Evaluation of the analytical anisotropic algorithm in an extreme water-lung interface phantom using Monte Carlo dose calculations

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 33-46

  Gagné, Isabelle Marie ^a   Zavgorodni, Sergei ^b  

^a BRITISH COLUMBIA CANCER AGENCY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

AAA; Analytical anisotropic algorithm; Lung inhomogeneity correction; Monte Carlo calculations; PBC; Pencil beam convolution

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247337632     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15269914     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v8i1.2324     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Brahme A. Dosimetric precision requirements in radiation therapy. Acta Radiol Oncol. 1984;23(5):379-391.
2. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU). Determination of absorbed dose in a patient irradiated by beams of X or gamma rays in radiotherapy procedures. ICRU Report 24. Washington (DC): ICRU; 1976. 67 p.
3. Metcalfe PE, Wong TP, Hoban PW. Radiotherapy X-ray beam inhomogeneity corrections: the problem of lateral electronic disequilibrium in lung. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 1993; 16(4):155-167.
4. Krieger T, Sauer OA. Monte Carlo- versus pencil-beam-/ collapsed-cone-dose calculation in a heterogeneous multi-layer phantom. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50(5):859-868.
5. Miften M, Wiesmeyer M, Kapur A, Ma CM. Comparison of RTP dose distributions in heterogeneous phantoms with the BEAM Monte Carlo simulation system. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2001;2(1):21-31.
6. Sheikh-Bagheri D, Rogers DW, Ross CK, Seuntjens JP. Comparison of measured and Monte Carlo calculated dose distributions from the NRC LINAC. Med Phys. 2000;27(10):2256-2266.
7. 60Co therapy source. Med Phys. 1999;26(11):2494-2502.
8. Rogers DW, Faddegon BA, Ding GX, Ma CM, We J, Mackie TR. BEAM: a Monte Carlo code to simulate radiotherapy treatment units. Med Phys. 1995;22(5):503-524.
9. Butson MJ, Elferink R, Cheung T, et al. Verification of lung dose in an anthropomorphic phantom calculated by the collapsed cone convolution method. Phys Med Biol. 2000;45(11):N143-N149.
10. Hoban PW, Murray DC, Metcalfe PE, Round WH. Superposition dose calculation in lung for 10 MV photons. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 1990;13(2):81-92.
11. Aspradakis MM, Redpath AT. A technique for the fast calculation of three-dimensional photon dose distributions using the superposition model. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42(8):1475-1489.
12. Ding W, Johnston PN, Wong TP, Bubb IF. Investigation of photon beam models in heterogeneous media of modern radiotherapy. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2004;27(2):39-48.
13. Ulmer W, Kaissl W. The inverse problem of a Gaussian convolution and its application to the finite size of the measurement chambers/detectors in photon and proton dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48(6):707-727.
14. Ulmer W, Harder D. A triple Gaussian pencil beam model for photon beam treatment planning, 2. Med Phys. 1995;(5):25-30.
15. Ulmer W, Pyyry J, Kaissl W. A 3D photon superposition/convolution algorithm and its foundation on results of Monte Carlo calculations. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50(8):1767-1790.
16. Sievinen J, Ulmer W, Kaissl W. AAA photon dose calculation model in Eclipse. Palo Alto (CA): Varian Medical Systems; 2005. [RAD #7170B]
17. Fraass BA, McShan DL. Three-dimensional photon beam treatment planning. In: Smith AR, editor. Medical radiology. New York: Springer; 1995: 43-94.
18. Davis JB, Pfafflin A, Cozzi AF. Accuracy of two- and three-dimensional photon dose calculation for tangential irradiation of the breast. Radiother Oncol. 1997;42(3):245-248.
19. Blomquist M, Karlsson M. Measured lung dose correction factors for 50 MV photons. Phys Med Biol. 1998;43(11):3225-3234.
20. Metcalfe PE, Battista JJ. Accuracy of inhomogeneity corrections in lung irradiated with high energy X-rays. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 1988;11(2):67-75.
21. Carrasco P, Jornet N, Duch MA, et al. Comparison of dose calculation algorithms in phantoms with lung equivalent heterogeneities under conditions of lateral electronic disequilibrium. Med Phys. 2004;31(10):2899-2911.
