Program Information
Impact of Dose Calculation Algorithms On Biologically Optimized VMAT Plans for Esophageal Cancer
Rajesh Thiyagarajan1*, N Arunai Nambiraj2 , S Vikraman1 , Karrthick KP1 , Ashokkumar Sigamani2 ,Bargavan Subbarao3 , M Ramu1 , R Sambasivaselli1 , V Senniandavar1 , Tejinder Kataria1 , (1) Medanta The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, (2) VIT University, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, (3) Elekta India, Chennai, Tamil Nadu,
Presentations
SU-E-T-456 (Sunday, July 12, 2015) 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM Room: Exhibit Hall
Purpose:
To evaluate the impact of dose calculation algorithm on the dose distribution of biologically optimized Volumatric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans for Esophgeal cancer.
Methods:
Eighteen retrospectively treated patients with carcinoma esophagus were studied. VMAT plans were optimized using biological objectives in Monaco (5.0) TPS for 6MV photon beam (Elekta Infinity). These plans were calculated for final dose using Monte Carlo (MC), Collapsed Cone Convolution (CCC) & Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) algorithms from Monaco and Oncentra Masterplan TPS. A dose grid of 2mm was used for all algorithms and 1% per plan uncertainty maintained for MC calculation. MC based calculations were considered as the reference for CCC & PBC. Dose volume histogram (DVH) indices (D95, D98, D50 etc) of Target (PTV) and critical structures were compared to study the impact of all three algorithms.
Results:
Beam models were consistent with measured data. The mean difference observed in reference with MC calculation for D98, D95, D50 & D2 of PTV were 0.37%, -0.21%, 1.51% & 1.18% respectively for CCC and 3.28%, 2.75%, 3.61% & 3.08% for PBC. Heart D25 mean difference was 4.94% & 11.21% for CCC and PBC respectively. Lung Dmean mean difference was 1.5% (CCC) and 4.1% (PBC). Spinal cord D2 mean difference was 2.35% (CCC) and 3.98% (PBC). Similar differences were observed for liver and kidneys. The overall mean difference found for target and critical structures was 0.71±1.52%, 2.71±3.10% for CCC and 3.18±1.55%, 6.61±5.1% for PBC respectively.
Conclusion:
We observed a significant overestimate of dose distribution by CCC and PBC as compared to MC. The dose prediction of CCC is closer (<3%) to MC than that of PBC. This can be attributed to poor performance of CCC and PBC in inhomogeneous regions around esophagus. CCC can be considered as an alternate in the absence of MC algorithm
Contact Email: