Comparison of four commercial dose calculation algorithms in different evaluation tests

被引:3
|
作者
Rostami, Aram [1 ]
De Castro Neto, Aluisio Jose [1 ]
Paloor, Satheesh Prasad [1 ]
Khalid, Abdul Sattar [1 ]
Hammoud, Rabih [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Ctr Canc Care & Res, Dept Radiat Oncol, Doha, Qatar
关键词
Treatment Planning System (TPS); Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA); Acuros (AXB); collapsed cone; convolution (CCC); Monte Carlo (MC); TREATMENT PLANNING SYSTEM; MONTE-CARLO; CLINICAL IMPLEMENTATION; DOSIMETRIC ACCURACY; ACUROS XB; PHOTON; VALIDATION; ENERGY; VERIFICATION; RADIOTHERAPY;
D O I
10.3233/XST-230079
中图分类号
TH7 [仪器、仪表];
学科分类号
0804 ; 080401 ; 081102 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Accurate and fast dose calculation is crucial in modern radiation therapy. Four dose calculation algorithms (AAA, AXB, CCC, and MC) are available in Varian Eclipse and RaySearch Laboratories RayStation Treatment Planning Systems (TPSs). OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate and compare dosimetric accuracy of the four dose calculation algorithms applying to homogeneous and heterogeneous media, VMAT plans (based on AAPM TG-119 test cases), and the surface and buildup regions. METHODS: The four algorithms are assessed in homogeneous (IAEA-TECDOCE 1540) and heterogeneous (IAEATECDOC 1583) media. Dosimetric evaluation accuracy for VMAT plans is then analyzed, along with the evaluation of the accuracy of algorithms applying to the surface and buildup regions. RESULTS: Tests conducted in homogeneous media revealed that all algorithms exhibit dose deviations within 5% for various conditions, with pass rates exceeding 95% based on recommended tolerances. Additionally, the tests conducted in heterogeneous media demonstrate high pass rates for all algorithms, with a 100% pass rate observed for 6MV and mostly 100% pass rate for 15MV, except for CCC, which achieves a pass rate of 94%. The results of gamma index pass rate (GIPR) for dose calculation algorithms in IMRT fields show that GIPR (3%/3 mm) for all four algorithms in all evaluated tests based on TG119, are greater than 97%. The results of the algorithm testing for the accuracy of superficial dose reveal variations in dose differences, ranging from -11.9% to 7.03% for 15MV and -9.5% to 3.3% for 6MV, respectively. It is noteworthy that the AXB and MC algorithms demonstrate relatively lower discrepancies compared to the other algorithms. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that generally, two dose calculation algorithms (AXB and MC) that calculate dose in medium have better accuracy than other two dose calculation algorithms (CCC and AAA) that calculate dose to water.
引用
收藏
页码:1013 / 1033
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Evaluation of a commercial macro Monte Carlo electron dose calculation algorithm
    Popple, R
    Weinberg, R
    Antolak, J
    Brezovich, I
    Duan, J
    Pareek, P
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2005, 32 (06) : 2016 - 2016
  • [42] COMPARISON OF 4 DIFFERENT ALGORITHMS FOR THE CALCULATION OF RADIOIMMUNOASSAY STANDARD CURVES
    MARSCHNER, I
    HERNDL, R
    SCRIBA, PC
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL CHEMISTRY AND CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY, 1980, 18 (02): : 105 - 109
  • [43] Comparison of dose calculation algorithms with Monte Carlo simulation for surface dosimetry
    Chow, J.
    Jiang, R.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (09) : 4308 - 4308
  • [44] Comparison of dose calculation algorithms with Monte Carlo methods for photon arcs
    Chow, JCL
    Wong, E
    Chen, JZ
    Van Dyk, J
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2003, 30 (10) : 2686 - 2694
  • [45] A Comparison of Primary and Secondary Dose Calculation Algorithms for Lung SBRT Targets
    Pogue, J.
    Popple, R.
    Stahl, J.
    Sullivan, R.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2022, 49 (06) : E969 - E969
  • [46] Comparison oF Different Tests for Evaluation of the Meibomian Glands
    Gierow, J. Peter
    Larsson, Nathalie
    Bostrom, Johanna
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2015, 56 (07)
  • [47] Comparison of CCC and ETAR dose calculation algorithms in pituitary adenoma radiation treatment planning; Monte Carlo evaluation
    Tanha, K.
    Mahdavi, S. R.
    Geraily, G.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF RADIOTHERAPY IN PRACTICE, 2014, 13 (04) : 447 - 455
  • [48] Evaluation of dose calculation algorithms for dynamic are treatments of head and neck tumors
    Linthout, N
    Verellen, D
    Storme, G
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2002, 29 (06) : 1368 - 1368
  • [49] Dosimetric Evaluation with Heterogeneity in Eclipse Treatment Planning Dose Calculation Algorithms
    Rana, S.
    Cheng, C.
    Hibbitts, K.
    Ahmad, S.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (06)
  • [50] A comprehensive evaluation of advanced dose calculation algorithms for brain stereotactic radiosurgery
    Yoon, Jihyung
    Jung, Hyunuk
    Tanny, Sean M.
    Lemus, Olga Maria Dona
    Milano, Michael T.
    Hardy, Sara J.
    Usuki, Kenneth Y.
    Zheng, Dandan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2023, 24 (11):