A comparison of three commercial IMRT treatment planning systems for selected pediatric cases

被引:3
|
作者
Eldesoky, Ismail [1 ]
Attalla, Ehab M. [1 ,2 ]
Elshemey, Wael M. [3 ]
Zaghloul, Mohamed S. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Cairo Univ, Childrens Canc Hosp, Cairo, Egypt
[2] Cairo Univ, Natl Canc Inst, Cairo, Egypt
[3] Cairo Univ, Fac Sci, Dept Biophys, Cairo, Egypt
来源
关键词
KonRad; XiO; Prowess; IMRT; MODULATED RADIATION-THERAPY; NORMAL TISSUE; 2ND CANCERS; DELIVERY; NUMBER; RADIOTHERAPY; TOLERANCE;
D O I
10.1120/jacmp.v13i2.3742
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
This work aimed at evaluating the performance of three different intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment planning systems (TPSs) - KonRad, XiO and Prowess - for selected pediatric cases. For this study, 11 pediatric patients with different types of brain, orbit, head and neck cancer were selected. Clinical step-and-shoot IMRT treatment plans were designed for delivery on a Siemens ONCOR accelerator with 82-leaf multileaf collimators (MLCs). Plans were optimized to achieve the same clinical objectives by applying the same beam energy and the same number and direction of beams. The analysis of performance was based on isodose distributions, dose-volume histograms (DVHs) for planning target volume (PTV), the relevant organs at risk (OARs), as well as mean dose (D-mean), maximum dose (D-max), 95% dose (D-95), volume of patient receiving 2 and 5 Gy, total number of segments, monitor units per segment (MU/Segment), and the number of MU/cGy. Treatment delivery time and conformation number were two other evaluation parameters that were considered in this study. Collectively, the Prowess and KonRad plans showed a significant reduction in the number of MUs that varied between 1.8% and 61.5% (p-value = 0.001) for the different cases, compared to XiO. This was reflected in shorter treatment delivery times. The percentage volumes of each patient receiving 2 Gy and 5 Gy were compared for the three TPSs. The general trend was that KonRad had the highest percentage volume, Prowess showed the lowest (p-value = 0.0001). The KonRad achieved better conformality than both of XiO and Prowess. Based on the present results, the three treatment planning systems were efficient in IMRT, yet XiO showed the lowest performance. The three TPSs achieved the treatment goals according to the internationally approved standards.
引用
收藏
页码:124 / 135
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] IMRT Monitor Unit Efficiency Comparison of Treatment Planning/delivery Systems
    Doemer, A.
    Cao, J.
    Harrison, A.
    Perera, H.
    Xiao, Y.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2008, 35 (06)
  • [22] A comparison of IMRT planning systems in the treatment of colon-rectal cancer
    Laub, WU
    Yan, D
    Sharpe, M
    Nuyttens, J
    Robertson, J
    Wong, J
    [J]. USE OF COMPUTERS IN RADIATION THERAPY, 2000, : 529 - 531
  • [23] Comparison Between Two Treatment Planning Systems On IMRT Planning: UIH Versus Monaco
    Yang, Y.
    Fang, Y.
    Wang, J.
    Zhao, J.
    Hu, W.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 48 (06)
  • [24] COMPARING IMRT TREATMENT PLANNING SYSTEMS
    Ceberg, C.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2010, 96 : S33 - S33
  • [25] Analysis of IMRT modules of commercial treatment planning systems applied to breast tumor model
    Fogliata, A
    Nicolini, G
    Cozzi, L
    [J]. STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2004, 180 : 102 - 102
  • [26] Comparison of different treatment planning systems for pediatric cancers
    Cozzi, L.
    Nicolini, G.
    Clivio, A.
    Vanetti, E.
    Fogliata, A.
    [J]. STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2007, 183 : 183 - 183
  • [27] Inverse IMRT planning with commercial software: a comparison of the pinnacle and plato planning algorithms
    Mayles, H
    Cassapi, L
    Mayles, P
    Scott, A
    Syndikus, I
    Wolff, T
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2003, 68 : S70 - S70
  • [28] Dosimetric comparison of inhomogeniety corrections in IMRT treatment planning systems: A collaborative study
    Mitra, R
    Bagala, T
    Olch, A
    Das, I
    Cheng, C
    Chopra, K
    Hasson, B
    Jiang, Z
    Murphy, S
    Lian, J
    Ahnesjo, A
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2005, 32 (06) : 1965 - 1965
  • [29] Automation of the Treatment Planning Process for IMRT Prostate Cases
    Kapoor, P.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2020, 47 (06) : E708 - E709
  • [30] Evaluation of a commercial biologically based IMRT treatment planning system
    Semenenko, Vladimir A.
    Reitz, Bodo
    Day, Ellen
    Qi, X. Sharon
    Miften, Moyed
    Li, X. Allen
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2008, 35 (12) : 5851 - 5860