skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-E-J-136: Investigation Into Robustness of Stopping Power Calculated by DECT and SECT for Proton Therapy Treatment Planning

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the robustness of dual energy CT (DECT) and single energy CT (SECT) proton stopping power calibration techniques and quantify the associated errors when imaging a phantom differing in chemical composition to that used during stopping power calibration. Methods: The CIRS tissue substitute phantom was scanned in a CT-simulator at 90kV and 140kV. This image set was used to generate a DECT proton SPR calibration based on a relationship between effective atomic number and mean excitation energy. A SECT proton SPR calibration based only on Hounsfield units (HUs) was also generated. DECT and SECT scans of a second phantom of known density and chemical composition were performed. The SPR of the second phantom was calculated with the DECT approach (SPR-DECT),the SECT approach (SPR-SECT) and finally the known density and chemical composition of the phantom (SPR-ref). The DECT and SECT image sets were imported into the Pinnacle{sup 3} research release of proton therapy treatment planning. The difference in dose when exposed to a common pencil beam distribution was investigated. Results: SPR-DECT was found to be in better agreement with SPR-ref than SPR- SECT. The mean difference in SPR for all materials was 0.51% for DECT and 6.89% for SECT.more » With the exception of Teflon, SPR-DECT was found to agree with SPR-ref to within 1%. Significant differences in calculated dose were found when using the DECT image set or the SECT image set. Conclusion: The DECT calibration technique was found to be more robust to situations in which the physical properties of the test materials differed from the materials used during SPR calibration. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that the DECT and SECT SPR calibration techniques can Result in significantly different calculated dose distributions.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [2]
  1. University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA (Australia)
  2. (Australia)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22494148
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; ANIMAL TISSUES; BIOMEDICAL RADIOGRAPHY; CALIBRATION; CHEMICAL COMPOSITION; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; IMAGES; PHANTOMS; PLANNING; PROTON BEAMS; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; SIMULATORS; STOPPING POWER; TEFLON

Citation Formats

Zhu, J, Penfold, S, and Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA. SU-E-J-136: Investigation Into Robustness of Stopping Power Calculated by DECT and SECT for Proton Therapy Treatment Planning. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924222.
Zhu, J, Penfold, S, & Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA. SU-E-J-136: Investigation Into Robustness of Stopping Power Calculated by DECT and SECT for Proton Therapy Treatment Planning. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924222.
Zhu, J, Penfold, S, and Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA. Mon . "SU-E-J-136: Investigation Into Robustness of Stopping Power Calculated by DECT and SECT for Proton Therapy Treatment Planning". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924222.
@article{osti_22494148,
title = {SU-E-J-136: Investigation Into Robustness of Stopping Power Calculated by DECT and SECT for Proton Therapy Treatment Planning},
author = {Zhu, J and Penfold, S and Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To investigate the robustness of dual energy CT (DECT) and single energy CT (SECT) proton stopping power calibration techniques and quantify the associated errors when imaging a phantom differing in chemical composition to that used during stopping power calibration. Methods: The CIRS tissue substitute phantom was scanned in a CT-simulator at 90kV and 140kV. This image set was used to generate a DECT proton SPR calibration based on a relationship between effective atomic number and mean excitation energy. A SECT proton SPR calibration based only on Hounsfield units (HUs) was also generated. DECT and SECT scans of a second phantom of known density and chemical composition were performed. The SPR of the second phantom was calculated with the DECT approach (SPR-DECT),the SECT approach (SPR-SECT) and finally the known density and chemical composition of the phantom (SPR-ref). The DECT and SECT image sets were imported into the Pinnacle{sup 3} research release of proton therapy treatment planning. The difference in dose when exposed to a common pencil beam distribution was investigated. Results: SPR-DECT was found to be in better agreement with SPR-ref than SPR- SECT. The mean difference in SPR for all materials was 0.51% for DECT and 6.89% for SECT. With the exception of Teflon, SPR-DECT was found to agree with SPR-ref to within 1%. Significant differences in calculated dose were found when using the DECT image set or the SECT image set. Conclusion: The DECT calibration technique was found to be more robust to situations in which the physical properties of the test materials differed from the materials used during SPR calibration. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that the DECT and SECT SPR calibration techniques can Result in significantly different calculated dose distributions.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924222},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}