Different dose calculation algorithms applied in the design of intensity-modulated radiotherapy plan for postoperative patients with cervical cancer: a dosimetric analysis(PDF)
《中国医学物理学杂志》[ISSN:1005-202X/CN:44-1351/R]
- Issue:
- 2018年第2期
- Page:
- 145-150
- Research Field:
- 医学放射物理
- Publishing date:
Info
- Title:
- Different dose calculation algorithms applied in the design of intensity-modulated radiotherapy plan for postoperative patients with cervical cancer: a dosimetric analysis
- Author(s):
- NIU Ruijun1; 2; ZHANG Hui3; 4; LIU Zhiqiang1; 2; CHENG Pinjing5; GAO Liying1; 2; ZHAO Lin1; 2; GUO Qing1; 2; TAO Fali1; 2; OUYANG Shuigen1; 2
- 1. Gansu Provincial Cancer Hospital, Lanzhou 730050, China; 2. Gansu Provincial Radiation Therapy Research Center, Lanzhou 730050, China; 3. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China; 4. Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China; 5. School of Nuclear Science and Technology, University of South China, Hengyang 421001, China
- Keywords:
- ; cervical cancer; intensity-modulated radiotherapy; pencil beam convolution algorithm; anisotropic analytical algorithm; radiotherapy dosage
- PACS:
- R735.1
- DOI:
- DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2018.02.005
- Abstract:
- Objective To analyze and compare dosimetric differences between pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm and anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) in designing intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans for postoperative patients with cervical cancer. Methods Based on Eclipse treatment planning system, PBC algorithm and AAA were separately used to design intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans for 30 postoperative patients with cervical cancer, and the corresponding verification plans were also generated. The dosimetric parameters of target areas and organs-at-risk were compared. Results Statistical differences were found in the dosimetric parameters of target areas calculated with two different algorithms, including the D5%, D50%, D95%, D98%, Dmean of target areas, and the homogeneity index of planning target volume and conformity index of clinical target volume (P<0.05). The comparison of calculated organs-at-risk dose revealed that differences in V30, V40, Dmean of rectum and bladder, the V10, V20, V30, Dmean of small intestine, the V10, V20, V30, V40, V50, Dmean of marrow, the V20, V30, V40, V50, Dmean of the right femoral head and the V20, V30, V50, Dmean of the left femoral head were statistical significant (P<0.05), and that except for the V40 of the right and the left femoral head and the V50 of rectum, the other reference indexes calculated with PBC were lower than those calculated with AAA. The comparison of verification plans of two algorithms didn’t showed any statistical differences. Conclusion Although both AAA and PBC algorithm are conformed to the clinical requirement, some significant dosimetric differences between PBC and AAA are existed. Compared with AAA, PBC algorithm overestimates the dose of target area which is in high-dose region, and underestimates the dose of organs-at-risk which is in low-dose region.
Last Update: 2018-01-29