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

Title: SU-F-T-606: Monte Carlo Evaluation of Tissue Inhomogeneity Corrections in the Treatment of Liver Cancer Patients Using Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the dosimetric performance of X-ray Voxel Monte Carlo(XVMC) algorithm in effort to clinically validate Monte Carlo-approach in heterogeneous liver phantom and liver SBRT plans. Methods: An anthropomorphic RPC liver phantom incorporating a liver structure with two cylindrical targets and organs-at-risk (OARs) was used in phantom validation. Subsequently, five patients with metastatic liver cancer were treated using heterogeneity-corrected pencil-beam(PB-hete)algorithm were analyzed following RTOG-1112 criteria .ITV was delineated on MinIP and OARs were contoured on MeanIP images of 4D-CT. PTV was generated from ITV with 5-10mm uniform margin. Mean PTV was 81.3±46.4cc. Prescription was 30–45Gy in 5 fractions, with at least PTV(D95%)=100%. Hybrid SBRT plans were generated with noncoplanar/3D-conformal arcs plus static-beams at Novalis-TX consisting of HD-MLC and 6MV-SRS. SBRT plans were re-computed using XVMC algorithm utilizing identical beam-geometry, MLC-positions, and monitor units and subsequently compared to clinical PB-hete plans. Results: Our results using RPC liver motion phantom validation were all compliance with MD Anderson standards. However, compared to PB-hete, average target volume encompassed by the prescribed percent isodose (Vp) was 9.1% and 8.5% less for PTV1 and PTV2 with XVMC. For the clinical liver SBRT plans, PB-hete systematically overestimated PTV dose (D95, Dmean and D10) within ±2.0% (p<0.05)more » compared to XVMC. Mean value of Vp was about 3.8% less with XVMC compared to PB-hete (ranged 2.9–5.7% (p<0.003)). However, mean liver dose (MLD) was 3.2% higher (p<0.003), on average, with XVMC compared to clinical PB-hete (ranged −1.0to−3.9%). OARs doses were statistically insignificant. Conclusion: Results from our XVMC dose calculations and validation study for liver SBRT indicate small-to-moderate under-dosing of the tumor volume when compared to PB-hete. Results were consistent with phantom validation and patients plans. However, Vp was less by up to 5.7% for some liver SBRT patients with XVMC–suggesting under-dosing of the target volume and overdosing of MLD by up to 3.9% occurred with PB-hete plan. These differences between PB-hete and XVMC dose calculations may be of clinical interest.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. University of Kansas Hospital, Kansas City, KS (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22649173
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; LIVER; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NEOPLASMS; PATIENTS; PHANTOMS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; VALIDATION; X RADIATION

Citation Formats

Pokhrel, D, Sood, S, Badkul, R, McClinton, C, Jiang, H, Saleh, H, and Lominska, C. SU-F-T-606: Monte Carlo Evaluation of Tissue Inhomogeneity Corrections in the Treatment of Liver Cancer Patients Using Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956791.
Pokhrel, D, Sood, S, Badkul, R, McClinton, C, Jiang, H, Saleh, H, & Lominska, C. SU-F-T-606: Monte Carlo Evaluation of Tissue Inhomogeneity Corrections in the Treatment of Liver Cancer Patients Using Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956791.
Pokhrel, D, Sood, S, Badkul, R, McClinton, C, Jiang, H, Saleh, H, and Lominska, C. 2016. "SU-F-T-606: Monte Carlo Evaluation of Tissue Inhomogeneity Corrections in the Treatment of Liver Cancer Patients Using Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956791.
