Feasibility of Monte-Carlo algorithm in comparison with collapse-cone dose calculation algorithm of a commercial treatment planning system in the presence of high-density metallic implant: a dosimetric study

Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute - 2021
Manindra Bhushan1, Deepak Tripathi2, Garima Yadav1, Lalit Kumar1, Rahul Lal Chowdhary1, A.K. Pahuja1, T. Suresh1, Sushil Kumar Shukla1, Swarupa Mitra1
1Division of Medical Physics & Department of Radiation Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, Sector-5, Rohini, New Delhi, 110085, India
2Amity School of Applied Sciences, Amity University (AUUP), Noida, India

Tóm tắt

Abstract Background The number of people with implanted hip prosthesis has grown worldwide. For radiotherapy planning of patients with hip implants, few main challenges are encountered. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility of different planning algorithms in the presence of high-density metallic implant in the treatment of patients with carcinoma cervix. Results It was found that D98% were 44.49 ± 0.11, 44.51 ± 0.13, 44.39 ± 0.22, and 44.45 ± 0.16 Gy for 4FMC6MV (4-field technique calculated with Monte-Carlo algorithm and 6 MV photon energy), 4FMC6MV_WP (4-field technique calculated with Monte-Carlo algorithm and 6 MV photon energy without prosthesis), 4FCC6MV (4-field technique calculated with collapse-cone-convolution algorithm and 6 MV photon energy), and 4FCC6MV_WP (4-field technique calculated with collapse-cone-convolution algorithm and 6 MV photon energy without prosthesis) respectively. Similarly, D2% were 49.40 ± 0.84, 49.05 ± 0.76, 48.97 ± 0.91, and 48.57 ± 0.85 Gray (Gy) for 4FMC6MV, 4FMC6MV_WP, 4FCC6MV, and 4FCC6MV_WP respectively. The present study has not suggested any major difference between the Monte-Carlo (MC) and collapse-cone-convolution (CCC) calculation algorithm in the presence of high-Z metallic implants. Volume of bowel receiving 15 Gy dose has shown a significant difference with prosthesis cases. This study investigates that hip prosthesis creates considerable changes in the treatment planning of cervical malignancies. Conclusion CCC algorithm is in good agreement with MC calculation algorithm in the presence of high-density metallic implants in terms of target coverage and avoidance organ sparing except few parameters.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Reft C, Alecu R, Das IJ, Gerbi BJ, Keall P, Lief E, et al. Dosimetric consideration for patients with HIP prostheses undergoing pelvic irradiation. Report of the AAPM radiation therapy committee task group 63. Med Phys. 2003;30(6):1162–82.

Sibata CH, Mota HC, Higgins PD, Gaisser D, Saxton JP, Shin KH. Influence of hip prostheses on high energy photon dose distributions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990;18:455–61.

Catli S, Tanir G. Experimental and Monte Carlo evaluation of eclipse treatment planning system for effects on dose distribution of the hip prostheses. Med Dosim. 2013;38:332–6.

Keall PJ, Siebers JV, Jeraj R, Mohan R. Radiotherapy dose calculations in the presence of hip prostheses. Med Dosim. 2003;28:107–12.

Bhushan M, Tripathi D, Yadav G, Kumar L, Dewan A, Kumar G. Effect of hip prosthesis on photon beam characteristics in radiological physics. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 21(6):1731–8. https://doi.org/10.31557/APJCP.2020.21.6.1731.

William SJ, Mundt AJ. Consensus guidelines for the delineation of the intensity modulated pelvic radiotherapy CTV in the postoperative treatment of endometrial and cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008; Available from: https://www.rtog.org/CoreLab/ContouringAtlases/GYN.aspx.

van’t Riet A, Mak AC, Moerland MA, Elders LH, Zee WV. A conformation number to quantify the degree of conformality in brachytherapy and external beam irradiation: application to the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37:731–6.

Shaw E, Scott C, Souhami L, Dinapoli R, Kline R, Loeffler J, et al. Single dose radiosurgical treatment of recurrent previously irradiated primary brain tumors and brain metastases: final report of RTOG protocol 90–05. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;47:291–8.

Lomax NJ, Scheib SG. Quantifying the degree of conformity in radiosurgery treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:1409–19.

Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon-beam intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) Oxford: Oxford University press, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 2010. ICRU Report 83.

Wu Q, Mohan R, Morris M, Lavue A, Schmidt-Ullrich R. Simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locally advanced head-and-neck squamous cell carcinomas: dosimetric results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;26:573–85.

Semerenko VA, Reitz B, Day E, Qi XS, Miften M, Li XA. Evaluation of a commercial biologically based IMRT treatment planning system. Med Phys. 2008;35:5851–60.

Nagar YS, Singh S, Kumar S, Lal P. Conventional 4-field box radiotherapy technique for cancer cervix: potential for geographic miss without CECT scan-based planning. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2004;14(5):865–70.

Mesbahi A, Thwaites DI, Reilly AJ. Experimental and Monte Carlo evaluation of eclipse treatment planning system for lung dose calculations. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2006;11:123–33.

Farajollahi A, Mesbahi A. Monte Carlo dose calculations for a 6-MV photon beam in a thorax phantom. Radiat Med. 2006;24:269–76.

Kim SJ, Kim SK, Kim DH. Comparison of pencil-beam, collapsed-cone and Monte-Carlo algorithms in radiotherapy treatment planning for 6-MV photons. J Korean Phys Soc. 2015;67:153–8. https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.67.153.

Ojala J, Kapanen M, Sipilä P, Hyödynmaa S, Pitkänen M. The accuracy of Acuros XB algorithm for radiation beams traversing a metallic hip implant – comparison with measurements and Monte Carlo calculations. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15:4912.

Paulu D, Alaei P. Evaluation of dose calculation accuracy of treatment planning systems at hip prosthesis interfaces. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017;18(3):9–15.

Wieslander E, Knöös T. Dose perturbation in the presence of metallic implants: treatment planning system versus Monte Carlo simulations. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48:3295–305.

Theis VS, Sripadam R, Ramani V, Lal S. Chronic radiation enteritis. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2010;22(1):70–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2009.10.003.

Lin SY, Chu TC, Lin JP, Liu MT. The effect of a metal hip prosthesis on the radiation dose in therapeutic photon beam irradiations. Appl Radiat Isot. 2002;57:17–23.

Carolan M, Dao P, Fox C, Metcalfe P. Effect of hip prostheses on radiotherapy dose. Australas Radiol. 2000;44:290–5.

Bayatiani MR, Seif F, Hamidi S, Bagheri S. Investigating the impact of knee prosthesis in patient’s body on radiation dose distribution: a Monte Carlo approach. J Biomed Phys Eng. 2019;9(3):345–54.

Mohammadi K, Hassani M, Ghorbani M, Farhood B, Knaup C. Evaluation of the accuracy of various dose calculation algorithms of a commercial treatment planning system in the presence of hip prosthesis and comparison with Monte Carlo. J Can Res Ther. 2017;13:501–9.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute

Thông tin tác giả