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

Title: SU-E-T-580: On the Significance of Model Based Dosimetry for Breast and Head and Neck 192Ir HDR Brachytherapy

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the dosimetric and radiobiological differences between TG43-based and model-based dosimetry in the treatment planning of {sup 192}Ir HDR brachytherapy for breast and head and neck cancer. Methods: Two cohorts of 57 Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI) and 22 head and neck (H&N) patients with oral cavity carcinoma were studied. Dosimetry for the treatment plans was performed using the TG43 algorithm of the Oncentra Brachy v4.4 treatment planning system (TPS). Corresponding Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were performed using MCNP6 with input files automatically prepared by the BrachyGuide software tool from DICOM RT plan data. TG43 and MC data were compared in terms of % dose differences, Dose Volume Histograms (DVHs) and related indices of clinical interest for the Planning Target Volume (PTV) and the Organs-At-Risk (OARs). A radiobiological analysis was also performed using the Equivalent Uniform Dose (EUD), mean survival fraction (S) and Tumor Control Probability (TCP) for the PTV, and the Normal Tissue Control Probability (N TCP) and the generalized EUD (gEUD) for the OARs. Significance testing of the observed differences performed using the Wilcoxon paired sample test. Results: Differences between TG43 and MC DVH indices, associated with the increased corresponding local % dose differences observed, weremore » statistically significant. This is mainly attributed to their consistency however, since TG43 agrees closely with MC for the majority of DVH and radiobiological parameters in both patient cohorts. Differences varied considerably among patients only for the ipsilateral lung and ribs in the APBI cohort, with a strong correlation to target location. Conclusion: While the consistency and magnitude of differences in the majority of clinically relevant DVH indices imply that no change is needed in the treatment planning practice, individualized dosimetry improves accuracy and addresses instances of inter-patient variability observed. Research co-financed by the ESF and Greek funds through the Operational Program Education and Lifelong Learning Investing in Knowledge Society of the NSRF. Research Funding Program Aristeia. Nucletron, an Elekta company (Veenendaal, The Netherlands) is gratefully acknowledged for providing Oncentra Brachy v4.4 for research purposes.« less

Authors:
; ; ;  [1]; ;  [2]
  1. Medical Physics Laboratory, Medical School, University of Athens, Athens (Greece)
  2. National Institute of Oncology, Budapest (Hungary)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22496293
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:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; BRACHYTHERAPY; CARCINOMAS; COMPUTER CODES; DOSIMETRY; HEAD; IRIDIUM 192; IRRADIATION; MAMMARY GLANDS; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NECK; PATIENTS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIATION SOURCE IMPLANTS; SIMULATION; SURVIVAL CURVES

