Evaluation of brachytherapy lung implant dose distributions from photon-emitting sources due to tissue heterogeneities

被引:9
|
作者
Yang, Yun [1 ]
Rivard, Mark J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Tufts Univ, Sch Med, Boston, MA 02111 USA
关键词
lung; brachytherapy; Monte Carlo; dosimetry; permanent implants; I-125; BRACHYTHERAPY; CANCER; DOSIMETRY; RESECTION; UPDATE;
D O I
10.1118/1.3641872
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
Purpose: Photon-emitting brachytherapy sources are used for permanent implantation to treat lung cancer. However, the current brachytherapy dose calculation formalism assumes a homogeneous water medium without considering the influence of radiation scatter or tissue heterogeneities. The purpose of this study was to determine the dosimetric effects of tissue heterogeneities for permanent lung brachytherapy. Methods: The MCNP5 v1.40 radiation transport code was used for Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. Point sources with energies of 0.02, 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 MeV were simulated to cover the range of pertinent brachytherapy energies and to glean dosimetric trends independent of specific radionuclide emissions. Source positions from postimplant CT scans of five patient implants were used for source coordinates, with dose normalized to 200 Gy at the center of each implant. With the presence of fibrosis (around the implant), cortical bone, lung, and healthy tissues, dose distributions and PTVDVH were calculated using the MCNP *FMESH4 tally and the NIST mass-energy absorption coefficients. This process was repeated upon replacing all tissues with water. For all photon energies, 10(9) histories were simulated to achieve statistical errors (k = 1) typically of 1%. Results: The mean PTV doses calculated using tissue heterogeneities for all five patients changed (compared to dose to water) by only a few percent over the examined photon energy range, as did PTV dose at the implant center. The V-PTV(100) values were 81.2%, 90.0% (as normalized), 94.3%, 93.9%, 92.7%, and 92.2% for 0.02, 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 MeV source photons, respectively. Relative to water, the maximum bone doses were higher by factors of 3.7, 5.1, 5.2, 2.4, 1.2, and 1.0 The maximum lung doses were about 0.98, 0.94, 0.91, 0.94, 0.97, and 0.99. Relative to water, the maximum healthy tissue doses at the mediastinal position were higher by factors of 9.8, 2.2, 1.3, 1.1, 1.1, and 1.1. However, the maximum doses to these healthy tissues were only 3.1, 7.2, 11.3, 10.9, 9.0, and 8.1 Gy while maximum bone doses were 66, 177, 236, 106, 49, and 39 Gy, respectively. Similarly, maximum lung doses were 55, 66, 73, 74, 73, and 73 Gy, respectively. Conclusions: The current brachytherapy dose calculation formalism overestimates PTV dose and significantly underestimates doses to bone and healthy tissue. Further investigation using specific brachytherapy source models and patient-based CT datasets as MC input may indicate whether the observed trends can be generalized for low-energy lung brachytherapy dosimetry. (C) 2011 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. [DOI: 10.1118/1.3641872]
引用
收藏
页码:5857 / 5862
页数:6
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [21] A Generalized Dose-Rate Constant Formalism for Brachytherapy Sources Emitting Anisotropic Photon Energy Spectrum
    Chen, Z.
    Nath, R.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (06)
  • [22] Monte Carlo simulation of the effect of magnetic fields on brachytherapy dose distributions in lung tissue material
    Moreno-Barbosa, Fernando
    de Celis-Alonso, Benito
    Moreno-Barbosa, Eduardo
    Hernandez-Lopez, Javier Miguel
    Geoghegan, Theodore
    Ramos-Mendez, Jose
    PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (10):
  • [23] MONTE CARLO ESTIMATION OF DOSE DIFFERENCE IN LUNG FROM 192Ir BRACHYTHERAPY DUE TO TISSUE INHOMOGENEITY
    Gialousis, G.
    Dimitriadis, A.
    Yakoumakis, E.
    RADIATION PROTECTION DOSIMETRY, 2011, 147 (1-2) : 287 - 290
  • [24] Effect of tissue Inhomogeneities on dose distributions from Cf-252 brachytherapy source
    Ghassoun, J.
    APPLIED RADIATION AND ISOTOPES, 2013, 71 (01) : 1 - 6
  • [25] Procedures for establishing and maintaining consistent air-kerma strength standards for low-energy, photon-emitting brachytherapy sources: Recommendations of the Calibration Laboratory Accreditation Subcommittee of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine
    DeWerd, LA
    Huq, MS
    Das, IJ
    Ibbott, GS
    Hanson, WF
    Slowey, TW
    Williamson, JF
    Coursey, BM
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2004, 31 (03) : 675 - 681
  • [26] Treatment Planning Considerations and the Effect of Tissue Heterogeneities On the Absorbed Dose Distribution From the Xoft Axxent 50 KVp Electronic Brachytherapy Source
    DeMarco, J.
    Fahimian, B.
    Iwamoto, K.
    Holt, R.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (06)
  • [27] Influence of photon energy spectra from brachytherapy sources on Monte Carlo simulations of kerma and dose rates in water and air
    Rivard, Mark J.
    Granero, Domingo
    Perez-Calatayud, Jose
    Ballester, Facundo
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (02) : 869 - 876
  • [28] A MCNP5 Comparison of the Dose Distribution from 169-Ytterbium LDR Brachytherapy Sources Within Heterogeneous Tissue to TG-43 Guidelines
    Currier, B.
    Medich, D. C.
    Munro, J. J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2012, 84 (03): : S570 - S570
  • [29] Evaluation of bone dose arising from skin cancer brachytherapy: A comparison between 192Ir and 60Co sources through Monte Carlo simulations
    Sheikholeslami, Sahar
    Khodaverdian, Shaghayegh
    Hashemzaei, Fatemeh
    Ghobadi, Parvin
    Ghorbani, Mahdi
    Farhood, Bagher
    COMPUTER METHODS AND PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICINE, 2021, 205
  • [30] Evaluation of proton and photon dose distributions recalculated on 2D and 3D Unet-generated pseudoCTs from T1-weighted MR head scans
    Neppl, Sebastian
    Landry, Guillaume
    Kurz, Christopher
    Hansen, David C.
    Hoyle, Ben
    Stoecklein, Sophia
    Seidensticker, Max
    Weller, Jochen
    Belka, Claus
    Parodi, Katia
    Kamp, Florian
    ACTA ONCOLOGICA, 2019, 58 (10) : 1429 - 1434