Evaluation of the ray-casting analytical algorithm for pencil beam scanning proton therapy

被引:15
|
作者
Winterhalter, Carla [1 ,2 ]
Zepter, Stefan [1 ]
Shim, Sojin [1 ,3 ,4 ]
Meier, Gabriel [1 ]
Bolsi, Alessandra [1 ]
Fredh, Anna [1 ]
Hrbacek, Jan [1 ]
Oxley, David [1 ]
Zhang, Ye [1 ]
Weber, Damien C. [1 ,5 ,6 ]
Lomax, Antony [1 ,2 ]
Safai, Sairos [1 ]
机构
[1] Paul Scherrer Inst, Ctr Proton Therapy, Villigen, Switzerland
[2] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Dept Phys, Zurich, Switzerland
[3] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Dept Mech & Proc Engn, Zurich, Switzerland
[4] EPF Lausanne, Sect Phys, Lausanne, Switzerland
[5] Univ Hosp Bern, Radiat Oncol Dept, Bern, Switzerland
[6] Univ Hosp Zurich, Radiat Oncol Dept, Zurich, Switzerland
来源
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY | 2019年 / 64卷 / 06期
关键词
proton therapy; pencil beam scanning; Monte Carlo simulation; analytical algorithm; ray-casting algorithm; pencil-beam algorithm; DOSE CALCULATION; QUALITY-ASSURANCE; VERIFICATION; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1088/1361-6560/aafe58
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
For pencil beam scanned (PBS) proton therapy, analytical dose calculation engines are still typically used for the optimisation process, and often for the final evaluation of the plan. Recently however, the suitability of analytical calculations for planning PBS treatments has been questioned. Conceptually, the two main approaches for these analytical dose calculations are the ray-casting (RC) and the pencil-beam (PB) method. In this study, we compare dose distributions and dosimetric indices, calculated on both the clinical dose calculation grid and as a function of dose grid resolution, to Monte Carlo (MC) calculations. The analysis is done using a comprehensive set of clinical plans which represent a wide choice of treatment sites. When analysing dose difference histograms for relative treatment plans, pencil beam calculations with double grid resolution perform best, with on average 97.7%/91.9% (RC), 97.9%/92.7% (RC, double grid resolution), 97.6%/91.0% (PB) and 98.6%/94.0% (PB, double grid resolution) of voxels agreeing within +/- 5%/+/- 3% between the analytical and the MC calculations. Even though these point-to-point dose comparison shows differences between analytical and MC calculations, for all algorithms, clinically relevant dosimetric indices agree within +/- 4% for the PTV and within +/- 5% for critical organs. While the clinical agreement depends on the treatment site, there is no substantial difference of indices between the different algorithms. The pencil-beam approach however comes at a higher computational cost than the ray-casting calculation. In conclusion, we would recommend using the ray-casting algorithm for fast dose optimization and subsequently combine it with one MC calculation to scale the absolute dose and assure the quality of the treatment plan.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Tuning An Analytical Proton Therapy Dose Calculation Algorithm for Penumbra Agreement in Collimated Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy
    Bennett, L.
    Erhart, K.
    Nelson, N.
    Yu, J.
    Gutierrez, A.
    Rana, S.
    Smith, B.
    Hill, P.
    Hyer, D.
    Geoghegan, T.
    Patwardhan, K.
    Culberson, W.
    Flynn, R.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2022, 49 (06) : E424 - E424
  • [2] Clinical Validation of a Ray-Casting Analytical Dose Engine for Spot Scanning Proton Delivery Systems
    Younkin, James E.
    Morales, Danairis Hernandez
    Shen, Jiajian
    Shan, Jie
    Bues, Martin
    Lentz, Jarrod M.
    Schild, Steven E.
    Stoker, Joshua B.
    Ding, Xiaoning
    Liu, Wei
    [J]. TECHNOLOGY IN CANCER RESEARCH & TREATMENT, 2019, 18
  • [3] Pencil Beam Dose Algorithm for Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy with Scanning Proton Beams
    Wang, H.
    Zheng, H.
    Cao, R.
    Jia, J.
    Song, J.
    He, T.
    Wu, Y.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2017, 44 (06)
  • [4] Introduction to Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy
    Zhu, M.
    Mossahebi, S.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2020, 47 (06) : E275 - E276
  • [5] Ray-Casting Algorithm and Its Considerations for Parallel Processing Optimization techniques for parallel ray-casting algorithm
    Cho, Hanjoo
    Kim, Young Hwan
    [J]. 2014 14TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTEGRATED CIRCUITS (ISIC), 2014, : 107 - 110
  • [6] Neutron Dose Equivalent Evaluation for Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy with Apertures
    Geng, C.
    Schuemann, J.
    Moteabbed, M.
    Paganetti, H.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (06) : 3466 - 3466
  • [7] Development and Evaluation of a Pixel Detector System for Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy
    Eichin, Michael
    Actis, O.
    Grossmann, M.
    Konig, S.
    Mayor, A.
    Meer, D.
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NUCLEAR SCIENCE, 2019, 66 (07) : 1273 - 1279
  • [8] Pencil Beam Scanning:: a dynamical approach to proton therapy
    Sepulchre, R
    Gérard, M
    Marchand, B
    Prieels, D
    Bauvir, B
    [J]. IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON BIO-INFORMATICS AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, PROCEEDINGS, 2000, : 370 - 375
  • [9] A NOVEL PARALLEL RAY-CASTING ALGORITHM
    Zhang, Yan
    Gao, Peng
    Li, Xiao-Qing
    [J]. 2016 13TH INTERNATIONAL COMPUTER CONFERENCE ON WAVELET ACTIVE MEDIA TECHNOLOGY AND INFORMATION PROCESSING (ICCWAMTIP), 2016, : 59 - 61
  • [10] Impact of dose engine algorithm in pencil beam scanning proton therapy for breast cancer
    Tommasino, Francesco
    Fellin, Francesco
    Lorentini, Stefano
    Farace, Paolo
    [J]. PHYSICA MEDICA-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 50 : 7 - 12