Cargando…

Dosimetric impact of intermediate dose calculation for optimization convergence error

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) provides the protection of the normal organs and a precise treatment plan through its optimization process. However, the final dose-volume histogram (DVH) obtained by this technique differs from the optimal DVH, owing to optimization convergence errors. H...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Byung Do, Kim, Tae Gyu, Kim, Jong Eon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Impact Journals LLC 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5122334/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26933998
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.7743
_version_ 1782469558766927872
author Park, Byung Do
Kim, Tae Gyu
Kim, Jong Eon
author_facet Park, Byung Do
Kim, Tae Gyu
Kim, Jong Eon
author_sort Park, Byung Do
collection PubMed
description Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) provides the protection of the normal organs and a precise treatment plan through its optimization process. However, the final dose-volume histogram (DVH) obtained by this technique differs from the optimal DVH, owing to optimization convergence errors. Herein, intermediate dose calculation was applied to IMRT plans during the optimization process to solve these issues. Homogeneous and heterogeneous targets were delineated on a virtual phantom, and the final DVH for the target volume was assessed on the target coverage. The IMRT plans of 30 patients were established to evaluate the usefulness of intermediate dose calculation. The target coverage results were analogous in the three plans with homogeneous targets. Conversely, conformity indices (conformity index [CI], heterogeneity index [HI], and uniformity index [UI]) of plans with intermediate dose calculation were estimated to be more homogenous than plans without this option for heterogeneous targets (CI, 0.371 vs. 1.000; HI, 0.104 vs. 0.036; UI, 1.099 vs. 1.031 for Phantom B; and CI, 0.318 vs. 0.956; HI, 0.167 vs. 0.076; UI, 1.165 vs. 1.057 for Phantom C). In brain and prostate cancers, a slight difference between plans calculated with anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) was observed (HI, p = 0.043, UI, p = 0.043 for brain; HI, p = 0.042, UI, p = 0.043 for prostate). All target coverage indices were improved by intermediate dose calculation in lung cancer cases (p = 0.043). In conclusion, intermediate dose calculation in IMRT plans improves the target coverage in the target volume around heterogeneous materials. Moreover, the optimization time can be reduced.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5122334
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Impact Journals LLC
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51223342016-12-05 Dosimetric impact of intermediate dose calculation for optimization convergence error Park, Byung Do Kim, Tae Gyu Kim, Jong Eon Oncotarget Research Paper Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) provides the protection of the normal organs and a precise treatment plan through its optimization process. However, the final dose-volume histogram (DVH) obtained by this technique differs from the optimal DVH, owing to optimization convergence errors. Herein, intermediate dose calculation was applied to IMRT plans during the optimization process to solve these issues. Homogeneous and heterogeneous targets were delineated on a virtual phantom, and the final DVH for the target volume was assessed on the target coverage. The IMRT plans of 30 patients were established to evaluate the usefulness of intermediate dose calculation. The target coverage results were analogous in the three plans with homogeneous targets. Conversely, conformity indices (conformity index [CI], heterogeneity index [HI], and uniformity index [UI]) of plans with intermediate dose calculation were estimated to be more homogenous than plans without this option for heterogeneous targets (CI, 0.371 vs. 1.000; HI, 0.104 vs. 0.036; UI, 1.099 vs. 1.031 for Phantom B; and CI, 0.318 vs. 0.956; HI, 0.167 vs. 0.076; UI, 1.165 vs. 1.057 for Phantom C). In brain and prostate cancers, a slight difference between plans calculated with anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) was observed (HI, p = 0.043, UI, p = 0.043 for brain; HI, p = 0.042, UI, p = 0.043 for prostate). All target coverage indices were improved by intermediate dose calculation in lung cancer cases (p = 0.043). In conclusion, intermediate dose calculation in IMRT plans improves the target coverage in the target volume around heterogeneous materials. Moreover, the optimization time can be reduced. Impact Journals LLC 2016-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5122334/ /pubmed/26933998 http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.7743 Text en Copyright: © 2016 Park et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Park, Byung Do
Kim, Tae Gyu
Kim, Jong Eon
Dosimetric impact of intermediate dose calculation for optimization convergence error
title Dosimetric impact of intermediate dose calculation for optimization convergence error
title_full Dosimetric impact of intermediate dose calculation for optimization convergence error
title_fullStr Dosimetric impact of intermediate dose calculation for optimization convergence error
title_full_unstemmed Dosimetric impact of intermediate dose calculation for optimization convergence error
title_short Dosimetric impact of intermediate dose calculation for optimization convergence error
title_sort dosimetric impact of intermediate dose calculation for optimization convergence error
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5122334/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26933998
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.7743
work_keys_str_mv AT parkbyungdo dosimetricimpactofintermediatedosecalculationforoptimizationconvergenceerror
AT kimtaegyu dosimetricimpactofintermediatedosecalculationforoptimizationconvergenceerror
AT kimjongeon dosimetricimpactofintermediatedosecalculationforoptimizationconvergenceerror