Cargando…
A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy
OBJECTIVE: Analytical dose calculation algorithms for Eclipse and Raystation treatment planning systems (TPS), as well as a Raystation Monte Carlo model are compared to corresponding measured point doses. METHOD: The TPS were modeled with the same beam data acquired during commissioning. Thirty‐five...
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/PMC5768005/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29205763 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12235 |
_version_ | 1783292632263294976 |
---|---|
author | Langner, Ulrich W. Mundis, Michelle Strauss, Dan Zhu, Mingyao Mossahebi, Sina |
author_facet | Langner, Ulrich W. Mundis, Michelle Strauss, Dan Zhu, Mingyao Mossahebi, Sina |
author_sort | Langner, Ulrich W. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Analytical dose calculation algorithms for Eclipse and Raystation treatment planning systems (TPS), as well as a Raystation Monte Carlo model are compared to corresponding measured point doses. METHOD: The TPS were modeled with the same beam data acquired during commissioning. Thirty‐five typical plans were made with each planning system, 31 without range shifter and four with a 5 cm range shifter. Point doses in these planes were compared to measured doses. RESULTS: The mean percentage difference for all plans between Raystation and Eclipse were 1.51 ± 1.99%. The mean percentage difference for all plans between TPS models and measured values are −2.06 ± 1.48% for Raystation pencil beam (PB), −0.59 ± 1.71% for Eclipse and −1.69 ± 1.11% for Raystation monte carlo (MC). The distribution for the patient plans were similar for Eclipse and Raystation MC with a P‐value of 0.59 for a two tailed unpaired t‐test and significantly different from the Raystation PB model with P = 0.0013 between Raystation MC and PB. All three models faired markedly better if plans with a 5 cm range shifter were ignored. Plan comparisons with a 5 cm range shifter give differences between Raystation and Eclipse of 3.77 ± 1.82%. The mean percentage difference for 5 cm range shifter plans between TPS models and measured values are −3.89 ± 2.79% for Raystation PB, −0.25 ± 3.85% for Eclipse and 1.55 ± 1.95% for Raystation MC. CONCLUSION: Both Eclipse and Raystation PB TPS are not always accurate within ±3% for a 5 cm range shifters or for small targets. This was improved with the Raystation MC model. The point dose calculations of Eclipse, Raystation PB, and Raystation MC compare within ±3% to measured doses for the other scenarios tested. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5768005 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57680052018-04-02 A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy Langner, Ulrich W. Mundis, Michelle Strauss, Dan Zhu, Mingyao Mossahebi, Sina J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics OBJECTIVE: Analytical dose calculation algorithms for Eclipse and Raystation treatment planning systems (TPS), as well as a Raystation Monte Carlo model are compared to corresponding measured point doses. METHOD: The TPS were modeled with the same beam data acquired during commissioning. Thirty‐five typical plans were made with each planning system, 31 without range shifter and four with a 5 cm range shifter. Point doses in these planes were compared to measured doses. RESULTS: The mean percentage difference for all plans between Raystation and Eclipse were 1.51 ± 1.99%. The mean percentage difference for all plans between TPS models and measured values are −2.06 ± 1.48% for Raystation pencil beam (PB), −0.59 ± 1.71% for Eclipse and −1.69 ± 1.11% for Raystation monte carlo (MC). The distribution for the patient plans were similar for Eclipse and Raystation MC with a P‐value of 0.59 for a two tailed unpaired t‐test and significantly different from the Raystation PB model with P = 0.0013 between Raystation MC and PB. All three models faired markedly better if plans with a 5 cm range shifter were ignored. Plan comparisons with a 5 cm range shifter give differences between Raystation and Eclipse of 3.77 ± 1.82%. The mean percentage difference for 5 cm range shifter plans between TPS models and measured values are −3.89 ± 2.79% for Raystation PB, −0.25 ± 3.85% for Eclipse and 1.55 ± 1.95% for Raystation MC. CONCLUSION: Both Eclipse and Raystation PB TPS are not always accurate within ±3% for a 5 cm range shifters or for small targets. This was improved with the Raystation MC model. The point dose calculations of Eclipse, Raystation PB, and Raystation MC compare within ±3% to measured doses for the other scenarios tested. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5768005/ /pubmed/29205763 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12235 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 Langner, Ulrich W. Mundis, Michelle Strauss, Dan Zhu, Mingyao Mossahebi, Sina A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy |
title | A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy |
title_full | A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy |
title_fullStr | A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy |
title_short | A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy |
title_sort | comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5768005/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29205763 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12235 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT langnerulrichw acomparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy AT mundismichelle acomparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy AT straussdan acomparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy AT zhumingyao acomparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy AT mossahebisina acomparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy AT langnerulrichw comparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy AT mundismichelle comparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy AT straussdan comparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy AT zhumingyao comparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy AT mossahebisina comparisonoftwopencilbeamscanningtreatmentplanningsystemsforprotontherapy |