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

Title: SU-F-T-600: Influence of Acuros XB and AAA Dose Calculation Algorithms On Plan Quality Metrics and Normal Lung Doses in Lung SBRT

Abstract

Purpose: To study the influence of superposition-beam model (AAA) and determinant-photon transport-solver (Acuros XB) dose calculation algorithms on the treatment plan quality metrics and on normal lung dose in Lung SBRT. Methods: Treatment plans of 10 Lung SBRT patients were randomly selected. Patients were prescribed to a total dose of 50-54Gy in 3–5 fractions (10?5 or 18?3). Doses were optimized accomplished with 6-MV using 2-arcs (VMAT). Doses were calculated using AAA algorithm with heterogeneity correction. For each plan, plan quality metrics in the categories- coverage, homogeneity, conformity and gradient were quantified. Repeat dosimetry for these AAA treatment plans was performed using AXB algorithm with heterogeneity correction for same beam and MU parameters. Plan quality metrics were again evaluated and compared with AAA plan metrics. For normal lung dose, V{sub 20} and V{sub 5} to (Total lung- GTV) were evaluated. Results: The results are summarized in Supplemental Table 1. PTV volume was mean 11.4 (±3.3) cm{sup 3}. Comparing RTOG 0813 protocol criteria for conformality, AXB plans yielded on average, similar PITV ratio (individual PITV ratio differences varied from −9 to +15%), reduced target coverage (−1.6%) and increased R50% (+2.6%). Comparing normal lung doses, the lung V{sub 20} (+3.1%) and V{sub 5}more » (+1.5%) were slightly higher for AXB plans compared to AAA plans. High-dose spillage ((V105%PD - PTV)/ PTV) was slightly lower for AXB plans but the % low dose spillage (D2cm) was similar between the two calculation algorithms. Conclusion: AAA algorithm overestimates lung target dose. Routinely adapting to AXB for dose calculations in Lung SBRT planning may improve dose calculation accuracy, as AXB based calculations have been shown to be closer to Monte Carlo based dose predictions in accuracy and with relatively faster computational time. For clinical practice, revisiting dose-fractionation in Lung SBRT to correct for dose overestimates attributable to algorithm may very well be warranted.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22649170
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 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; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ALGORITHMS; CORRECTIONS; FRACTIONATED IRRADIATION; LUNGS; METRICS; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PLANNING; RADIATION DOSES