22. Lewis RD, Ryde SJ, Seaby AW, Hancock DA, Evans CJ. Use of Monte Carlo computation in benchmarking radiotherapy treatment planning system algorithms. Phys Med Biol. 2000;45(7):1755-1764.
23. Cranmer-Sargison G, Beckham WA, Popescu IA. Modelling an extreme water-lung interface using a single pencil beam algorithm and the Monte Carlo method. Phys Med Biol. 2004;49(8):1557-1567.
24. Fogliata A, Nicolini G, Vanetti E, Clivio A, Cozzi L. Dosimetric validation of the anisotropic analytical algorithm for photon dose calculation: fundamental characterization in water. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51(6):1421-1438.
25. Knoos T, Ahnesjo A, Nilsson P, Weber L. Limitations of a pencil beam approach to photon dose calculations in lung tissue. Phys Med Biol. 1995;40(9):1411-1420.
26. Ahnesjo A, Aspradakis MM. Dose calculations for external photon beams in radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 1999;44(11):R99-R155.
27. Storchi P, Woudstra E. Calculation of the absorbed dose distribution due to irregularly shaped photon beams using pencil beam kernels derived from basic beam data. Phys Med Biol. 1996;41(4):637-656.
28. Rogers DWO, Walters B, Kawrakow I. BEAMnrc users manual. NRC report PIRS-0509(A)revK. Ottawa (ON): National Research Council of Canada; 2005.
29. Walters B, Kawrakow I, Rogers DWO. DOSXYZnrc users manual. NRC report PIRS-794revB. Ottawa (ON): National Research Council of Canada; 2005.
30. Mackie TR, el-Khatib E, Battista J, Scrimger J, Van Dyk J, Cunningham JR. Lung dose corrections for 6- and 15- MV X rays. Med Phys. 1985;12(3):327-332.
31. Venselaar J, Welleweerd H, Mijnheer B. Tolerances for the accuracy of photon beam dose calculations of treatment planning systems. Radiother Oncol. 2001;60(2):191-201.
32. Welleweerd J, van der Zee W. Dose calculation for asymmetric fields using Plato version 2.01 [Abstrad]. Radiother Oncol. 1998;48(Suppl 1):134.
33. Sempau J, Sanchez-Reyes A, Salvat F, ben Tahar HO, Jiang SB, Fernandez-Varea JM. Monte Carlo simulation of electron beams from an accelerator head using PENELOPE. Phys Med Biol. 2001;46(4):1163-1186.
34. White PJ, Zwicker RD, Huang DT. Comparison of dose homogeneity effects due to electron equilibrium loss in lung for 6 MV and 18 MV photons. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;34(5):1141-1146.
35. Ekstrand KE, Barnes WH. Pitfalls in the use of high energy X rays to treat tumors in the lung. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990;18(1):249-252.
36. McDermott L, Perkins A. Comparison of measured and calculated radiotherapy doses in the chest region of an inhomogeneous humanoid phantom. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2004;27(1):16-21.
37. Brahme A, Chavaudra J, Landberg T. Accuracy requirements and quality assurance of external beam therapy with photons and electrons. Acta Radiol Oncol. 1988;(1 Suppl): 1-76.
38. Dahlin H, Lamm IL, Landberg T, Levernes S, Ulso N. User requirements on CT-based computed dose planning systems in radiation therapy. Acta Radiol Oncol. 1983;22(5):397-415.
39. McCullough EC. Specifying and evaluating the performance of computed tomography (CT) scanners. Med Phys. 1980;7(4):291-296.
40. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU). Use of computers in external beam radiotherapy procedures with high-energy photons and electrons. ICRU Report 42. Washington (DC): ICRU; 1987.
41. Nisbet A, Beange I, Vollmar HS, Irvine C, Morgan A, Thwaites DI. Dosimetric verification of a commercial collapsed cone algorithm in simulated clinical situations. Radiother Oncol. 2004;73(1):79-88.
42. Fraass B, Doppke K, Hunt M, et al. American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 53: quality assurance for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning. Med Phys. 1998;25(10):1773-1829.
43. Van Dyk J, Barnett RB, Cygler JE, Shragge PC. Commissioning and quality assurance of treatment planning computers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993;26(2):261-273.
44. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Quality assurance for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning. AAPM Report 62. New York (NY): American Institute of Physics; 1998. 57 p.