基于蒙特卡罗模拟的同步集成升压技术放射治疗计划剂量学评价。

IF 0.7 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING

Journal of Medical Physics Pub Date : 2023-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-18 DOI:10.4103/jmp.jmp_4_23

Ravindra Shende, S J Dhoble, Gourav Gupta

{"title":"基于蒙特卡罗模拟的同步集成升压技术放射治疗计划剂量学评价。","authors":"Ravindra Shende, S J Dhoble, Gourav Gupta","doi":"10.4103/jmp.jmp_4_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Monte Carlo (MC) techniques have been recognized as the gold standard for the simulation of radiation transport in radiotherapy. The aim of the study is to perform dosimetric evaluation of Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) radiation treatment planning using MC simulation approach. The geometrical source modeling and simulation of 6 MV Flattening Filter Free (FFF)beam from TrueBeam linear accelerator have been carried out to simulate Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans using MC simulation software PRIMO. All the SIB plans have been generated using VMAT techniques for patients with locally advanced postoperative head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma in Eclipse Treatment Planning System (TPS) retrospectively. TPS plans have been compared against their respective MC-simulated plans in PRIMO. The quality assessments of plans have been performed using several dose volume parameters, plan quality indices, and methods of gamma analysis. Dmean, D50%, and D2% received by planning target volume (PTV), PTV60, and PTV52 have been found significantly lower in TPS-generated plans compared to MC-simulated plans. D100%, D98%, and D95% received by PTV60 exhibit good agreement. However, PTV52 shows a significant deviation between TPS and MC plans. The mean organ-at-risk doses have been found significantly lower in TPS plans compared to MC plans. TPS and MC plans have been found in close agreement within gamma acceptance criteria of 3% Dose Difference (DD) and 3 mm Distance to Agreement (DTA). Dose distributions computed using MC simulation techniques are reliable, accurate, and consistent with analytical anisotropic algorithm. Plan quality indices have been found slightly compromised in MC-simulated plans compared with TPS-generated plans appeared to be a true representation of real dose distribution obtained from MC simulation technique. Validation using MC simulation approach provides an independent secondary check for ensuring accuracy of TPS-generated plan.","PeriodicalId":51719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Physics","volume":"48 3","pages":"298-306"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10642595/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dosimetric Evaluation of Radiation Treatment Planning for Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique Using Monte Carlo Simulation.\",\"authors\":\"Ravindra Shende, S J Dhoble, Gourav Gupta\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jmp.jmp_4_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Monte Carlo (MC) techniques have been recognized as the gold standard for the simulation of radiation transport in radiotherapy. The aim of the study is to perform dosimetric evaluation of Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) radiation treatment planning using MC simulation approach. The geometrical source modeling and simulation of 6 MV Flattening Filter Free (FFF)beam from TrueBeam linear accelerator have been carried out to simulate Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans using MC simulation software PRIMO. All the SIB plans have been generated using VMAT techniques for patients with locally advanced postoperative head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma in Eclipse Treatment Planning System (TPS) retrospectively. TPS plans have been compared against their respective MC-simulated plans in PRIMO. The quality assessments of plans have been performed using several dose volume parameters, plan quality indices, and methods of gamma analysis. Dmean, D50%, and D2% received by planning target volume (PTV), PTV60, and PTV52 have been found significantly lower in TPS-generated plans compared to MC-simulated plans. D100%, D98%, and D95% received by PTV60 exhibit good agreement. However, PTV52 shows a significant deviation between TPS and MC plans. The mean organ-at-risk doses have been found significantly lower in TPS plans compared to MC plans. TPS and MC plans have been found in close agreement within gamma acceptance criteria of 3% Dose Difference (DD) and 3 mm Distance to Agreement (DTA). Dose distributions computed using MC simulation techniques are reliable, accurate, and consistent with analytical anisotropic algorithm. Plan quality indices have been found slightly compromised in MC-simulated plans compared with TPS-generated plans appeared to be a true representation of real dose distribution obtained from MC simulation technique. Validation using MC simulation approach provides an independent secondary check for ensuring accuracy of TPS-generated plan.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51719,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Physics\",\"volume\":\"48 3\",\"pages\":\"298-306\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10642595/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_4_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_4_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

