated by 20 to 40 Gy and 5 to 30 Gy, respectively (p max ) of spinal cord by 6.9 Gy compared with manual planning (p = 0.000). Additionally, manual planning showed the significantly lower low-dose volume (V{sub 5}) for the lung (p = 0.005). For auto-planning, the V{sub 5} of the lung was significantly associated with the relative volume index (the volume ratio of PTV to the lung), and the correlation coefficient (R) and p-value were 0.994 and 0.000. Pinnacle auto-planning achieved superior target conformity and homogeneity and similar target coverage compared with historical manual planning. Most of organs at risk (OARs) sparing was significantly improved by auto-planning except for the V{sub 5} of the lung, and the low dose distribution was highly associated with PTV volume and lung volume in auto-planning.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Importance of deformable image registration and biological dose summation in planning of radiotherapy retreatments

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of nonrigid and fractionation-corrected dose summation on total doses in radiotherapy and to demonstrate the benefits of such dose summation on clinical decision-making for planning of retreatments. Dose summation of organs at risk (OARs) was investigated for 3 clinical cases with need of retreatment to the same site: head and neck, brain, and mediastinum. Three different summation methods over old and new radiotherapy treatment plans are presented and compared: (1) rigid raw sum with rigid registration of the planning images and direct dose summing; (2) deformable raw sum with deformable image registration and direct dose summing; and (3) deformable biological sum with deformable registration and takes into account the dose per fraction in biological manner in certain critical organs. In 2 cases, a user-defined dose downscaling is applied to take into account the time between the treatments and the healing from the radiation-induced effects. Of the 3 summation methods presented, the deformable biological sum was considered to offer the most biologically plausible account of the treatment. There were remarkable differences between near-maximum doses (D0.1cc) and dose-volume histogram (DVH) curves for OARs between different summation methods. The differences between deformable raw sum and rigid raw sum D0.1cc doses are in the range from −8 Gy to 2 Gy. Similarly, the deviation was from −14 Gy to 5 Gy for the deformable biological sum compared with the rigid raw sum. These differences come from incorrect summation of doses in the rigid raw sum case, and from the dose per fraction effect in biological summation. We conclude that computing the 3-dimensional deformable biological summation could be a valuable tool for treating patients with complex retreatments. It has the potential to assist the oncologist in refining plans for maximally curative doses while respecting appropriate tissue tolerances.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2018

Clinical analysis of the approximate, 3-dimensional, biological effective dose equation in multiphase treatment plans

A multiphase, approximate biological effective dose (BED{sub A}) equation was introduced because most treatment planning systems (TPS) are incapable of calculating the true BED (BED{sub T}). This work investigates the accuracy and precision of the multiphase BED{sub A} relative to the BED{sub T} in clinical cases. Ten patients with head and neck cancer and 10 patients with prostate cancer were studied using their treatment plans from Pinnacle{sup 3} 9.2 (Philips Medical, Fitchburg, WI). The organs at risk (OARs) that were studied are the normal brain, left and right optic nerves, optic chiasm, spinal cord, brainstem, bladder, and rectum. BED{sub A} and BED{sub T} distributions were calculated using MATLAB 2010b (MathWorks, Natick, MA) and analyzed on a voxel basis for percent error, percent error volume histograms (PEVHs), Pearson correlation coefficient, and Bland-Altman analysis. The maximum BED values that were calculated using the BED{sub A} and BED{sub T} methods were also analyzed. BED{sub A} was found to always underestimate BED{sub T}. The accuracy and precision of BED{sub A} distributions varied between the organs: for optic chiasm and brainstem, 50% of the patients had an overall BED{sub A} percent error of A percent error of A percent error of A distributions had maximum errors ranging from 2% to 11%, with the 11% error occurring for bladder. BED{sub A} produced much more accurate maximum BED values with adjacent organs such as normal brain, bladder, and rectum. This study has shown that BED{sub A} can calculate BED distributions with acceptable accuracy under certain circumstances. However, its consistency and accuracy strongly depend on the dose distributions of the different treatment phases. One should be cautious when using BED{sub A}.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2018

