Validation of a Software Upgrade in a Monte Carlo Treatment Planning System by Comparison of Plans in Different Versions

Overview

Journal J Med Phys

Date 2018 Jul 3

PMID 29962686

Authors

P Mohandass

D Khanna

D Manigandan

Narendra Kumar Bhalla

Abhishek Puri

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Validation of a new software version of a Monte Carlo treatment planning system through comparing plans generated by two software versions in volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for lung cancer.

Materials And Methods: Three patients who were treated with 60 Gy/30 fractions in Elekta Synergy™ linear accelerator by VMAT technique with 2% statistical uncertainty (SU) were chosen for the study. Multiple VMAT plans were generated using two different software versions of Monaco treatment planning system TPS (V5.10.02 and V5.11). By keeping all other parameters constant, originally accepted plans were recalculated for the SUs of 0.5%, 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, and 5%. For plan evaluation, the metrics compared were conformity Index (CI), homogeneity Index (HI), dose coverage to planning target volume (PTV), organ at risk (OAR) doses to spinal cord, pericardium, bilateral lungs-PTV, esophagus, liver, normal tissue integral dose (NTID), volumes receiving dose >5 and >10 Gy, calculation time (tCT), and gamma pass rates.

Results: In both versions, CI and HI improved as the SU increased from 0.5% to 5%. No significant dose difference was observed in Dmean to PTV, bilateral lungs-PTV, pericardium, esophagus, liver, normal tissue volume receiving >5, and >10 Gy and NTID. It was observed that while the tCT and gamma pass rates decreased, the maximum dose to PTV increased as the SU increased. No other significant dose differences were observed between the two MC versions compared.

Conclusion: For lung VMAT plans, in both versions, SU could be accepted up to 3% per plan with reduced tCT without compromising plan quality and deliverability by accepting variations in point dose and an inhomogeneous dose within the target. The plan quality of Monaco™V5.10.02 was similar to Monaco™TPS-V5.11 except for tCT.

References

Ma C, Li J, Jiang S, Pawlicki T, Xiong W, Qin L . Effect of statistical uncertainties on Monte Carlo treatment planning. Phys Med Biol. 2005; 50(5):891-907. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/50/5/013. View

Jiang S, Pawlicki T, Ma C . Removing the effect of statistical uncertainty on dose-volume histograms from Monte Carlo dose calculations. Phys Med Biol. 2000; 45(8):2151-61. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/45/8/307. View

Chetty I, Rosu M, Kessler M, Fraass B, Ten Haken R, Kong F . Reporting and analyzing statistical uncertainties in Monte Carlo-based treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 65(4):1249-59. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.03.039. View

Chetty I, Curran B, Cygler J, DeMarco J, Ezzell G, Faddegon B . Report of the AAPM Task Group No. 105: Issues associated with clinical implementation of Monte Carlo-based photon and electron external beam treatment planning. Med Phys. 2008; 34(12):4818-53. DOI: 10.1118/1.2795842. View

Mohan R, Antolak J . Monte Carlo techniques should replace analytical methods for estimating dose distributions in radiotherapy treatment planning. Med Phys. 2001; 28(2):123-6. DOI: 10.1118/1.1344208. View

Ma C, Pawlicki T, Jiang S, Li J, Deng J, Mok E . Monte Carlo verification of IMRT dose distributions from a commercial treatment planning optimization system. Phys Med Biol. 2000; 45(9):2483-95. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/45/9/303. View

Teoh M, Clark C, Wood K, Whitaker S, Nisbet A . Volumetric modulated arc therapy: a review of current literature and clinical use in practice. Br J Radiol. 2011; 84(1007):967-96. PMC: 3473700. DOI: 10.1259/bjr/22373346. View

Fogliata A, Nicolini G, Clivio A, Vanetti E, Mancosu P, Cozzi L . Dosimetric validation of the Acuros XB Advanced Dose Calculation algorithm: fundamental characterization in water. Phys Med Biol. 2011; 56(6):1879-904. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/56/6/022. View

Fraass B, Doppke K, Hunt M, Kutcher G, Starkschall G, Stern R . American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 53: quality assurance for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning. Med Phys. 1998; 25(10):1773-829. DOI: 10.1118/1.598373. View

10.

Keall P, Siebers J, Jeraj R, Mohan R . The effect of dose calculation uncertainty on the evaluation of radiotherapy plans. Med Phys. 2000; 27(3):478-84. DOI: 10.1118/1.598916. View

11.

Fotina I, Winkler P, Kunzler T, Reiterer J, Simmat I, Georg D . Advanced kernel methods vs. Monte Carlo-based dose calculation for high energy photon beams. Radiother Oncol. 2009; 93(3):645-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2009.10.013. View

12.

Krishna G, Srinivas V, Ayyangar K, Reddy P . Comparative study of old and new versions of treatment planning system using dose volume histogram indices of clinical plans. J Med Phys. 2016; 41(3):192-7. PMC: 5019038. DOI: 10.4103/0971-6203.189489. View

13.

Ojala J, Kapanen M . Quantification of dose differences between two versions of Acuros XB algorithm compared to Monte Carlo simulations--the effect on clinical patient treatment planning. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015; 16(6):213-225. PMC: 5691026. DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v16i6.5642. View

14.

Ezzell G, Burmeister J, Dogan N, LoSasso T, Mechalakos J, Mihailidis D . IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119. Med Phys. 2009; 36(11):5359-73. DOI: 10.1118/1.3238104. View

15.

Nithya L, Nambi Raj N, Kumar A, Rathinamuthu S, Pandey M . Comparative analysis of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for base of tongue cancer. J Med Phys. 2014; 39(2):121-6. PMC: 4035616. DOI: 10.4103/0971-6203.131288. View

16.

Hansen A, Petersen J, Hoyer M, Christensen J . Comparison of two dose calculation methods applied to extracranial stereotactic radiotherapy treatment planning. Radiother Oncol. 2005; 77(1):96-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2005.04.018. View

17.

Andreo P . Monte Carlo techniques in medical radiation physics. Phys Med Biol. 1991; 36(7):861-920. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/36/7/001. View

18.

Feuvret L, Noel G, Mazeron J, Bey P . Conformity index: a review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 64(2):333-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.09.028. View

19.

Aoyama H, Westerly D, Rockwell Mackie T, Olivera G, Bentzen S, Patel R . Integral radiation dose to normal structures with conformal external beam radiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 64(3):962-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.11.005. View

20.

Hussein M, Adams E, Jordan T, Clark C, Nisbet A . A critical evaluation of the PTW 2D-ARRAY seven29 and OCTAVIUS II phantom for IMRT and VMAT verification. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013; 14(6):4460. PMC: 5714639. DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v14i6.4460. View