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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists 2017, Vol.42 (3), p.216-222 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
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 |