• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Medical Physics Conference
• /
• 2002.09a
• /
• pp.291-293
• /
• 2002

Accurate dose calculation in radiation treatment planning is most important for successful treatment. Since human body is composed of various materials and not an ideal shape, it is not easy to calculate the accurate effective dose in the patients. Many methods have been proposed to solve the inhomogeneity and surface contour problems. Monte Carlo simulations are regarded as the most accurate method, but it is not appropriate for routine planning because it takes so much time. Pencil beam kernel based convolution/superposition methods were also proposed to correct those effects. Nowadays, many commercial treatment planning systems, including Pinnacle and Helax-TMS, have adopted this algorithm as a dose calculation engine. The purpose of this study is to verify the accuracy of the dose calculated from pencil beam kernel based treatment planning system Helax-TMS comparing to Monte Carlo simulations and measurements especially in inhomogeneous region. Home-made inhomogeneous phantom, Helax-TMS ver. 6.0 and Monte Carlo code BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc were used in this study. Dose calculation results from TPS and Monte Carlo simulation were verified by measurements. In homogeneous media, the accuracy was acceptable but in inhomogeneous media, the errors were more significant.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.106-113
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the variation of radiation dose distribution for liver tumor located in liver dome and for the interest organs(normal liver, kidney, stomach) with the pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm versus anisotropic Analyticalal algorithm (AAA) of the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system, The target volumes from 20 liver cancer patients were used to create treatment plans. Treatment plans for 10 patients were performed in Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) plan and others were performed in 3 Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy (3DCRT) plan. dose calculation was recalculated by AAA algorithm after dose calculation was performed by PBC algorithm for 20 patients. Plans were optimized to 100% of the PTV by the Prescription Isodose in Dose Calculation with the PBC algorithm. Plans were recalculated with the AAA, retaining identical beam arrangements, monitor units, field weighting and collimator condition. In this study, Total PTV was to be statistically significant (SRS: p=0.018, 3DCRT: p=0.006) between PBC and AAA algorithm. and in the case of PTV, ITV in liver dome, plans for 3DCRT were to be statistically significant respectively (p=0.013, p=0.024). normal liver and kidney were to be statistically significant (p=0.009, p=0.037). For the predictive index of dose variation, CVF ratio was to be statistically significant for PTV in the liver dome versus PTV (SRS r=0.684, 3DCRT r=0.732, p<0.01) and CVF ratio for Tumor size was to be statistically significant (SRS r=-0.193, p=0.017, 3DCRT r=0.237, p=0.023).

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.54-62
• /
• 2020

Dose calculation algorithms play an important role in radiation therapy and are even the basis for optimizing treatment plans, an important feature in the development of complex treatment technologies such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy. We reviewed the past and current status of dose calculation algorithms used in the treatment planning system for radiation therapy. The radiation-calculating dose calculation algorithm can be broadly classified into three main groups based on the mechanisms used: (1) factor-based, (2) model-based, and (3) principle-based. Factor-based algorithms are a type of empirical dose calculation that interpolates or extrapolates the dose in some basic measurements. Model-based algorithms, represented by the pencil beam convolution, analytical anisotropic, and collapse cone convolution algorithms, use a simplified physical process by using a convolution equation that convolutes the primary photon energy fluence with a kernel. Model-based algorithms allowing side scattering when beams are transmitted to the heterogeneous media provide more precise dose calculation results than correction-based algorithms. Principle-based algorithms, represented by Monte Carlo dose calculations, simulate all real physical processes involving beam particles during transportation; therefore, dose calculations are accurate but time consuming. For approximately 70 years, through the development of dose calculation algorithms and computing technology, the accuracy of dose calculation seems close to our clinical needs. Next-generation dose calculation algorithms are expected to include biologically equivalent doses or biologically effective doses, and doctors expect to be able to use them to improve the quality of treatment in the near future.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.11-14
• /
• 2012