Assessing dose variance from immobilization devices in VMAT head and neck treatment planning: A retrospective case study analysis

Immobilization devices serve several purposes in radiation oncology including improved positional reproducibility and decreased patient movement. If immobilization device beam attenuation is unaccounted for in the treatment planning process, planning target volume (PTV) coverage can be compromised. A retrospective case study was performed to evaluate beam attenuation from head and neck (HN) immobilization devices in volumetric-modulated arc therapy using the Eclipse treatment planning system and the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm. Three facilities retrospectively evaluated 15 patients with various HN carcinomas. A test plan was created from each patient's existing plan in Eclipse to include immobilization devices in the dose calculation. Plan comparisons were performed using dose-volume histograms, which assessed the maximum dose, percentage of the PTV that received 95% of the prescription dose (V{sub 95}), and dose covering 100% of the PTV (D{sub 100}). The test plan normalization values were then adjusted to match the original PTV coverage. The maximum dose difference calculated ranged from 0.3% to 4.1%. The absolute difference in V{sub 95} coverage between the HN and the test plans ranged from 0.4% to 2.3%. The difference in the D{sub 100} was more statistically significant, reporting a range of 1.2% to 71.4%. Finally, to achieve the same PTV coverage as observed in the HN plan, an adjustment to the normalization value was needed, which required a change ranging from 0.1 to 7.7. Attenuation from immobilization devices, when unaccounted for, can cause a misrepresentation of the dose delivered to the PTV. It is not a standardized practice among institutions to include immobilization devices within the body contour for dose calculations. However, with the increasing use of volumetric-modulated arc therapy for treatment of the HN region, precision is of the utmost importance, and inclusion of immobilization devices should be standardized.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2018

Radiation therapy of synchronous bilateral breast carcinoma (SBBC) using multiple techniques

The purpose of this study was to establish intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans for synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC) and to compare those plans with the previous treatment plans using 3D conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT). The differences among the treatments were also statistically compared regarding dosimetry distribution and treatment efficiency. The research was conducted with 10 SBBC patients. The study established IMRT (12 fields with a single isocenter) and VMAT (2 partial arcs with a single isocenter) treatment plans for SBBC patients and then compared those plans with 3DCRT (8 fields with multiple isocenters). The plans were evaluated based on a dose-volume histogram analysis. For planning target volumes (PTVs), the mean doses and the values of V{sub 95%}, V{sub 105%}, conformity index, and homogeneity index were reported. For the organs at risk, the analysis included the mean dose, maximum dose, and V{sub XGy}, depending on the organs (lungs, heart, and liver). To objectively evaluate the efficiency of the treatment plans, each plan's beam times, treatment times (including set-up time), and monitor units were compared. Tukey test and one-way analysis of variance were used to compare the PTV and organs at risk values of the 3 techniques. Additionally, the independent-samples t-test was used to compare the 2 techniques (IMRT and VMAT) based on the values of Rt. PTV and Lt. PTV (p mean and of approximately 5.7% in V{sub 95%} dose distribution compared with 3DCRT. In comparison to VMAT, 3DCRT showed about 3.0% higher dose distribution in D{sub mean} and V{sub 95%}. IMRT was the best in terms of conformity index and homogeneity index (p 30Gy and V{sub 40Gy} was approximately 70% lower for IMRT and approximately 40% lower for VMAT than for 3DCRT. For distribution volumes of low doses such as V{sub 5%} and V{sub 10%}, that for 3DCRT was approximately 60% smaller than for IMRT and approximately 70% smaller than for VMAT. Comparison between IMRT and VMAT showed that the IMRT was superior in all distribution factors. VMAT showed better treatment efficiency than 3DCRT or IMRT. Among the SBBC radiotherapy treatment plans, IMRT was superior to 3DCRT and VMAT in terms of PTV dose distribution, whereas VMAT showed the most outstanding treatment efficiency.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