Cargando…
Tuning of AcurosXB source size setting for small intracranial targets
This study details a method to evaluate the source size selection for small field intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) deliveries in Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) for AcurosXB dose calculation algorithm. Our method uses end‐to‐end dosimetric data to evaluate a total of five source...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5689841/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28470819 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12091 |
_version_ | 1783279468998033408 |
---|---|
author | Gardner, Stephen J. Lu, Siming Liu, Chang Wen, Ning Chetty, Indrin J. |
author_facet | Gardner, Stephen J. Lu, Siming Liu, Chang Wen, Ning Chetty, Indrin J. |
author_sort | Gardner, Stephen J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study details a method to evaluate the source size selection for small field intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) deliveries in Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) for AcurosXB dose calculation algorithm. Our method uses end‐to‐end dosimetric data to evaluate a total of five source size selections (0.50 mm, 0.75 mm, 1.00 mm, 1.25 mm, and 1.50 mm). The dosimetric leaf gap (DLG) was varied in this analysis (three DLG values were tested for each scenario). We also tested two MLC leaf designs (standard and high‐definition MLC) and two delivery types for intracranial SRS (volumetric modulated arc therapy [VMAT] and dynamic conformal arc [DCA]). Thus, a total of 10 VMAT plans and 10 DCA plans were tested for each machine type (TrueBeam [standard MLC] and Edge [high‐definition MLC]). Each plan was mapped to a solid water phantom and dose was calculated with each iteration of source size and DLG value (15 total dose calculations for each plan). To measure the dose, Gafchromic film was placed in the coronal plane of the solid water phantom at isocenter. The phantom was localized via on‐board CBCT and the plans were delivered at planned gantry, collimator, and couch angles. The planned and measured film dose was compared using Gamma (3.0%, 0.3 mm) criteria. The vendor‐recommended 1.00 mm source size was suitable for TrueBeam planning (both VMAT and DCA planning) and Edge DCA planning. However, for Edge VMAT planning, the 0.50 mm source size yielded the highest passing rates. The difference in dose calculation among the source size variations manifested primarily in two regions of the dose calculation: (1) the shoulder of the high‐dose region, and (2) for small targets (volume ≤ 0.30 cc), in the central portion of the high‐dose region. Selection of a larger than optimal source size can result in increased blurring of the shoulder for all target volume sizes tested, and can result in central axis dose discrepancies in excess of 10% for target volumes sizes ≤ 0.30 cc. Our results indicate a need for evaluation of the source size when AcurosXB is used to model intracranial SRS delivery, and our methods represent a feasible process for many clinics to perform tuning of the AcurosXB source size parameter. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5689841 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56898412018-04-02 Tuning of AcurosXB source size setting for small intracranial targets Gardner, Stephen J. Lu, Siming Liu, Chang Wen, Ning Chetty, Indrin J. J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics This study details a method to evaluate the source size selection for small field intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) deliveries in Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) for AcurosXB dose calculation algorithm. Our method uses end‐to‐end dosimetric data to evaluate a total of five source size selections (0.50 mm, 0.75 mm, 1.00 mm, 1.25 mm, and 1.50 mm). The dosimetric leaf gap (DLG) was varied in this analysis (three DLG values were tested for each scenario). We also tested two MLC leaf designs (standard and high‐definition MLC) and two delivery types for intracranial SRS (volumetric modulated arc therapy [VMAT] and dynamic conformal arc [DCA]). Thus, a total of 10 VMAT plans and 10 DCA plans were tested for each machine type (TrueBeam [standard MLC] and Edge [high‐definition MLC]). Each plan was mapped to a solid water phantom and dose was calculated with each iteration of source size and DLG value (15 total dose calculations for each plan). To measure the dose, Gafchromic film was placed in the coronal plane of the solid water phantom at isocenter. The phantom was localized via on‐board CBCT and the plans were delivered at planned gantry, collimator, and couch angles. The planned and measured film dose was compared using Gamma (3.0%, 0.3 mm) criteria. The vendor‐recommended 1.00 mm source size was suitable for TrueBeam planning (both VMAT and DCA planning) and Edge DCA planning. However, for Edge VMAT planning, the 0.50 mm source size yielded the highest passing rates. The difference in dose calculation among the source size variations manifested primarily in two regions of the dose calculation: (1) the shoulder of the high‐dose region, and (2) for small targets (volume ≤ 0.30 cc), in the central portion of the high‐dose region. Selection of a larger than optimal source size can result in increased blurring of the shoulder for all target volume sizes tested, and can result in central axis dose discrepancies in excess of 10% for target volumes sizes ≤ 0.30 cc. Our results indicate a need for evaluation of the source size when AcurosXB is used to model intracranial SRS delivery, and our methods represent a feasible process for many clinics to perform tuning of the AcurosXB source size parameter. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5689841/ /pubmed/28470819 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12091 Text en © 2017 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://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 Gardner, Stephen J. Lu, Siming Liu, Chang Wen, Ning Chetty, Indrin J. Tuning of AcurosXB source size setting for small intracranial targets |
title | Tuning of AcurosXB source size setting for small intracranial targets |
title_full | Tuning of AcurosXB source size setting for small intracranial targets |
title_fullStr | Tuning of AcurosXB source size setting for small intracranial targets |
title_full_unstemmed | Tuning of AcurosXB source size setting for small intracranial targets |
title_short | Tuning of AcurosXB source size setting for small intracranial targets |
title_sort | tuning of acurosxb source size setting for small intracranial targets |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5689841/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28470819 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12091 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gardnerstephenj tuningofacurosxbsourcesizesettingforsmallintracranialtargets AT lusiming tuningofacurosxbsourcesizesettingforsmallintracranialtargets AT liuchang tuningofacurosxbsourcesizesettingforsmallintracranialtargets AT wenning tuningofacurosxbsourcesizesettingforsmallintracranialtargets AT chettyindrinj tuningofacurosxbsourcesizesettingforsmallintracranialtargets |