Purpose: Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) provides more accurate dose calculation regarding impact on scatter and tissue inhomogeneity in comparison to Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) algorithm. This study tries to analyze the difference of dose distribution according to PBC algorithm and dose calculation algorithm of AAA on breast cancer tangential plan. Materials and Methods: Computerized medical care plan using Eclipse treatment planning system (version 8.9, VARIAN, USA) has been established for the 10 breast cancer patients using 6 MV energy of Linac (CL-6EX, VARIAN, USA). After treatment plan of Conventional Radiation Therapy plan (Conventional plan) and Field-in-Field Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy plan (FiF plan) using PBC algorithm has been established, MU has been fixed, implemented dose calculation after changing it to AAA, and compared and analyzed treatment plan using Dose Volume Histogram (DVH). Results: Firstly, as a result of evaluating PBC algorithm of Conventional plan and the difference according to AAA, the average difference of CI value on target volume has been highly estimated by 0.295 on PBC algorithm and as a result of evaluating dose of lung, $V_{47Gy}$ and $V_{45Gy}$ has been highly evaluated by 5.83% and 4.04% each, Mean dose, $V_{20Gy}$, $V_{5Gy}$, $V_{3Gy}$ has been highly evaluated 0.6%, 0.29%, 6.35%, 10.23% each on AAA. Secondly, in case of FiF plan, the average difference of CI value on target volume has been highly evaluated on PBC algorithm by 0.165, and dose on ipsilateral lung, $V_{47Gy}$, $V_{45Gy}$, Mean dose has been highly evaluated 6.17%, 3.80%, 0.15% each on PBC algorithm, $V_{20Gy}$, $V_{5Gy}$, $V_{3Gy}$ has been highly evaluated 0.14%, 4.07%, 4.35% each on AAA. Conclusion: When calculating with AAA on breast cancer tangential plan, compared to PBC algorithm, Conformity on target volume of Conventional plan, FiF plan has been less evaluated by 0.295, 0.165 each. For the reason that dose of high dose region of ipsilateral lung has been showed little amount, and dose of low dose region has been showed much amount, features according to dose calculation algorithm need to be considered when we evaluate dose for the lungs.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.137-147
• /
• 2012

Purpose: Analyze the Effectiveness of Radiation Treatment Planning by dose calculation and optimization algorithm, apply consideration of actual treatment planning, and then suggest the best way to treatment planning protocol. Materials and Methods: The treatment planning system use Eclipse 10.0. (Varian, USA). PBC (Pencil Beam Convolution) and AAA (Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm) Apply to Dose calculation, DVO (Dose Volume Optimizer 10.0.28) used for optimized algorithm of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), PRO II (Progressive Resolution Optimizer V 8.9.17) and PRO III (Progressive Resolution Optimizer V 10.0.28) used for optimized algorithm of VAMT. A phantom for experiment virtually created at treatment planning system, $30{\times}30{\times}30$ cm sized, homogeneous density (HU: 0) and heterogeneous density that inserted air assumed material (HU: -1,000). Apply to clinical treatment planning on the basis of general treatment planning feature analyzed with Phantom planning. Results: In homogeneous density phantom, PBC and AAA show 65.2% PDD (6 MV, 10 cm) both, In heterogeneous density phantom, also show similar PDD value before meet with low density material, but they show different dose curve in air territory, PDD 10 cm showed 75%, 73% each after penetrate phantom. 3D treatment plan in same MU, AAA treatment planning shows low dose at Lung included area. 2D POP treatment plan with 15 MV of cervical vertebral region include trachea and lung area, Conformity Index (ICRU 62) is 0.95 in PBC calculation and 0.93 in AAA. DVO DVH and Dose calculation DVH are showed equal value in IMRT treatment plan. But AAA calculation shows lack of dose compared with DVO result which is satisfactory condition. Optimizing VMAT treatment plans using PRO II obtained results were satisfactory, but lower density area showed lack of dose in dose calculations. PRO III, but optimizing the dose calculation results were similar with optimized the same conditions once more. Conclusion: In this study, do not judge the rightness of the dose calculation algorithm. However, analyzing the characteristics of the dose distribution represented by each algorithm, especially, a method for the optimal treatment plan can be presented when make a treatment plan. by considering optimized algorithm factors of the IMRT or VMAT that needs to optimization make a treatment plan.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.48-53
• /
• 2012

The pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithms in radiation treatment planning system have been widely used to calculate the radiation dose. A new photon dose calculation algorithm, referred to as the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), was released for use by the Varian medical system. The aim of this paper was to investigate the difference in dose calculation between the AAA and PBC algorithm using the intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plan for lung cancer cases that were inhomogeneous in the low density. We quantitatively analyzed the differences in dose using the eclipse planning system (Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, CA) and I'mRT matirxx (IBA, Schwarzenbruck, Germany) equipment to compare the gamma evaluation. 11 patients with lung cancer at various sites were used in this study. We also used the TLD-100 (LiF) to measure the differences in dose between the calculated dose and measured dose in the Alderson Rando phantom. The maximum, mean, minimum dose for the normal tissue did not change significantly. But the volume of the PTV covered by the 95% isodose curve was decreased by 6% in the lung due to the difference in the algorithms. The difference dose between the calculated dose by the PBC algorithms and AAA algorithms and the measured dose with TLD-100 (LiF) in the Alderson Rando phantom was -4.6% and -2.7% respectively. Based on the results of this study, the treatment plan calculated using the AAA algorithms is more accurate in lung sites with a low density when compared to the treatment plan calculated using the PBC algorithms.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.11-19
• /
• 2014

