open access

Vol 11, No 3 (2006)
Original papers
Published online: 2006-01-01
Submitted: 2005-10-11
Get Citation

Experimental and Monte Carlo evaluation of Eclipse treatment planning system for lung dose calculations

Asghar Mesbahi, David I. Thwaites, Andrew J. Reilly
DOI: 10.1016/S1507-1367(06)71057-4
·
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2006;11(3):123-133.

open access

Vol 11, No 3 (2006)
Original papers
Published online: 2006-01-01
Submitted: 2005-10-11

Abstract

Background

In this study the accuracy of a pencil beam based treatment planning system (TPS) was evaluated for lung dose calculations by comparison with measurement and the Monte Carlo (MC) method.

Aim

In the current study we assessed the performance of the Eclipse treatment planning system in the thorax region by ionization chamber measurements and Monte Carlo calculations. We examined two analytic methods: modified Batho (MB) and equivalent tissue-air ratio “ETAR” methods for thorax region irradiations. For Monte Carlo calculations in the thorax phantom, we modelled a Varian Clinac 2100EX linac. After benchmarking our model with water phantom measurements we used this model for thorax phantom calculations.

Materials/Methods

8 and 15 MV photon beams of Varian 21EX linac were used for irradiations. Using MANP4C Monte Carlo code, the geometry of the linac head was simulated. After commissioning “MC” beam models, lung doses were calculated by the Monte Carlo (MC) method. Irradiation cases were: (1) posterior fields of single lung with field sizes of 4×4 and 10×10cm2 (2) lateral fields of thorax with 4×4 and 10×10cm2 field sizes.

Results

TPS calculations involving ETAR and MB methods were in close agreement with Monte Carlo results and measurements for a 10×10 cm2 field size at both energies. For a field size of 4×4cm2 the maximum differences in local dose between TPS calculations and measurement were +33% (MB) and +28% (ETAR). Also, they ignored lung dose reduction due to lateral electronic equilibrium for small field size. Similar results would be expected for other TPSs implementing these algorithms. MC calculations were in excellent agreement with measurement, showing local differences of no more than 2% for all measured points.

Conclusions

Our study findings showed great differences between both analytical methods and measurements for 4×4cm2 field sizes for points in the lung. Our study recommends using the MC method for small-field lung dose calculations.

Abstract

Background

In this study the accuracy of a pencil beam based treatment planning system (TPS) was evaluated for lung dose calculations by comparison with measurement and the Monte Carlo (MC) method.

Aim

In the current study we assessed the performance of the Eclipse treatment planning system in the thorax region by ionization chamber measurements and Monte Carlo calculations. We examined two analytic methods: modified Batho (MB) and equivalent tissue-air ratio “ETAR” methods for thorax region irradiations. For Monte Carlo calculations in the thorax phantom, we modelled a Varian Clinac 2100EX linac. After benchmarking our model with water phantom measurements we used this model for thorax phantom calculations.

Materials/Methods

8 and 15 MV photon beams of Varian 21EX linac were used for irradiations. Using MANP4C Monte Carlo code, the geometry of the linac head was simulated. After commissioning “MC” beam models, lung doses were calculated by the Monte Carlo (MC) method. Irradiation cases were: (1) posterior fields of single lung with field sizes of 4×4 and 10×10cm2 (2) lateral fields of thorax with 4×4 and 10×10cm2 field sizes.

Results

TPS calculations involving ETAR and MB methods were in close agreement with Monte Carlo results and measurements for a 10×10 cm2 field size at both energies. For a field size of 4×4cm2 the maximum differences in local dose between TPS calculations and measurement were +33% (MB) and +28% (ETAR). Also, they ignored lung dose reduction due to lateral electronic equilibrium for small field size. Similar results would be expected for other TPSs implementing these algorithms. MC calculations were in excellent agreement with measurement, showing local differences of no more than 2% for all measured points.

Conclusions

Our study findings showed great differences between both analytical methods and measurements for 4×4cm2 field sizes for points in the lung. Our study recommends using the MC method for small-field lung dose calculations.

Get Citation

Keywords

radiotherapy treatment planning; Monte Carlo method; lung inhomogeneity; thorax phantom; electronic equilibrium

About this article
Title

Experimental and Monte Carlo evaluation of Eclipse treatment planning system for lung dose calculations

Journal

Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy

Issue

Vol 11, No 3 (2006)

Pages

123-133

Published online

2006-01-01

DOI

10.1016/S1507-1367(06)71057-4

Bibliographic record

Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2006;11(3):123-133.

Keywords

radiotherapy treatment planning
Monte Carlo method
lung inhomogeneity
thorax phantom
electronic equilibrium

Authors

Asghar Mesbahi
David I. Thwaites
Andrew J. Reilly

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: journals@viamedica.pl