Cargando…

Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy

BACKGROUND: The currently available treatment planning systems (TPSs) are neither designed nor intended for accurate dose calculations in nontarget regions. The aim of this work is to quantify the accuracy and reliability of nontarget doses calculated by a commercially available TPS. METHODS: Nontar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Danckaert, Willeke, Ost, Piet, De Wagter, Carlos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10402685/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37170654
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14003
_version_ 1785084897498497024
author Danckaert, Willeke
Ost, Piet
De Wagter, Carlos
author_facet Danckaert, Willeke
Ost, Piet
De Wagter, Carlos
author_sort Danckaert, Willeke
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The currently available treatment planning systems (TPSs) are neither designed nor intended for accurate dose calculations in nontarget regions. The aim of this work is to quantify the accuracy and reliability of nontarget doses calculated by a commercially available TPS. METHODS: Nontarget doses calculated by the collapsed cone (CC) (v5.2) algorithm implemented in the RayStation (v6) TPS were compared to measured values. Different scenarios were investigated, from simple static fields to intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans. Deviations and confidence limits (CLs) were calculated between results of calculations and measurements—applying both local (δ) and global (Δ) normalization—for various points of interest (POIs). Results were based on a single‐institution experience for one clinical test case (prostate) and evaluated against internationally accepted criteria. RESULTS: Overall, the TPS underestimated the nontarget dose by an average of −17.7% ± 25.3% for IMRT. Quantitatively similar results were obtained for VMAT (−17.6% ± 21.2%). POIs receiving < 5% of the prescription dose were significantly underestimated by the TPS (p‐value < 0.05 for both IMRT and VMAT). Dose calculation accuracy was also determined by the contribution of secondary radiation, with measured doses for out‐of‐field POIs being significantly different from calculated values (p‐value < 0.01 for both IMRT and VMAT). Although the CL(δ) in nontarget regions failed the proposed tolerance criteria (40%) for both IMRT (68.8%) and VMAT (52.6%), the CL(Δ) was within the tolerance limit (4%) for both treatment techniques (1.9% for IMRT and 1.3% for VMAT). No action levels (7%) were exceeded. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the currently available benchmarks our TPS is considered acceptable for clinical use, although the dose in some POIs was poorly predicted by the CC algorithm. Some areas were pointed out where TPSs and linear accelerator control systems can be improved.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10402685
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104026852023-08-05 Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy Danckaert, Willeke Ost, Piet De Wagter, Carlos J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics BACKGROUND: The currently available treatment planning systems (TPSs) are neither designed nor intended for accurate dose calculations in nontarget regions. The aim of this work is to quantify the accuracy and reliability of nontarget doses calculated by a commercially available TPS. METHODS: Nontarget doses calculated by the collapsed cone (CC) (v5.2) algorithm implemented in the RayStation (v6) TPS were compared to measured values. Different scenarios were investigated, from simple static fields to intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans. Deviations and confidence limits (CLs) were calculated between results of calculations and measurements—applying both local (δ) and global (Δ) normalization—for various points of interest (POIs). Results were based on a single‐institution experience for one clinical test case (prostate) and evaluated against internationally accepted criteria. RESULTS: Overall, the TPS underestimated the nontarget dose by an average of −17.7% ± 25.3% for IMRT. Quantitatively similar results were obtained for VMAT (−17.6% ± 21.2%). POIs receiving < 5% of the prescription dose were significantly underestimated by the TPS (p‐value < 0.05 for both IMRT and VMAT). Dose calculation accuracy was also determined by the contribution of secondary radiation, with measured doses for out‐of‐field POIs being significantly different from calculated values (p‐value < 0.01 for both IMRT and VMAT). Although the CL(δ) in nontarget regions failed the proposed tolerance criteria (40%) for both IMRT (68.8%) and VMAT (52.6%), the CL(Δ) was within the tolerance limit (4%) for both treatment techniques (1.9% for IMRT and 1.3% for VMAT). No action levels (7%) were exceeded. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the currently available benchmarks our TPS is considered acceptable for clinical use, although the dose in some POIs was poorly predicted by the CC algorithm. Some areas were pointed out where TPSs and linear accelerator control systems can be improved. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10402685/ /pubmed/37170654 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14003 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Danckaert, Willeke
Ost, Piet
De Wagter, Carlos
Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy
title Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy
title_full Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy
title_fullStr Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy
title_short Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy
title_sort accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10402685/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37170654
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14003
work_keys_str_mv AT danckaertwilleke accuracyandreliabilityofacommercialtreatmentplanningsysteminnontargetregionsinmodernprostateradiotherapy
AT ostpiet accuracyandreliabilityofacommercialtreatmentplanningsysteminnontargetregionsinmodernprostateradiotherapy
AT dewagtercarlos accuracyandreliabilityofacommercialtreatmentplanningsysteminnontargetregionsinmodernprostateradiotherapy