Citation Formats

Peppa, V, Pappas, E, Pantelis, E, Papagiannis, P, Major, T, and Polgar, C. SU-E-T-580: On the Significance of Model Based Dosimetry for Breast and Head and Neck 192Ir HDR Brachytherapy. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924942.
Peppa, V, Pappas, E, Pantelis, E, Papagiannis, P, Major, T, & Polgar, C. SU-E-T-580: On the Significance of Model Based Dosimetry for Breast and Head and Neck 192Ir HDR Brachytherapy. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924942.
Peppa, V, Pappas, E, Pantelis, E, Papagiannis, P, Major, T, and Polgar, C. Mon . "SU-E-T-580: On the Significance of Model Based Dosimetry for Breast and Head and Neck 192Ir HDR Brachytherapy". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924942.
@article{osti_22496293,
title = {SU-E-T-580: On the Significance of Model Based Dosimetry for Breast and Head and Neck 192Ir HDR Brachytherapy},
author = {Peppa, V and Pappas, E and Pantelis, E and Papagiannis, P and Major, T and Polgar, C},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To assess the dosimetric and radiobiological differences between TG43-based and model-based dosimetry in the treatment planning of {sup 192}Ir HDR brachytherapy for breast and head and neck cancer. Methods: Two cohorts of 57 Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI) and 22 head and neck (H&N) patients with oral cavity carcinoma were studied. Dosimetry for the treatment plans was performed using the TG43 algorithm of the Oncentra Brachy v4.4 treatment planning system (TPS). Corresponding Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were performed using MCNP6 with input files automatically prepared by the BrachyGuide software tool from DICOM RT plan data. TG43 and MC data were compared in terms of % dose differences, Dose Volume Histograms (DVHs) and related indices of clinical interest for the Planning Target Volume (PTV) and the Organs-At-Risk (OARs). A radiobiological analysis was also performed using the Equivalent Uniform Dose (EUD), mean survival fraction (S) and Tumor Control Probability (TCP) for the PTV, and the Normal Tissue Control Probability (N TCP) and the generalized EUD (gEUD) for the OARs. Significance testing of the observed differences performed using the Wilcoxon paired sample test. Results: Differences between TG43 and MC DVH indices, associated with the increased corresponding local % dose differences observed, were statistically significant. This is mainly attributed to their consistency however, since TG43 agrees closely with MC for the majority of DVH and radiobiological parameters in both patient cohorts. Differences varied considerably among patients only for the ipsilateral lung and ribs in the APBI cohort, with a strong correlation to target location. Conclusion: While the consistency and magnitude of differences in the majority of clinically relevant DVH indices imply that no change is needed in the treatment planning practice, individualized dosimetry improves accuracy and addresses instances of inter-patient variability observed. Research co-financed by the ESF and Greek funds through the Operational Program Education and Lifelong Learning Investing in Knowledge Society of the NSRF. Research Funding Program Aristeia. Nucletron, an Elekta company (Veenendaal, The Netherlands) is gratefully acknowledged for providing Oncentra Brachy v4.4 for research purposes.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924942},
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}
}
  • Purpose: In a brachytherapy photon field in water the fluence-averaged mean photon energy Em at the point of measurement correlates with the radiation quality correction factor kQ of a non water-equivalent detector. To support the experimental assessment of Em, we show that the normalized signal ratio NSR of a pair of radiation detectors, an unshielded silicon diode and a diamond detector can serve to measure quantity Em in a water phantom at a Ir-192 unit. Methods: Photon fluence spectra were computed in EGSnrc based on a detailed model of the GammaMed source. Factor kQ was calculated as the ratio ofmore » the detector's spectrum-weighted responses under calibration conditions at a 60Co unit and under brachytherapy conditions at various radial distances from the source. The NSR was investigated for a pair of a p-type unshielded silicon diode 60012 and a synthetic single crystal diamond detector 60019 (both PTW Freiburg). Each detector was positioned according to its effective point of measurement, with its axis facing the source. Lateral signal profiles were scanned under complete scatter conditions, and the NSR was determined as the quotient of the signal ratio under application conditions x and that at position r-ref = 1 cm. Results: The radiation quality correction factor kQ shows a close correlation with the mean photon energy Em. The NSR of the diode/diamond pair changes by a factor of two from 0–18 cm from the source, while Em drops from 350 to 150 keV. Theoretical and measured NSR profiles agree by ± 2 % for points within 5 cm from the source. Conclusion: In the presence of the close correlation between radiation quality correction factor kQ and photon mean energy Em, the NSR provides a practical means of assessing Em under clinical conditions. Precise detector positioning is the major challenge.« less
  • Purpose: HDR brachytherapy is undergoing significant development, and quality assurance (QA) checks must keep pace. Current recommendations do not adequately verify delivered against planned dose distributions: This is particularly relevant for new treatment planning system (TPS) calculation algorithms (non TG-43 based), and an era of significant patient-specific plan optimisation. Full system checks are desirable in modern QA recommendations, complementary to device-centric individual tests. We present a QA system incorporating TPS calculation, dose distribution export, HDR unit performance, and dose distribution measurement. Such an approach, more common in external beam radiotherapy, has not previously been reported in the literature for brachytherapy.more » Methods: Our QA method was tested at 24 UK brachytherapy centres. As a novel approach, we used the TPS DICOM RTDose file export to compare planned dose distribution with that measured using Gafchromic EBT3 films placed around clinical brachytherapy treatment applicators. Gamma analysis was used to compare the dose distributions. Dose difference and distance to agreement were determined at prescription Point A. Accurate film dosimetry was achieved using a glass compression plate at scanning to ensure physically-flat films, simultaneous scanning of known dose films with measurement films, and triple-channel dosimetric analysis. Results: The mean gamma pass rate of RTDose compared to film-measured dose distributions was 98.1% at 3%(local), 2 mm criteria. The mean dose difference, measured to planned, at Point A was -0.5% for plastic treatment applicators and -2.4% for metal applicators, due to shielding not accounted for in TPS. The mean distance to agreement was 0.6 mm. Conclusion: It is recommended to develop brachytherapy QA to include full-system verification of agreement between planned and delivered dose distributions. This is a novel approach for HDR brachytherapy QA. A methodology using advanced film dosimetry and gamma comparison to DICOM RTDose files has been demonstrated as suitable to fulfil this need.« less