@article{osti_22649173,
title = {SU-F-T-606: Monte Carlo Evaluation of Tissue Inhomogeneity Corrections in the Treatment of Liver Cancer Patients Using Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy},
author = {Pokhrel, D and Sood, S and Badkul, R and McClinton, C and Jiang, H and Saleh, H and Lominska, C},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To evaluate the dosimetric performance of X-ray Voxel Monte Carlo(XVMC) algorithm in effort to clinically validate Monte Carlo-approach in heterogeneous liver phantom and liver SBRT plans. Methods: An anthropomorphic RPC liver phantom incorporating a liver structure with two cylindrical targets and organs-at-risk (OARs) was used in phantom validation. Subsequently, five patients with metastatic liver cancer were treated using heterogeneity-corrected pencil-beam(PB-hete)algorithm were analyzed following RTOG-1112 criteria .ITV was delineated on MinIP and OARs were contoured on MeanIP images of 4D-CT. PTV was generated from ITV with 5-10mm uniform margin. Mean PTV was 81.3±46.4cc. Prescription was 30–45Gy in 5 fractions, with at least PTV(D95%)=100%. Hybrid SBRT plans were generated with noncoplanar/3D-conformal arcs plus static-beams at Novalis-TX consisting of HD-MLC and 6MV-SRS. SBRT plans were re-computed using XVMC algorithm utilizing identical beam-geometry, MLC-positions, and monitor units and subsequently compared to clinical PB-hete plans. Results: Our results using RPC liver motion phantom validation were all compliance with MD Anderson standards. However, compared to PB-hete, average target volume encompassed by the prescribed percent isodose (Vp) was 9.1% and 8.5% less for PTV1 and PTV2 with XVMC. For the clinical liver SBRT plans, PB-hete systematically overestimated PTV dose (D95, Dmean and D10) within ±2.0% (p<0.05) compared to XVMC. Mean value of Vp was about 3.8% less with XVMC compared to PB-hete (ranged 2.9–5.7% (p<0.003)). However, mean liver dose (MLD) was 3.2% higher (p<0.003), on average, with XVMC compared to clinical PB-hete (ranged −1.0to−3.9%). OARs doses were statistically insignificant. Conclusion: Results from our XVMC dose calculations and validation study for liver SBRT indicate small-to-moderate under-dosing of the tumor volume when compared to PB-hete. Results were consistent with phantom validation and patients plans. However, Vp was less by up to 5.7% for some liver SBRT patients with XVMC–suggesting under-dosing of the target volume and overdosing of MLD by up to 3.9% occurred with PB-hete plan. These differences between PB-hete and XVMC dose calculations may be of clinical interest.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956791},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Early experience with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of centrally located lung tumors indicated increased rate of high-grade toxicity in the lungs. These clinical results were based on treatment plans that were computed using pencil beam–like algorithms and without tissue inhomogeneity corrections. In this study, we evaluated the dosimetric errors in plans with and without inhomogeneity corrections and with planning target volumes (PTVs) that were within the zone of the proximal bronchial tree (BT). For 10 patients, the PTV, lungs, and sections of the BT either inside or within 2 cm of the PTV were delineated. Two treatment plans weremore » generated for each patient using the following dose-calculation methods: (1) pencil beam (PB) algorithm without inhomogeneity correction (IC) (PB − IC) and (2) PB with inhomogeneity correction (PB + IC). Both plans had identical beam geometry but different beam segment shapes and monitor units (MU) to achieve similar conformal dose coverage of PTV. To obtain the baseline dose distributions, each plan was recalculated using a Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm by keeping MUs the same in the respective plans. The median maximum dose to the proximal BT and PTV dose coverage in the PB + IC plans were overestimated by 8% and 11%, respectively. However, the median maximum dose to the proximal BT and PTV dose coverage in PB − IC plans were underestimated by 15% and 9%. Similar trends were observed in low-dose regions of the lung within the irradiated volume. Our study indicates that dosimetric bias introduced by unit tissue density plans cannot be characterized as underestimation or overestimation of dose without taking the tumor location into account. This issue should be considered when analyzing clinical toxicity data from early lung SBRT trials that utilized unit tissue density for dose calculations.« less
  • Purpose: The recently activated Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) studies of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) require tissue density heterogeneity correction, where the high and intermediate dose compliance criteria were established based on superposition algorithm dose calculations. The study was aimed at comparing superposition algorithm dose calculations with Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculations for SBRT for NSCLC and to evaluate whether compliance criteria need to be adjusted for MC dose calculations. Methods and Materials: Fifteen RTOG 0236 study sets were used. The planning tumor volumes (PTV) ranged from 10.7 to 117.1 cm{sup 3}. SBRT conformalmore » treatment plans were generated using XiO (CMS Inc.) treatment planning software with superposition algorithm to meet the dosimetric high and intermediate compliance criteria recommended by the RTOG 0813 protocol. Plans were recalculated using the MC algorithm of a Monaco (CMS, Inc.) treatment planning system. Tissue density heterogeneity correction was applied in both calculations. Results: Overall, the dosimetric quantities of the MC calculations have larger magnitudes than those of the superposition calculations. On average, R{sub 100%} (ratio of prescription isodose volume to PTV), R{sub 50%} (ratio of 50% prescription isodose volume to PTV), D{sub 2cm} (maximal dose 2 cm from PTV in any direction as a percentage of prescription dose), and V{sub 20} (percentage of lung receiving dose equal to or larger than 20 Gy) increased by 9%, 12%, 7%, and 18%, respectively. In the superposition plans, 3 cases did not meet criteria for R{sub 50%} or D{sub 2cm}. In the MC-recalculated plans, 8 cases did not meet criteria for R{sub 100%}, R{sub 50%}, or D{sub 2cm}. After reoptimization with MC calculations, 5 cases did not meet the criteria for R{sub 50%} or D{sub 2cm}. Conclusions: Results indicate that the dosimetric criteria, e.g., the criteria for R{sub 50%} recommended by RTOG 0813 protocol, may need to be adjusted when the MC dose calculation algorithm is used.« less