Citation Formats

Yaparpalvi, R, Mynampati, D, Kuo, H, Garg, M, Tome, W, and Kalnicki, S. SU-F-T-600: Influence of Acuros XB and AAA Dose Calculation Algorithms On Plan Quality Metrics and Normal Lung Doses in Lung SBRT. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956785.
Yaparpalvi, R, Mynampati, D, Kuo, H, Garg, M, Tome, W, & Kalnicki, S. SU-F-T-600: Influence of Acuros XB and AAA Dose Calculation Algorithms On Plan Quality Metrics and Normal Lung Doses in Lung SBRT. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956785.
Yaparpalvi, R, Mynampati, D, Kuo, H, Garg, M, Tome, W, and Kalnicki, S. Wed . "SU-F-T-600: Influence of Acuros XB and AAA Dose Calculation Algorithms On Plan Quality Metrics and Normal Lung Doses in Lung SBRT". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956785.
@article{osti_22649170,
title = {SU-F-T-600: Influence of Acuros XB and AAA Dose Calculation Algorithms On Plan Quality Metrics and Normal Lung Doses in Lung SBRT},
author = {Yaparpalvi, R and Mynampati, D and Kuo, H and Garg, M and Tome, W and Kalnicki, S},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To study the influence of superposition-beam model (AAA) and determinant-photon transport-solver (Acuros XB) dose calculation algorithms on the treatment plan quality metrics and on normal lung dose in Lung SBRT. Methods: Treatment plans of 10 Lung SBRT patients were randomly selected. Patients were prescribed to a total dose of 50-54Gy in 3–5 fractions (10?5 or 18?3). Doses were optimized accomplished with 6-MV using 2-arcs (VMAT). Doses were calculated using AAA algorithm with heterogeneity correction. For each plan, plan quality metrics in the categories- coverage, homogeneity, conformity and gradient were quantified. Repeat dosimetry for these AAA treatment plans was performed using AXB algorithm with heterogeneity correction for same beam and MU parameters. Plan quality metrics were again evaluated and compared with AAA plan metrics. For normal lung dose, V{sub 20} and V{sub 5} to (Total lung- GTV) were evaluated. Results: The results are summarized in Supplemental Table 1. PTV volume was mean 11.4 (±3.3) cm{sup 3}. Comparing RTOG 0813 protocol criteria for conformality, AXB plans yielded on average, similar PITV ratio (individual PITV ratio differences varied from −9 to +15%), reduced target coverage (−1.6%) and increased R50% (+2.6%). Comparing normal lung doses, the lung V{sub 20} (+3.1%) and V{sub 5} (+1.5%) were slightly higher for AXB plans compared to AAA plans. High-dose spillage ((V105%PD - PTV)/ PTV) was slightly lower for AXB plans but the % low dose spillage (D2cm) was similar between the two calculation algorithms. Conclusion: AAA algorithm overestimates lung target dose. Routinely adapting to AXB for dose calculations in Lung SBRT planning may improve dose calculation accuracy, as AXB based calculations have been shown to be closer to Monte Carlo based dose predictions in accuracy and with relatively faster computational time. For clinical practice, revisiting dose-fractionation in Lung SBRT to correct for dose overestimates attributable to algorithm may very well be warranted.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956785},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}
  • Purpose: In this study, the comparison of dosimetric accuracy of Acuros XB and AAA algorithms were investigated for small radiation fields incident on homogeneous and heterogeneous geometries Methods: Small open fields of Truebeam 2.0 unit (1×1, 2×2, 3×3, 4×4 fields) were used for this study. The fields were incident on homogeneous phantom and in house phantom containing lung, air, and bone inhomogeneities. Using the same film batch, the net OD to dose calibration curve was obtaine dusing Trubeam 2.0 for 6 MV, 6 FFF, 10 MV, 10 FFF, 15 MV energies by delivering 0- 800 cGy. Films were scanned 48more » hours after irradiation using an Epson 1000XL flatbed scanner. The dosimetric accuracy of Acuros XB and AAA algorithms in the presence of the inhomogeneities was compared against EBT3 film dosimetry Results: Open field tests in a homogeneous phantom showed good agreement betweent wo algorithms and measurement. For Acuros XB, minimum gamma analysis passin grates between measured and calculated dose distributions were 99.3% and 98.1% for homogeneousand inhomogeneous fields in thecase of lung and bone respectively. For AAA, minimum gamma analysis passingrates were 99.1% and 96.5% for homogeneous and inhomogeneous fields respectively for all used energies and field sizes.In the case of the air heterogeneity, the differences were larger for both calculations algorithms. Over all, when compared to measurement, theAcuros XB had beter agreement than AAA. Conclusion: The Acuros XB calculation algorithm in the TPS is an improvemen tover theexisting AAA algorithm. Dose discrepancies were observed for in the presence of air inhomogeneities.« less
  • Purpose: To evaluate performance of three commercially available treatment planning systems for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of lung cancer using the following algorithms: Boltzmann transport equation based algorithm (AcurosXB AXB), convolution based algorithm Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm (AAA); and Monte Carlo based algorithm (XVMC). Methods: A total of 10 patients with early stage non-small cell peripheral lung cancer were included. The initial clinical plans were generated using the XVMC based treatment planning system with a prescription of 54Gy in 3 fractions following RTOG0613 protocol. The plans were recalculated with the same beam parameters and monitor units using AAA and AXBmore » algorithms. A calculation grid size of 2mm was used for all algorithms. The dose distribution, conformity, and dosimetric parameters for the targets and organs at risk (OAR) are compared between the algorithms. Results: The average PTV volume was 19.6mL (range 4.2–47.2mL). The volume of PTV covered by the prescribed dose (PTV-V100) were 93.97±2.00%, 95.07±2.07% and 95.10±2.97% for XVMC, AXB and AAA algorithms, respectively. There was no significant difference in high dose conformity index; however, XVMC predicted slightly higher values (p=0.04) for the ratio of 50% prescription isodose volume to PTV (R50%). The percentage volume of total lungs receiving dose >20Gy (LungV20Gy) were 4.03±2.26%, 3.86±2.22% and 3.85±2.21% for XVMC, AXB and AAA algorithms. Examination of dose volume histograms (DVH) revealed small differences in targets and OARs for most patients. However, the AAA algorithm was found to predict considerable higher PTV coverage compared with AXB and XVMC algorithms in two cases. The dose difference was found to be primarily located at the periphery region of the target. Conclusion: For clinical SBRT lung treatment planning, the dosimetric differences between three commercially available algorithms are generally small except at target periphery. XVMC and AXB algorithms are recommended for accurate dose estimation at tissue boundaries.« less
  • Purpose: To validate the Acuros XB algorithm implemented in Eclipse Treatment planning system version 11 (Varian Medical System, Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA) for photon dose calculation. Methods: Acuros XB is a Linear Boltzmann transport equation (LBTE) solver that solves LBTE equation explicitly and gives result equivalent to Monte Carlo. 6MV photon beam from Varian Clinac-iX (2300CD) was used for dosimetric validation of Acuros XB. Percentage depth dose (PDD) and profiles (at dmax, 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm) measurements were performed in water for field size ranging from 2×2,4×4, 6×6, 10×10, 20×20, 30×30 and 40×40 cm{sup 2}. Acuros XBmore » results were compared against measurements and anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) algorithm. Results: Acuros XB result shows good agreement with measurements, and were comparable to AAA algorithm. Result for PDD and profiles shows less than one percent difference from measurements, and from calculated PDD and profiles by AAA algorithm for all field size. TPS calculated Gamma error histogram values, average gamma errors in PDD curves before dmax and after dmax were 0.28, 0.15 for Acuros XB and 0.24, 0.17 for AAA respectively, average gamma error in profile curves in central region, penumbra region and outside field region were 0.17, 0.21, 0.42 for Acuros XB and 0.10, 0.22, 0.35 for AAA respectively. Conclusion: The dosimetric validation of Acuros XB algorithms in water medium was satisfactory. Acuros XB algorithm has potential to perform photon dose calculation with high accuracy, which is more desirable for modern radiotherapy environment.« less
  • Purpose: Actual irradiated prescription dose to patients cannot be verified. Thus, independent dose verification and second treatment planning system are used as the secondary check. AAA dose calculation engine has contributed to lung SBRT. We conducted a multi-institutional study to assess variation of prescription dose for lung SBRT when using AAA in reference to using Acuros XB and Clarkson algorithm. Methods: Six institutes in Japan participated in this study. All SBRT treatments were planed using AAA in Eclipse and Adaptive Convolve (AC) in Pinnacle3. All of the institutes used a same independent dose verification software program (Simple MU Analysis: SMU,more » Triangle Product, Ishikawa, Japan), which implemented a Clarkson-based dose calculation algorithm using CT image dataset. A retrospective analysis for lung SBRT plans (73 patients) was performed to compute the confidence limit (CL, Average±2SD) in dose between the AAA and the SMU. In one of the institutes, a additional analysis was conducted to evaluate the variations between the AAA and the Acuros XB (AXB). Results: The CL for SMU shows larger systematic and random errors of 8.7±9.9 % for AAA than the errors of 5.7±4.2 % for AC. The variations of AAA correlated with the mean CT values in the voxels of PTV (a correlation coefficient : −0.7) . The comparison of AXB vs. AAA shows smaller systematic and random errors of −0.7±1.7%. The correlation between dose variations for AXB and the mean CT values in PTV was weak (0.4). However, there were several plans with more than 2% deviation of AAPM TG114 (Maximum: −3.3 %). Conclusion: In comparison for AC, prescription dose calculated by AAA may be more variable in lung SBRT patient. Even AXB comparison shows unexpected variation. Care should be taken for the use of AAA in lung SBRT. This research is partially supported by Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED)« less
  • Purpose: To investigate the accuracy of the Acuros XB version 11 (AXB11) advanced dose calculation algorithm by comparing with Monte Caro (MC) calculations. The comparisons were performed with dose distributions for a virtual inhomogeneity phantom and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in head and neck. Methods: Recently, AXB based on Linear Boltzmann Transport Equation has been installed in the Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Oncology System, USA). The dose calculation accuracy of AXB11 was tested by the EGSnrc-MC calculations. In additions, AXB version 10 (AXB10) and Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) were also used. First the accuracy of an inhomogeneity correction formore » AXB and AAA algorithms was evaluated by comparing with MC-calculated dose distributions for a virtual inhomogeneity phantom that includes water, bone, air, adipose, muscle, and aluminum. Next the IMRT dose distributions for head and neck were compared with the AXB and AAA algorithms and MC by means of dose volume histograms and three dimensional gamma analysis for each structure (CTV, OAR, etc.). Results: For dose distributions with the virtual inhomogeneity phantom, AXB was in good agreement with those of MC, except the dose in air region. The dose in air region decreased in order of MC« less