  • Purpose: To retrospectively re-calculate dose distributions for selected head and neck cancer patients, earlier treated with HDR 192Ir brachytherapy, using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations and compare results to distributions from the planning system derived using TG43 formalism. To study differences between dose to medium (as obtained with the MC code) and dose to water in medium as obtained through (1) ratios of stopping powers and (2) ratios of mass energy absorption coefficients between water and medium. Methods: The MC code Algebra was used to calculate dose distributions according to earlier actual treatment plans using anonymized plan data and CT imagesmore » in DICOM format. Ratios of stopping power and mass energy absorption coefficients for water with various media obtained from 192-Ir spectra were used in toggling between dose to water and dose to media. Results: Differences between initial planned TG43 dose distributions and the doses to media calculated by MC are insignificant in the target volume. Differences are moderate (within 4–5 % at distances of 3–4 cm) but increase with distance and are most notable in bone and at the patient surface. Differences between dose to water and dose to medium are within 1-2% when using mass energy absorption coefficients to toggle between the two quantities but increase to above 10% for bone using stopping power ratios. Conclusion: MC predicts target doses for head and neck cancer patients in close agreement with TG43. MC yields improved dose estimations outside the target where a larger fraction of dose is from scattered photons. It is important with awareness and a clear reporting of absorbed dose values in using model based algorithms. Differences in bone media can exceed 10% depending on how dose to water in medium is defined.« less
  • Purpose: We have analyzed the dose volume histogram of 140 CT based HDR brachytherapy plans and evaluated the dose received to OAR ; rectum, bladder and sigmoid colon based on recommendations from ICRU and Image guided brachytherapy working group for cervical cancer . Methods: Our treatment protocol consist of XRT to whole pelvis with 45 Gy at 1.8Gy/fraction followed by 30 Gy at 6 Gy per fraction by HDR brachytherapy in 2 weeks . The CT compatible tandem and ovoid applicators were used and stabilized with radio opaque packing material. The patient was stabilized using special re-locatable implant table andmore » stirrups for reproducibility of the geometry during treatment. The CT scan images were taken at 3mm slice thickness and exported to the treatment planning computer. The OAR structures, bladder, rectum and sigmoid colon were outlined on the images along with the applicators. The prescription dose was targeted to A left and A right as defined in Manchester system and optimized on geometry . The dosimetry was compared on all plans using the parameter Ci.sec.cGy-1 . Using the Dose Volume Histogram (DVH) obtained from the plans the doses to rectum, sigmoid colon and bladder for ICRU defined points and 2cc volume were analyzed and reported. The following criteria were used for limiting the tolerance dose by volume (D2cc) were calculated. The rectum and sigmoid colon doses were limited to <75Gy. The bladder dose was limited to < 90Gy from both XRT and HDR brachytherapy. Results: The average total (XRT+HDRBT) BED values to prescription volume was 120 Gy. Dose 2cc to rectum was 70Gy +/− 17Gy, dose to 2cc bladder was 82+/−32 Gy. The average Ci.sec.cGy-1 calculated for the HDR plans was 6.99 +/− 0.5 Conclusion: The image based treatment planning enabled to evaluati volume based dose to critical structures for clinical interpretation.« less
  • Purpose: Analyse the water-equivalence of MAGIC-f polymer gel for {sup 60}Co and {sup 192}Ir clinical brachytherapy sources, through dose distributions simulated with PENELOPE Monte Carlo code. Methods: The real geometry of {sup 60} (BEBIG, modelo Co0.A86) and {sup 192}192Ir (Varian, model GammaMed Plus) clinical brachytherapy sources were modelled on PENELOPE Monte Carlo simulation code. The most probable emission lines of photons were used for both sources: 17 emission lines for {sup 192}Ir and 12 lines for {sup 60}. The dose distributions were obtained in a cubic water or gel homogeneous phantom (30 × 30 × 30 cm{sup 3}), with themore » source positioned in the middle of the phantom. In all cases the number of simulation showers remained constant at 10{sup 9} particles. A specific material for gel was constructed in PENELOPE using weight fraction components of MAGIC-f: wH = 0,1062, wC = 0,0751, wN = 0,0139, wO = 0,8021, wS = 2,58×10{sup −6} e wCu = 5,08 × 10{sup −6}. The voxel size in the dose distributions was 0.6 mm. Dose distribution maps on the longitudinal and radial direction through the centre of the source were used to analyse the water-equivalence of MAGIC-f. Results: For the {sup 60} source, the maximum diferences in relative doses obtained in the gel and water were 0,65% and 1,90%, for radial and longitudinal direction, respectively. For {sup 192}Ir, the maximum difereces in relative doses were 0,30% and 1,05%, for radial and longitudinal direction, respectively. The materials equivalence can also be verified through the effective atomic number and density of each material: Zef-MAGIC-f = 7,07 e .MAGIC-f = 1,060 g/cm{sup 3} and Zef-water = 7,22. Conclusion: The results showed that MAGIC-f is water equivalent, consequently being suitable to simulate soft tissue, for Cobalt and Iridium energies. Hence, gel can be used as a dosimeter in clinical applications. Further investigation to its use in a clinical protocol is needed.« less