  • Purpose: To describe the development of a knowledge-based treatment planning model for lung cancer patients treated with SBRT, and to evaluate the model performance and applicability to different planning techniques and tumor locations. Methods: 105 lung SBRT plans previously treated at our institution were included in the development of the model using Varian’s RapidPlan DVH estimation algorithm. The model was trained with a combination of IMRT, VMAT, and 3D–CRT techniques. Tumor locations encompassed lesions located centrally vs peripherally (43:62), upper vs lower (62:43), and anterior vs posterior lobes (60:45). The model performance was validated with 25 cases independent of themore » training set, for both IMRT and VMAT. Model generated plans were created with only one optimization and no planner intervention. The original, general model was also divided into four separate models according to tumor location. The model was also applied using different beam templates to further improve workflow. Dose differences to targets and organs-at-risk were evaluated. Results: IMRT and VMAT RapidPlan generated plans were comparable to clinical plans with respect to target coverage and several OARs. Spinal cord dose was lowered in the model-based plans by 1Gy compared to the clinical plans, p=0.008. Splitting the model according to tumor location resulted in insignificant differences in DVH estimation. The peripheral model decreased esophagus dose to the central lesions by 0.5Gy compared to the original model, p=0.025, and the posterior model increased dose to the spinal cord by 1Gy compared to the anterior model, p=0.001. All template beam plans met OAR criteria, with 1Gy increases noted in maximum heart dose for the 9-field plans, p=0.04. Conclusion: A RapidPlan knowledge-based model for lung SBRT produces comparable results to clinical plans, with increased consistency and greater efficiency. The model encompasses both IMRT and VMAT techniques, differing tumor locations, and beam arrangements. Research supported in part by a grant from Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto CA.« less
  • The purpose of this study is to assess the real target dose coverage when radiation treatments were delivered to lung cancer patients based on treatment planning according to the RTOG-0236 Protocol. We compare calculated dosimetric results between the more accurate anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and the pencil beam algorithm for stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment planning in lung cancer. Ten patients with non-small cell lung cancer were given 60 Gy in three fractions using 6 and 10 MV beams with 8-10 fields. The patients were chosen in accordance with the lung RTOG-0236 protocol. The dose calculations were performed using themore » pencil beam algorithm with no heterogeneity corrections (PB-NC) and then recalculated with the pencil beam with modified Batho heterogeneity corrections (PB-MB) and the AAA using an identical beam setup and monitor units. The differences in calculated dose to 95% or 99% of the PTV, between using the PB-NC and the AAA, were within 10% of prescribed dose (60 Gy). However, the minimum dose to 95% and 99% of PTV calculated using the PB-MB were consistently overestimated by up to 40% and 36% of the prescribed dose, respectively, compared to that calculated by the AAA. Using the AAA as reference, the calculated maximum doses were underestimated by up to 27% using the PB-NC and overestimated by 19% using the PB-MB. The calculations of dose to lung from PB-NC generally agree with that of AAA except in the small high-dose region where PB-NC underestimates. The calculated dose distributions near the interface using the AAA agree with those from Monte Carlo calculations as well as measured values. This study indicates that the real minimum PTV dose coverage cannot be guaranteed when the PB-NC is used to calculate the monitor unit settings in dose prescriptions.« less
  • Purpose: The latest publications indicate that the Ray Tracing algorithm significantly overestimates the dose delivered as compared to the Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm. The purpose of this study is to quantify this overestimation and to identify significant correlations between the RT and MC calculated dose distributions. Methods: Preliminary results are based on 50 preexisting RT algorithm dose optimization and calculation treatment plans prepared on the Multiplan treatment planning system (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA). The analysis will be expanded to include 100 plans. These plans are recalculated using the MC algorithm, with high resolution and 1% uncertainty. The geometry and numbermore » of beams for a given plan, as well as the number of monitor units, is constant for the calculations for both algorithms and normalized differences are compared. Results: MC calculated doses were significantly smaller than RT doses. The D95 of the PTV was 27% lower for the MC calculation. The GTV and PTV mean coverage were 13 and 39% less for MC calculation. The first parameter of conformality, as defined as the ratio of the Prescription Isodose Volume to the PTV Volume was on average 1.18 for RT and 0.62 for MC. Maximum doses delivered to OARs was reduced in the MC plans. The doses for 1000 and 1500 cc of total lung minus PTV, respectively were reduced by 39% and 53% for the MC plans. The correlation of the ratio of air in PTV to the PTV with the difference in PTV coverage had a coefficient of −0.54. Conclusion: The preliminary results confirm that the RT algorithm significantly overestimates the dosages delivered confirming previous analyses. Finally, subdividing the data into different size regimes increased the correlation for the smaller size PTVs indicating the MC algorithm improvement verses the RT algorithm is dependent upon the size of the PTV.« less