Validation of Varian's AAA algorithm with focus on lung treatments

Acta Oncologica

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 209-215

  Rønde, Heidi S ^a,b   Hoffmann, Lone ^a  

^a AARHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

^b AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ANISOTROPY; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSIMETRY; HUMAN; IONIZATION CHAMBER; LUNG CANCER; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTION; THORAX; TREATMENT PLANNING;

ALGORITHMS; ANISOTROPY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GAMMA RAYS; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOMETRY; RADIOSURGERY; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOTHERAPY, INTENSITY-MODULATED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SCATTERING, RADIATION;

EID: 60549085783     PISSN: 0284186X     EISSN: 1651226X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02841860802287108     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. 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. p 67.
2. Engelsman M, Damen EMF, Koken PW, van't Veld AA, van Ingen KM, Mijnheer BJ. Impact of simple tissue inhomogeniety correction algorithms on conformal radiotherapy of lung tumours. Radiother Oncol 2001;60:299-309.
3. Knöös T, Wieslander E, Cozzi L, Brink C, Fogliata A, Albers D, et al. Comparison of dose calculation algorithms for treatment planning in external photon beam therapy for clinical situations. Phys Med Biol 2006;51:5785-807.
4. Fogliata A, Vanetti E, Albers D, Brink C, Clivio A, Knöös T, et al. On the dosimetric behaviour of photon dose calculation algorithms in the presence of simple geometric heterogeneities: Comparison with Monte Carlo calculations. Phys Med Biol 2007;52:1363-85.
5. Fogliata A, Nicolini G, Vanetti E, Clivio A, Winkler P, Cozzi L. The impact of photon dose calculation algorithms on expected dose distributions in lungs under different respiratory phases. Phys Med Biol 2008;53:2375-90.
6. Polednik M, Madyan YA, Schneider F, Wolff D, Bannach B, Lambrecht U, et al. Evaluation of calculation algorithms implemented in different commercial planning systems on an anthropomorphic breast phantom using film dosimetry. Strahlenther. Onkol 2007;12:667-72.
7. Ulmer W, Harder D. A triple Gaussian pencil beam model for photon beam treatment planning. Z Med Phys 1995;5:25-30.
8. Ulmer W, Harder D. Applications of a triple Gaussian pencil beam model for photon beam treatment planning. Z Med Phys 1996;6:68-74.
9. Ulmer W, Pyyry J, Waissl W. A 3D photon superposition/convolution algorithm and its foundation on results of Monte Carlo calculations. Phys Med Biol 2005;50:1767-90.
10. Sievinen J, Ulmer W, Kaissl W. AAA photon dose calculation model in Eclipse™, Varian Medical Systems, 2004. (The white paper).
11. 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;51:1421-38.
12. Van Esch A, Tillikainen L, Pyykkonen J, Tenhunen M, Helminen H, Siljamäki S, et al. Testing of the analytical anisotropic algorithm for photon dose calculation. Med Phys 2006;33:4130-48.
13. Bragg CM, Conway J. Dosimetric verification of the anisotropic analytical algorithm for radiotherapy treatment planning. Radiother Oncol 2006;81:315-23.
14. Ding GX, Duggan DM, Lu B, Hallhan DE, Cmelak A, Malcolm A, et al. Impact of inhomogeneity corrections on dose coverage in the treatment of lung cancer using stereotactic body radiation therapy. Med Phys 2007;34:2985-94.
15. 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;41:637-56.
16. Storchi PRM, van Battum LJ, Woudstra E. Calculation of a pencil beam kernel from measured photon beam data. Phys Med Biol 1999;44:2917-28.
17. Storchi P, Woudstra E. Calculation models for determining the absorbed dose in water phantoms in off-axis planes of rectangular fields of open and wedged photon beams. Phys Med Biol 1995;40:511-27.
18. Caprile P, Venencia CD, Besa P. Comparison between measured and calculated dynamic wedge dose distributions using the anisotropic analytic algorithm and pencil-beam convolution. Med Phys 2007;8:47-54.
19. CIRS Tissue Simulation & Phantom Technology, www.cirsinc.com, Virginia: c2008 [sited 2008 May 14] Available from: www.cirsinc.com/002lfc-rad. html.
20. Lynch BD, Kozelka J, Ranade MK, Li JG, Simon WE, Dempsey JF. Important considerations for radiochromic film dosimetry with flatbed CCD scanners and EBT Gafchromic® Film. Med Phys 2006;33:4551-6.
21. Paelinck L, De Neve W, De Wagter C. Precautions and strategies in using a commercial flatbed scanner for radiochromic film dosimetry. Phys Med Biol 2007;52:231-42.
22. International Specialty Products (ISP), www.ispcorp.com, New Jersey c2007 [sited 2008 may 14] Available from: http:// online1.ispcorp.com/-layouts/ Gafchromic/content/products/ebt/pdfs/EBTwhitepaper.pdf. Gafchromic® EBT self-developing film for radiotherapy dosimetry, ISP, 2007. (The white paper).
23. Low DA, Dempsey JF. Evaluation of the gamma dose distribution comparison method. Med Phys 2003;30:2455-64.