Dosimetric comparison of peripheral NSCLC SBRT using Acuros XB and AAA calculation algorithms

There is a concern for dose calculation in highly heterogenous environments such as the thorax region. This study compares the quality of treatment plans of peripheral non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using 2 calculation algorithms, namely, Eclipse Anisot...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists 2017, Vol.42 (3), p.216-222
Hauptverfasser: Ong, Chloe C.H., Ang, Khong Wei, Soh, Roger C.X., Tin, Kah Ming, Yap, Jerome H.H., Lee, James C.L., Bragg, Christopher M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 222
container_issue 3
container_start_page 216
container_title Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists
container_volume 42
creator Ong, Chloe C.H.
Ang, Khong Wei
Soh, Roger C.X.
Tin, Kah Ming
Yap, Jerome H.H.
Lee, James C.L.
Bragg, Christopher M.
description There is a concern for dose calculation in highly heterogenous environments such as the thorax region. This study compares the quality of treatment plans of peripheral non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using 2 calculation algorithms, namely, Eclipse Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and Acuros External Beam (AXB), for 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) data from 20 anonymized patients were studied using Varian Eclipse planning system, AXB, and AAA version 10.0.28. A 3DCRT plan and a VMAT plan were generated using AAA and AXB with constant plan parameters for each patient. The prescription and dose constraints were benchmarked against Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0915 protocol. Planning parameters of the plan were compared statistically using Mann-Whitney U tests. Results showed that 3DCRT and VMAT plans have a lower target coverage up to 8% when calculated using AXB as compared with AAA. The conformity index (CI) for AXB plans was 4.7% lower than AAA plans, but was closer to unity, which indicated better target conformity. AXB produced plans with global maximum doses which were, on average, 2% hotter than AAA plans. Both 3DCRT and VMAT plans were able to achieve D95%. VMAT plans were shown to be more conformal (CI = 1.01) and were at least 3.2% and 1.5% lower in terms of PTV maximum and mean dose, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference for doses received by organs at risk (OARs) regardless of calculation algorithms and treatment techniques. In general, the difference in tissue modeling for AXB and AAA algorithm is responsible for the dose distribution between the AXB and the AAA algorithms. The AXB VMAT plans could be used to benefit patients receiving peripheral NSCLC SBRT.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.meddos.2017.05.005
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1920201988</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0958394717300602</els_id><sourcerecordid>1920201988</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-51fb4fc9cab02bfe3389e555db4a3046e50aa34bddeffd9141ac5526c596f1ab3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFO3DAQhq2qqCyUN0CVj70kHSf2JrlUCgullVatVEDigizHHoNXSRzsBIm3r9FCj5zmMN8_v-Yj5JRBzoCtv-3yAY3xMS-AVTmIHEB8ICtWV2XGoSg-khU0os7KhleH5CjGHSSCQ_mJHBZ1xRiv6hW5O_fRDTgHp6n2w6SCi36k3tIJg5seMKie_r7abDf06uzvNV2iG-9pq5fgI709o2o0tG1bqlWvl17NLoVVf--Dmx-G-JkcWNVHPHmdx-Tmx8X15me2_XP5a9NuM82hnjPBbMetbrTqoOgslmXdoBDCdFyVwNcoQKmSd8agtaZhnCktRLHWollbprrymHzd352Cf1wwznJwUWPfqxH9EiVrCkiamrpOKN-jOn0QA1o5BTeo8CwZyBexcif3YuWLWAlCJm0p9uW1YenS-n_ozWQCvu8BTH8-OQwyaoejRuMC6lka795v-AeHm4u-</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1920201988</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dosimetric comparison of peripheral NSCLC SBRT using Acuros XB and AAA calculation algorithms</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Ong, Chloe C.H. ; Ang, Khong Wei ; Soh, Roger C.X. ; Tin, Kah Ming ; Yap, Jerome H.H. ; Lee, James C.L. ; Bragg, Christopher M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Ong, Chloe C.H. ; Ang, Khong Wei ; Soh, Roger C.X. ; Tin, Kah Ming ; Yap, Jerome H.H. ; Lee, James C.L. ; Bragg, Christopher M.</creatorcontrib><description>There is a concern for dose calculation in highly heterogenous environments such as the thorax region. This study compares the quality of treatment plans of peripheral non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using 2 calculation algorithms, namely, Eclipse Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and Acuros External Beam (AXB), for 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) data from 20 anonymized patients were studied using Varian Eclipse planning system, AXB, and AAA version 10.0.28. A 3DCRT plan and a VMAT plan were generated using AAA and AXB with constant plan parameters for each patient. The prescription and dose constraints were benchmarked against Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0915 protocol. Planning parameters of the plan were compared statistically using Mann-Whitney U tests. Results showed that 3DCRT and VMAT plans have a lower target coverage up to 8% when calculated using AXB as compared with AAA. The conformity index (CI) for AXB plans was 4.7% lower than AAA plans, but was closer to unity, which indicated better target conformity. AXB produced plans with global maximum doses which were, on average, 2% hotter than AAA plans. Both 3DCRT and VMAT plans were able to achieve D95%. VMAT plans were shown to be more conformal (CI = 1.01) and were at least 3.2% and 1.5% lower in terms of PTV maximum and mean dose, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference for doses received by organs at risk (OARs) regardless of calculation algorithms and treatment techniques. In general, the difference in tissue modeling for AXB and AAA algorithm is responsible for the dose distribution between the AXB and the AAA algorithms. The AXB VMAT plans could be used to benefit patients receiving peripheral NSCLC SBRT.