Purpose : To derive the most appropriate factors by considering the effects of the major factors when applied to the optimization algorithm, thereby aiding the effective designing of a ideal treatment plan. Materials and Methods : The eclipse treatment planning system(Eclipse 10.0, Varian, USA) was used in this study. The PBC (Pencil Beam Convolution) algorithm was used for dose calculation, and the DVO (Dose Volume Optimizer 10.0.28) Optimization algorithm was used for intensity modulated radiation therapy. The experimental group consists of patients receiving intensity modulated radiation therapy for the head and neck cancer and dose prescription to two planned target volume was 2.2 Gy and 2.0 Gy simultaneously. Treatment plan was done with inverse dose calculation methods utilizing 6 MV beam and 7 fields. The optimal algorithm parameter of the established plan was selected based on volume dose-priority(Constrain), dose fluence smooth value and the impact of the treatment plan was analyzed according to the variation of each factors. Volume dose-priority determines the reference conditions and the optimization process was carried out under the condition using same ratio, but different absolute values. We evaluated the surrounding normal organs of treatment volume according to the changing conditions of the absolute values of the volume dose-priority. Dose fluence smooth value was applied by simply changing the reference conditions (absolute value) and by changing the related volume dose-priority. The treatment plan was evaluated using Conformal Index, Paddick's Conformal Index, Homogeneity Index and the average dose of each organs. Results : When the volume dose-priority values were directly proportioned by changing the absolute values, the CI values were found to be different. However PCI was $1.299{\pm}0.006$ and HI was $1.095{\pm}0.004$ while D5%/D95% was $1.090{\pm}1.011$. The impact on the prescribed dose were similar. The average dose of parotid gland decreased to 67.4, 50.3, 51.2, 47.1 Gy when the absolute values of the volume dose-priority increased by 40,60,70,90. When the dose smooth strength from each treatment plan was increased, PCI value increased to $1.338{\pm}0.006$. Conclusion : The optimization algorithm was more influenced by the ratio of each condition than the absolute value of volume dose-priority. If the same ratio was maintained, similar treatment plan was established even if the absolute values were different. Volume dose-priority of the treatment volume should be more than 50% of the normal organ volume dose-priority in order to achieve a successful treatment plan. Dose fluence smooth value should increase or decrease proportional to the volume dose-priority. Volume dose-priority is not enough to satisfy the conditions when the absolute value are applied solely.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.1-6
• /
• 2019

Purpose: This study conducts a comparative evaluation of the skin dose in CyberKnife (CK) and Helical Tomotherapy (HT) to predict the accurate dose of radiation and minimize skin burns in head-and-neck stereotactic body radiotherapy. Materials and Methods: Arbitrarily-defined planning target volume (PTV) close to the skin was drawn on the planning computed tomography acquired from a head-and-neck phantom with 19 optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLDs) attached to the surface (3 OSLDs were positioned at the skin close to PTV and 16 OSLDs were near sideburns and forehead, away from PTV). The calculation doses were obtained from the MultiPlan 5.1.2 treatment planning system using raytracing (RT), finite size pencil beam (FSPB), and Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms for CK. For HT, the skin dose was estimated via convolution superposition (CS) algorithm from the Tomotherapy planning station 5.0.2.5. The prescribed dose was 8 Gy for 95% coverage of the PTV. Results and Conclusions: The mean differences between calculation and measurement values were $-1.2{\pm}3.1%$, $2.5{\pm}7.9%$, $-2.8{\pm}3.8%$, $-6.6{\pm}8.8%$, and $-1.4{\pm}1.8%$ in CS, RT, RT with contour correction (CC), FSPB, and MC, respectively. FSPB showed a dose error comparable to RT. CS and RT with CC led to a small error as compared to FSPB and RT. Considering OSLDs close to PTV, MC minimized the uncertainty of skin dose as compared to other algorithms.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.23-30
• /
• 2012

Purpose: There was a problem with using MU verification programs for the reasons that there were errors of MU when using MU verification programs based on Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm with radiation treatment plans around lung using Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA). On this study, we studied the methods that can verify the calculated treatment plans using AAA. Materials and Methods: Using Eclipse treatment planning system (Version 8.9, Varian, USA), for each 57 fields of 7 cases of Lung Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT), we have calculated using PBC and AAA with dose calculation algorithm. By developing MU of established plans, we compared and analyzed with MU of manual calculation programs. We have analyzed relationship between errors and 4 variables such as field size, lung path distance of radiation, Tumor path distance of radiation, effective depth that can affect on errors created from PBC algorithm and AAA using commonly used programs. Results: Errors of PBC algorithm have showned $0.2{\pm}1.0%$ and errors of AAA have showned $3.5{\pm}2.8%$. Moreover, as a result of analyzing 4 variables that can affect on errors, relationship in errors between lung path distance and MU, connection coefficient 0.648 (P=0.000) has been increased and we could calculate MU correction factor that is A.E=L.P 0.00903+0.02048 and as a result of replying for manual calculation program, errors of $3.5{\pm}2.8%$ before the application has been decreased within $0.4{\pm}2.0%$. Conclusion: On this study, we have learned that errors from manual calculation program have been increased as lung path distance of radiation increases and we could verified MU of AAA with a simple method that is called MU correction factor.