Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil-beam redefinition algorithm

被引:2
|
作者
Price, Michael J.
Hogstrom, Kenneth R.
Antolak, John A.
White, R. Allen
Bloch, Charles D.
Boyd, Robert A.
机构
[1] Univ Texas, MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Phys, Houston, TX 77070 USA
[2] Univ Texas, Grad Sch Biomed Sci, Houston, TX USA
[3] Univ Texas, MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Biomath, Houston, TX 77030 USA
来源
关键词
electron dose algorithm; pencil beam; depth dose;
D O I
10.1120/jacmp.v8i2.2443
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
In the present work, we investigated the accuracy of the electron pencil-beam redefinition algorithm (PBRA) in calculating central-axis percent depth dose in water for rectangular fields. The PBRA energy correction factor C(E) was determined so that PBRA-calculated percent depth dose best matched the percent depth dose measured in water. The hypothesis tested was that a method can be implemented into the PBRA that will enable the algorithm to calculate central-axis percent depth dose in water at a 100-cm source-to-surface distance (SSD) with an accuracy of 2% or 1-mm distance to agreement for rectangular field sizes >= 2 x 2 cm. Preliminary investigations showed that C(E), determined using a single percent depth dose for a large field (that is, having side-scatter equilibrium), was insufficient for the PBRA to accurately calculate percent depth dose for all square fields >= 2 x 2 cm. Therefore, two alternative methods for determining C(E) were investigated. In Method 1, C(E), modeled as a polynomial in energy, was determined by fitting the PBRA calculations to individual rectangular-field percent depth doses. In Method 2, C(E) for square fields, described by a polynomial in both energy and side of square W [ that is, C = C(E, W)], was determined by fitting the PBRA calculations to measured percent depth dose for a small number of square fields. Using the function C(E, W), C(E) for other square fields was determined, and C(E) for rectangular field sizes was determined using the geometric mean of C(E) for the two measured square fields of the dimension of the rectangle (square root method). Using both methods, PBRA calculations were evaluated by comparison with measured square-field and derived rectangular-field percent depth doses at 100-cm SSD for the Siemens Primus radiotherapy accelerator equipped with a 25 x 25-cm applicator at 10 MeV and 15 MeV. To improve the fit of C(E) and C(E, W) to the electron component of percent depth dose, it was necessary to modify the PBRA's photon depth dose model to include dose buildup. Results showed that, using both methods, the PBRA was able to predict percent depth dose within criteria for all square and rectangular fields. Results showed that second- or third-order polynomials in energy (Methods 1 and 2) and in field size (Method 2) were typically required. Although the time for dose calculation using Method 1 is approximately twice that using Method 2, we recommend that Method 1 be used for clinical implementation of the PBRA because it is more accurate (most measured depth doses predicted within approximately 1%) and simpler to implement.
引用
收藏
页码:61 / 75
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Intensity modulated dose calculation with an improved experimental pencil-beam kernel
    Diego Azcona, Juan
    Burguete, Javier
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (09) : 4634 - 4642
  • [42] Extended collimator model for pencil-beam dose calculation in proton radiotherapy
    Kanematsu, Nobuyuki
    Akagi, Takashi
    Takatani, Yasuyuki
    Yonai, Shunsuke
    Sakamoto, Hidenobu
    Yamashita, Haruo
    PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2006, 51 (19): : 4807 - 4817
  • [43] Comparison of Electron Monte Carlo and Pencil-Beam Algorithms in Clinical Electron Beam Radiation Dosimetry
    Liu, Z.
    Hargrove, I.
    Tazi, A.
    Barrett, J.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2013, 40 (06)
  • [44] Basic data for pencil-beam dose algorithm for the Brainlab m3-microMLC - A comparison of dosimetry methods
    Griessbach, L
    Raupach, M
    Scheermann, J
    Gademann, G
    STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2002, 178 : 50 - 50
  • [45] Development of a golden beam data set for the commissioning of a proton double-scattering system in a pencil-beam dose calculation algorithm
    Slopsema, R. L.
    Lin, L.
    Flampouri, S.
    Yeung, D.
    Li, Z.
    McDonough, J. E.
    Palta, J.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 41 (09)
  • [46] THE OPTIMIZATION OF PENCIL BEAM WIDTHS FOR USE IN AN ELECTRON PENCIL BEAM ALGORITHM
    MCPARLAND, BJ
    CUNNINGHAM, JR
    WOO, MK
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1988, 15 (04) : 489 - 497
  • [47] Verification Of A Novel Pencil-beam Based Dose Calculation Algorithm With Heterogeneity Correction For Situations Of Lateral Electron Disequilibrium And Comparison With Monte Carlo Calculations
    Wertz, H.
    Jahnke, L.
    Schneider, F.
    Polednik, M.
    Fleckenstein, J.
    Lohr, F.
    Wenz, F.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2011, 81 (02): : S903 - S903
  • [48] Implementation of pencil beam redefinition algorithm (PBRA) for intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT) treatment planning
    Tavallaie, Mina
    Tabrizi, Sanaz Hariri
    Heidarloo, Nematollah
    PHYSICA MEDICA-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2022, 104 : 32 - 42
  • [49] A MULTIRAY MODEL FOR CALCULATING ELECTRON PENCIL BEAM DISTRIBUTION
    YU, CX
    GE, WS
    WONG, JW
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1988, 15 (05) : 662 - 671
  • [50] Interfacing the Pencil Beam Redefinition Algorithm with a Commercial Treatment Planning System
    Carver, R.
    Hogstrom, K.
    Chu, C.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (06)