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0958-3947</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-4022</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2017.05.005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28711478</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>AAA ; Algorithms ; AXB ; Calculation algorithms ; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - radiotherapy ; Humans ; Lung Neoplasms - radiotherapy ; NSCLC ; Organs at Risk ; Radiosurgery ; Radiotherapy Dosage ; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted ; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated ; Retrospective Studies ; SBRT</subject><ispartof>Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists, 2017, Vol.42 (3), p.216-222</ispartof><rights>2017 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-51fb4fc9cab02bfe3389e555db4a3046e50aa34bddeffd9141ac5526c596f1ab3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-51fb4fc9cab02bfe3389e555db4a3046e50aa34bddeffd9141ac5526c596f1ab3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0958394717300602$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28711478$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ong, Chloe C.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ang, Khong Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soh, Roger C.X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tin, Kah Ming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yap, Jerome H.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, James C.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bragg, Christopher M.</creatorcontrib><title>Dosimetric comparison of peripheral NSCLC SBRT using Acuros XB and AAA calculation algorithms</title><title>Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists</title><addtitle>Med Dosim</addtitle><description>There is a concern for dose calculation in highly heterogenous environments such as the thorax region. This study compares the quality of treatment plans of peripheral non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using 2 calculation algorithms, namely, Eclipse Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and Acuros External Beam (AXB), for 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) data from 20 anonymized patients were studied using Varian Eclipse planning system, AXB, and AAA version 10.0.28. A 3DCRT plan and a VMAT plan were generated using AAA and AXB with constant plan parameters for each patient. The prescription and dose constraints were benchmarked against Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0915 protocol. Planning parameters of the plan were compared statistically using Mann-Whitney U tests. Results showed that 3DCRT and VMAT plans have a lower target coverage up to 8% when calculated using AXB as compared with AAA. The conformity index (CI) for AXB plans was 4.7% lower than AAA plans, but was closer to unity, which indicated better target conformity. AXB produced plans with global maximum doses which were, on average, 2% hotter than AAA plans. Both 3DCRT and VMAT plans were able to achieve D95%. VMAT plans were shown to be more conformal (CI = 1.01) and were at least 3.2% and 1.5% lower in terms of PTV maximum and mean dose, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference for doses received by organs at risk (OARs) regardless of calculation algorithms and treatment techniques. In general, the difference in tissue modeling for AXB and AAA algorithm is responsible for the dose distribution between the AXB and the AAA algorithms. The AXB VMAT plans could be used to benefit patients receiving peripheral NSCLC SBRT.</description><subject>AAA</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>AXB</subject><subject>Calculation algorithms</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - radiotherapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lung Neoplasms - radiotherapy</subject><subject>NSCLC</subject><subject>Organs at Risk</subject><subject>Radiosurgery</subject><subject>Radiotherapy Dosage</subject><subject>Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>SBRT</subject><issn>0958-3947</issn><issn>1873-4022</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMFO3DAQhq2qqCyUN0CVj70kHSf2JrlUCgullVatVEDigizHHoNXSRzsBIm3r9FCj5zmMN8_v-Yj5JRBzoCtv-3yAY3xMS-AVTmIHEB8ICtWV2XGoSg-khU0os7KhleH5CjGHSSCQ_mJHBZ1xRiv6hW5O_fRDTgHp6n2w6SCi36k3tIJg5seMKie_r7abDf06uzvNV2iG-9pq5fgI709o2o0tG1bqlWvl17NLoVVf--Dmx-G-JkcWNVHPHmdx-Tmx8X15me2_XP5a9NuM82hnjPBbMetbrTqoOgslmXdoBDCdFyVwNcoQKmSd8agtaZhnCktRLHWollbprrymHzd352Cf1wwznJwUWPfqxH9EiVrCkiamrpOKN-jOn0QA1o5BTeo8CwZyBexcif3YuWLWAlCJm0p9uW1YenS-n_ozWQCvu8BTH8-OQwyaoejRuMC6lka795v-AeHm4u-</recordid><startdate>2017</startdate><enddate>2017</enddate><creator>Ong, Chloe C.H.</creator><creator>Ang, Khong Wei</creator><creator>Soh, Roger C.X.</creator><creator>Tin, Kah Ming</creator><creator>Yap, Jerome H.H.</creator><creator>Lee, James C.L.</creator><creator>Bragg, Christopher M.