Cargando…

Dosimetric Comparison of Different Dose Calculation Algorithms in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients Using Conformal Planning Techniques

BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to compare three different dose-calculating algorithms, i.e., superposition (SP), fast SP (FSP), and convolution (CV), for breast cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and field-in-Field forward plan IMRT (FiF-FP-IMRT). MATE...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gaur, Garima, Dangwal, Vinod Kumar, Banipal, Raja Paramjeet Singh, Singh, Ranjit, Kaur, Gurpreet, Grover, Romikant, Sachdeva, Sheetal, Kang, Manraj Singh, Singh, Simrandeep, Garg, Pardeep, Singh, Baltej
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10419741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37576097
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_28_23
_version_ 1785088598711730176
author Gaur, Garima
Dangwal, Vinod Kumar
Banipal, Raja Paramjeet Singh
Singh, Ranjit
Kaur, Gurpreet
Grover, Romikant
Sachdeva, Sheetal
Kang, Manraj Singh
Singh, Simrandeep
Garg, Pardeep
Singh, Baltej
author_facet Gaur, Garima
Dangwal, Vinod Kumar
Banipal, Raja Paramjeet Singh
Singh, Ranjit
Kaur, Gurpreet
Grover, Romikant
Sachdeva, Sheetal
Kang, Manraj Singh
Singh, Simrandeep
Garg, Pardeep
Singh, Baltej
author_sort Gaur, Garima
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to compare three different dose-calculating algorithms, i.e., superposition (SP), fast SP (FSP), and convolution (CV), for breast cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and field-in-Field forward plan IMRT (FiF-FP-IMRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current retrospective study involved 100 postmastectomy breast cancer patients who were given radiotherapy using IMRT and FiF-FP-IMRT planning techniques. All the initially SP-calculated plans were recalculated with the same monitor units for FSP and CV algorithm without change in any of the other planning parameters. The isodose distribution and various plan evaluating parameters, for example, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index, and uniformity index target volume and normal structure doses were compared and analyzed for all the different algorithm calculated plans. RESULTS: In the IMRT plans, all the target and normal structure dose-volume parameters showed a significant difference between all the three different algorithms with P < 0.05. In the FiF-FP-IMRT plans, CV algorithm showed a significant difference in most of the target and normal structure dose-volume parameters. Among quality indexes, only CI showed a significant difference between all the algorithms in both the planning techniques. R(50) showed a significant difference with the CV algorithm in both the planning techniques. CONCLUSION: The change in the dose calculation algorithm resulted in dosimetric changes which must be evaluated by the medical physicists and oncologists while evaluating treatment plans. In the current study with breast patients, the results obtained for target and normal structure doses using the CV algorithm are overestimated as compared to SP and FSP algorithms, producing variable results in air and bony normal structures. However, the ipsilateral lung V(5) parameter and the ipsilateral humeral head mean dose were found to be underestimated by the CV algorithm as compared to the SP and FSP algorithm in both the planning techniques.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10419741
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104197412023-08-12 Dosimetric Comparison of Different Dose Calculation Algorithms in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients Using Conformal Planning Techniques Gaur, Garima Dangwal, Vinod Kumar Banipal, Raja Paramjeet Singh Singh, Ranjit Kaur, Gurpreet Grover, Romikant Sachdeva, Sheetal Kang, Manraj Singh Singh, Simrandeep Garg, Pardeep Singh, Baltej J Med Phys Original Article BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to compare three different dose-calculating algorithms, i.e., superposition (SP), fast SP (FSP), and convolution (CV), for breast cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and field-in-Field forward plan IMRT (FiF-FP-IMRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current retrospective study involved 100 postmastectomy breast cancer patients who were given radiotherapy using IMRT and FiF-FP-IMRT planning techniques. All the initially SP-calculated plans were recalculated with the same monitor units for FSP and CV algorithm without change in any of the other planning parameters. The isodose distribution and various plan evaluating parameters, for example, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index, and uniformity index target volume and normal structure doses were compared and analyzed for all the different algorithm calculated plans. RESULTS: In the IMRT plans, all the target and normal structure dose-volume parameters showed a significant difference between all the three different algorithms with P < 0.05. In the FiF-FP-IMRT plans, CV algorithm showed a significant difference in most of the target and normal structure dose-volume parameters. Among quality indexes, only CI showed a significant difference between all the algorithms in both the planning techniques. R(50) showed a significant difference with the CV algorithm in both the planning techniques. CONCLUSION: The change in the dose calculation algorithm resulted in dosimetric changes which must be evaluated by the medical physicists and oncologists while evaluating treatment plans. In the current study with breast patients, the results obtained for target and normal structure doses using the CV algorithm are overestimated as compared to SP and FSP algorithms, producing variable results in air and bony normal structures. However, the ipsilateral lung V(5) parameter and the ipsilateral humeral head mean dose were found to be underestimated by the CV algorithm as compared to the SP and FSP algorithm in both the planning techniques. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023 2023-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10419741/ /pubmed/37576097 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_28_23 Text en Copyright: © 2023 Journal of Medical Physics https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Gaur, Garima
Dangwal, Vinod Kumar
Banipal, Raja Paramjeet Singh
Singh, Ranjit
Kaur, Gurpreet
Grover, Romikant
Sachdeva, Sheetal
Kang, Manraj Singh
Singh, Simrandeep
Garg, Pardeep
Singh, Baltej
Dosimetric Comparison of Different Dose Calculation Algorithms in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients Using Conformal Planning Techniques
title Dosimetric Comparison of Different Dose Calculation Algorithms in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients Using Conformal Planning Techniques
title_full Dosimetric Comparison of Different Dose Calculation Algorithms in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients Using Conformal Planning Techniques
title_fullStr Dosimetric Comparison of Different Dose Calculation Algorithms in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients Using Conformal Planning Techniques
title_full_unstemmed Dosimetric Comparison of Different Dose Calculation Algorithms in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients Using Conformal Planning Techniques
title_short Dosimetric Comparison of Different Dose Calculation Algorithms in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer Patients Using Conformal Planning Techniques
title_sort dosimetric comparison of different dose calculation algorithms in postmastectomy breast cancer patients using conformal planning techniques
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10419741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37576097
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_28_23
work_keys_str_mv AT gaurgarima dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT dangwalvinodkumar dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT banipalrajaparamjeetsingh dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT singhranjit dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT kaurgurpreet dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT groverromikant dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT sachdevasheetal dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT kangmanrajsingh dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT singhsimrandeep dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT gargpardeep dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques
AT singhbaltej dosimetriccomparisonofdifferentdosecalculationalgorithmsinpostmastectomybreastcancerpatientsusingconformalplanningtechniques