Published June 24, 2013 | Version v1
Journal article

Dosimetric accuracy and clinical quality of Acuros XB and AAA dose calculation algorithm for stereotactic and conventional lung volumetric modulated arc therapy plans

  • 1. Department of Medical Physics, Institute Verbeeten, Brugstraat 10, 5042 SB Tilburg (Netherlands)
  • 2. Department of Radiotherapy, Institute Verbeeten, Brugstraat 10, 5042 SB Tilburg (Netherlands)

Description

The main aim of the current study was to assess the dosimetric accuracy and clinical quality of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for stereotactic (stage I) and conventional (stage III) lung cancer treatments planned with Eclipse version 10.0 Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and Acuros XB (AXB) algorithm. The dosimetric impact of using AAA instead of AXB, and grid size 2.5 mm instead of 1.0 mm for VMAT treatment plans was evaluated. The clinical plan quality of AXB VMAT was assessed using 45 stage I and 73 stage III patients, and was compared with published results, planned with VMAT and hybrid-VMAT techniques. The dosimetric impact on near-minimum PTV dose (D98%) using AAA instead of AXB was large (underdose up to 12.3%) for stage I and very small (underdose up to 0.8%) for stage III lung treatments. There were no significant differences for dose volume histogram (DVH) values between grid sizes. The calculation time was significantly higher for AXB grid size 1.0 than 2.5 mm (p < 0.01). The clinical quality of the VMAT plans was at least comparable with clinical qualities given in literature of lung treatment plans with VMAT and hybrid-VMAT techniques. The average mean lung dose (MLD), lung V20Gy and V5Gy in this study were respectively 3.6 Gy, 4.1% and 15.7% for 45 stage I patients and 12.4 Gy, 19.3% and 46.6% for 73 stage III lung patients. The average contra-lateral lung dose V5Gy-cont was 35.6% for stage III patients. For stereotactic and conventional lung treatments, VMAT calculated with AXB grid size 2.5 mm resulted in accurate dose calculations. No hybrid technique was needed to obtain the dose constraints. AXB is recommended instead of AAA for avoiding serious overestimation of the minimum target doses compared to the actual delivered dose

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-149; Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3723919

Additional details

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Radiation Oncology (Online)
Journal Volume
8
Journal Page Range
p. 149
ISSN
1748-717X

INIS

Country of Publication
United Kingdom
Country of Input or Organization
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
INIS RN
47065756
Subject category
S62: RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE;
Descriptors DEI
ACCURACY; ALGORITHMS; DOSIMETRY; GRIDS; GY RANGE 01-10; GY RANGE 10-100; LUNGS; NEOPLASMS; PATIENTS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY
Descriptors DEC
ABSORBED DOSE RANGE; BODY; DISEASES; DOSES; ELECTRODES; GY RANGE; MATHEMATICAL LOGIC; MEDICINE; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; ORGANS; RADIATION DOSE RANGES; RADIOLOGY; RESPIRATORY SYSTEM; THERAPY

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2013 Kroon et al.
Notes
PMCID: PMC3723919; PUBLISHER-ID: 1748-717X-8-149; PMID: 23800024; OAI: oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:3723919; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.