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2017</creationdate><title>Dosimetric comparison of peripheral NSCLC SBRT using Acuros XB and AAA calculation algorithms</title><author>Ong, Chloe C.H. ; Ang, Khong Wei ; Soh, Roger C.X. ; Tin, Kah Ming ; Yap, Jerome H.H. ; Lee, James C.L. ; Bragg, Christopher M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-51fb4fc9cab02bfe3389e555db4a3046e50aa34bddeffd9141ac5526c596f1ab3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>AAA</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>AXB</topic><topic>Calculation algorithms</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - radiotherapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lung Neoplasms - radiotherapy</topic><topic>NSCLC</topic><topic>Organs at Risk</topic><topic>Radiosurgery</topic><topic>Radiotherapy Dosage</topic><topic>Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>SBRT</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ong, Chloe C.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ang, Khong Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soh, Roger C.X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tin, Kah Ming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yap, Jerome H.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, James C.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bragg, Christopher M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ong, Chloe C.H.</au><au>Ang, Khong Wei</au><au>Soh, Roger C.X.</au><au>Tin, Kah Ming</au><au>Yap, Jerome H.H.</au><au>Lee, James C.L.</au><au>Bragg, Christopher M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dosimetric comparison of peripheral NSCLC SBRT using Acuros XB and AAA calculation algorithms</atitle><jtitle>Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists</jtitle><addtitle>Med Dosim</addtitle><date>2017</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>216</spage><epage>222</epage><pages>216-222</pages><issn>0958-3947</issn><eissn>1873-4022</eissn><abstract>There is a concern for dose calculation in highly heterogenous environments such as the thorax region. This study compares the quality of treatment plans of peripheral non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using 2 calculation algorithms, namely, Eclipse Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and Acuros External Beam (AXB), for 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) data from 20 anonymized patients were studied using Varian Eclipse planning system, AXB, and AAA version 10.0.28. A 3DCRT plan and a VMAT plan were generated using AAA and AXB with constant plan parameters for each patient. The prescription and dose constraints were benchmarked against Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0915 protocol. Planning parameters of the plan were compared statistically using Mann-Whitney U tests. Results showed that 3DCRT and VMAT plans have a lower target coverage up to 8% when calculated using AXB as compared with AAA. The conformity index (CI) for AXB plans was 4.7% lower than AAA plans, but was closer to unity, which indicated better target conformity. AXB produced plans with global maximum doses which were, on average, 2% hotter than AAA plans. Both 3DCRT and VMAT plans were able to achieve D95%. VMAT plans were shown to be more conformal (CI = 1.01) and were at least 3.2% and 1.5% lower in terms of PTV maximum and mean dose, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference for doses received by organs at risk (OARs) regardless of calculation algorithms and treatment techniques. In general, the difference in tissue modeling for AXB and AAA algorithm is responsible for the dose distribution between the AXB and the AAA algorithms. The AXB VMAT plans could be used to benefit patients receiving peripheral NSCLC SBRT.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>28711478</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.meddos.2017.05.005</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0958-3947
ispartof Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists, 2017, Vol.42 (3), p.216-222
issn 0958-3947
1873-4022
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1920201988
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects AAA
Algorithms
AXB
Calculation algorithms
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - radiotherapy
Humans
Lung Neoplasms - radiotherapy
NSCLC
Organs at Risk
Radiosurgery
Radiotherapy Dosage
Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted
Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated
Retrospective Studies
SBRT
title Dosimetric comparison of peripheral NSCLC SBRT using Acuros XB and AAA calculation algorithms
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T18%3A15%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dosimetric%20comparison%20of%20peripheral%20NSCLC%20SBRT%20using%20Acuros%20XB%20and%20AAA%20calculation%20algorithms&rft.jtitle=Medical%20dosimetry%20:%20official%20journal%20of%20the%20American%20Association%20of%20Medical%20Dosimetrists&rft.au=Ong,%20Chloe%20C.H.&rft.date=2017&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=216&rft.epage=222&rft.pages=216-222&rft.issn=0958-3947&rft.eissn=1873-4022&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.meddos.2017.05.005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1920201988%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1920201988&rft_id=info:pmid/28711478&rft_els_id=S0958394717300602&rfr_iscdi=true