蒙特卡罗(MC)技术已被公认为放射治疗中辐射输运模拟的金标准。该研究的目的是使用MC模拟方法对同步集成Boost (SIB)放射治疗计划进行剂量学评估。利用MC仿真软件PRIMO，对TrueBeam直线加速器产生的6 MV无压平滤波(FFF)光束进行了几何源建模和仿真，以模拟体积调制电弧治疗(VMAT)方案。在Eclipse治疗计划系统(TPS)中，采用VMAT技术对局部晚期头颈部鳞状细胞癌术后患者的SIB计划进行回顾性分析。在PRIMO中，TPS方案与mc模拟方案进行了比较。使用几种剂量体积参数、计划质量指标和伽玛分析方法对计划进行了质量评估。与mc模拟方案相比，tps生成方案的规划目标体积(PTV)、PTV60和PTV52获得的Dmean、D50%和D2%显著降低。PTV60检测到的D100%、D98%、D95%一致性良好。然而，PTV52显示TPS和MC计划之间存在显著偏差。与MC计划相比，TPS计划的平均器官危险剂量显著降低。TPS和MC方案在3%剂量差(DD)和3mm协议距离(DTA)的伽玛接受标准内非常一致。使用MC模拟技术计算的剂量分布可靠、准确，并且与解析各向异性算法一致。MC模拟的计划质量指标与tps生成的计划相比略有下降，似乎是MC模拟技术获得的真实剂量分布的真实代表。MC仿真方法的验证为保证tps生成方案的准确性提供了独立的二次检验。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Dosimetric Evaluation of Radiation Treatment Planning for Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique Using Monte Carlo Simulation.

Monte Carlo (MC) techniques have been recognized as the gold standard for the simulation of radiation transport in radiotherapy. The aim of the study is to perform dosimetric evaluation of Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) radiation treatment planning using MC simulation approach. The geometrical source modeling and simulation of 6 MV Flattening Filter Free (FFF)beam from TrueBeam linear accelerator have been carried out to simulate Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans using MC simulation software PRIMO. All the SIB plans have been generated using VMAT techniques for patients with locally advanced postoperative head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma in Eclipse Treatment Planning System (TPS) retrospectively. TPS plans have been compared against their respective MC-simulated plans in PRIMO. The quality assessments of plans have been performed using several dose volume parameters, plan quality indices, and methods of gamma analysis. Dmean, D50%, and D2% received by planning target volume (PTV), PTV60, and PTV52 have been found significantly lower in TPS-generated plans compared to MC-simulated plans. D100%, D98%, and D95% received by PTV60 exhibit good agreement. However, PTV52 shows a significant deviation between TPS and MC plans. The mean organ-at-risk doses have been found significantly lower in TPS plans compared to MC plans. TPS and MC plans have been found in close agreement within gamma acceptance criteria of 3% Dose Difference (DD) and 3 mm Distance to Agreement (DTA). Dose distributions computed using MC simulation techniques are reliable, accurate, and consistent with analytical anisotropic algorithm. Plan quality indices have been found slightly compromised in MC-simulated plans compared with TPS-generated plans appeared to be a true representation of real dose distribution obtained from MC simulation technique. Validation using MC simulation approach provides an independent secondary check for ensuring accuracy of TPS-generated plan.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Medical Physics RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-

CiteScore

1.10

自引率

11.10%

发文量

审稿时长

30 weeks

期刊介绍： JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS is the official journal of Association of Medical Physicists of India (AMPI). The association has been bringing out a quarterly publication since 1976. Till the end of 1993, it was known as Medical Physics Bulletin, which then became Journal of Medical Physics. The main objective of the Journal is to serve as a vehicle of communication to highlight all aspects of the practice of medical radiation physics. The areas covered include all aspects of the application of radiation physics to biological sciences, radiotherapy, radiodiagnosis, nuclear medicine, dosimetry and radiation protection. Papers / manuscripts dealing with the aspects of physics related to cancer therapy / radiobiology also fall within the scope of the journal.