Beam–Based Dose Calculation in Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Lung Cancer Under Normal and Deep Inspiration Breath Hold

V. Landoni, G. R. Borzì, S. Strolin, V. Bruzzaniti, A. Soriani, D. D’Alessio, F. Ambesi, A. M. Di Grazia, L. Strigari

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the differences between dose distributions calculated with the pencil beam (PB) and X-ray voxel Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms for patients with lung cancer using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or HybridArc techniques. The 2 algorithms were compared in terms of dose–volume histograms, under normal and deep inspiration breath hold, and in terms of the tumor control probability (TCP). The dependence of the differences in tumor volume and location was investigated. Dosimetric validation was performed using Gafchromic EBT3 (International Specialty Products, ISP, Wayne, NJ). Forty-five Computed Tomography (CT) data sets were used for this study; 40 Gy at 8 Gy/fraction was prescribed with 5 noncoplanar 6-MV IMRT beams or 3 to 4 dynamic conformal arcs with 3 to 5 IMRT beams distributed per arc. The plans were first calculated with PB and then recalculated with MC. The difference between the mean tumor doses was approximately 10% ± 4%; these differences were even larger under deep inspiration breath hold. Differences between the mean tumor dose correlated with tumor volume and path length of the beams. The TCP values changed from 99.87% ± 0.24% to 96.78% ± 4.81% for both PB- and MC-calculated plans (P =.009). When a fraction of hypoxic cells was considered, the mean TCP values changed from 76.01% ± 5.83% to 34.78% ± 18.06% for the differently calculated plans (P

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)334-342
Number of pages9
JournalTechnology in Cancer Research and Treatment
Volume14
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2015

Fingerprint

Radiosurgery
Lung Neoplasms
Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy
Neoplasms
Tumor Burden
Tomography
X-Rays

Keywords

  • Monte Carlo calculation
  • stereotactic lung radiotherapy
  • tumor control probability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Beam–Based Dose Calculation in Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Lung Cancer Under Normal and Deep Inspiration Breath Hold. / Landoni, V.; Borzì, G. R.; Strolin, S.; Bruzzaniti, V.; Soriani, A.; D’Alessio, D.; Ambesi, F.; Di Grazia, A. M.; Strigari, L.

In: Technology in Cancer Research and Treatment, Vol. 14, No. 3, 01.06.2015, p. 334-342.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Landoni, V. ; Borzì, G. R. ; Strolin, S. ; Bruzzaniti, V. ; Soriani, A. ; D’Alessio, D. ; Ambesi, F. ; Di Grazia, A. M. ; Strigari, L. / Beam–Based Dose Calculation in Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Lung Cancer Under Normal and Deep Inspiration Breath Hold. In: Technology in Cancer Research and Treatment. 2015 ; Vol. 14, No. 3. pp. 334-342.
@article{bd1bffcc642849508ca4cf211eb6f46f,
title = "Beam–Based Dose Calculation in Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Lung Cancer Under Normal and Deep Inspiration Breath Hold",
abstract = "The purpose of this study is to evaluate the differences between dose distributions calculated with the pencil beam (PB) and X-ray voxel Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms for patients with lung cancer using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or HybridArc techniques. The 2 algorithms were compared in terms of dose–volume histograms, under normal and deep inspiration breath hold, and in terms of the tumor control probability (TCP). The dependence of the differences in tumor volume and location was investigated. Dosimetric validation was performed using Gafchromic EBT3 (International Specialty Products, ISP, Wayne, NJ). Forty-five Computed Tomography (CT) data sets were used for this study; 40 Gy at 8 Gy/fraction was prescribed with 5 noncoplanar 6-MV IMRT beams or 3 to 4 dynamic conformal arcs with 3 to 5 IMRT beams distributed per arc. The plans were first calculated with PB and then recalculated with MC. The difference between the mean tumor doses was approximately 10{\%} ± 4{\%}; these differences were even larger under deep inspiration breath hold. Differences between the mean tumor dose correlated with tumor volume and path length of the beams. The TCP values changed from 99.87{\%} ± 0.24{\%} to 96.78{\%} ± 4.81{\%} for both PB- and MC-calculated plans (P =.009). When a fraction of hypoxic cells was considered, the mean TCP values changed from 76.01{\%} ± 5.83{\%} to 34.78{\%} ± 18.06{\%} for the differently calculated plans (P",
keywords = "Monte Carlo calculation, stereotactic lung radiotherapy, tumor control probability",
author = "V. Landoni and Borz{\`i}, {G. R.} and S. Strolin and V. Bruzzaniti and A. Soriani and D. D’Alessio and F. Ambesi and {Di Grazia}, {A. M.} and L. Strigari",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1533034614547451",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "334--342",
journal = "Technology in Cancer Research and Treatment",
issn = "1533-0346",
publisher = "Adenine Press",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Beam–Based Dose Calculation in Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Lung Cancer Under Normal and Deep Inspiration Breath Hold

AU - Landoni, V.

AU - Borzì, G. R.

AU - Strolin, S.

AU - Bruzzaniti, V.

AU - Soriani, A.

AU - D’Alessio, D.

AU - Ambesi, F.

AU - Di Grazia, A. M.

AU - Strigari, L.

PY - 2015/6/1

Y1 - 2015/6/1

N2 - The purpose of this study is to evaluate the differences between dose distributions calculated with the pencil beam (PB) and X-ray voxel Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms for patients with lung cancer using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or HybridArc techniques. The 2 algorithms were compared in terms of dose–volume histograms, under normal and deep inspiration breath hold, and in terms of the tumor control probability (TCP). The dependence of the differences in tumor volume and location was investigated. Dosimetric validation was performed using Gafchromic EBT3 (International Specialty Products, ISP, Wayne, NJ). Forty-five Computed Tomography (CT) data sets were used for this study; 40 Gy at 8 Gy/fraction was prescribed with 5 noncoplanar 6-MV IMRT beams or 3 to 4 dynamic conformal arcs with 3 to 5 IMRT beams distributed per arc. The plans were first calculated with PB and then recalculated with MC. The difference between the mean tumor doses was approximately 10% ± 4%; these differences were even larger under deep inspiration breath hold. Differences between the mean tumor dose correlated with tumor volume and path length of the beams. The TCP values changed from 99.87% ± 0.24% to 96.78% ± 4.81% for both PB- and MC-calculated plans (P =.009). When a fraction of hypoxic cells was considered, the mean TCP values changed from 76.01% ± 5.83% to 34.78% ± 18.06% for the differently calculated plans (P

AB - The purpose of this study is to evaluate the differences between dose distributions calculated with the pencil beam (PB) and X-ray voxel Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms for patients with lung cancer using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or HybridArc techniques. The 2 algorithms were compared in terms of dose–volume histograms, under normal and deep inspiration breath hold, and in terms of the tumor control probability (TCP). The dependence of the differences in tumor volume and location was investigated. Dosimetric validation was performed using Gafchromic EBT3 (International Specialty Products, ISP, Wayne, NJ). Forty-five Computed Tomography (CT) data sets were used for this study; 40 Gy at 8 Gy/fraction was prescribed with 5 noncoplanar 6-MV IMRT beams or 3 to 4 dynamic conformal arcs with 3 to 5 IMRT beams distributed per arc. The plans were first calculated with PB and then recalculated with MC. The difference between the mean tumor doses was approximately 10% ± 4%; these differences were even larger under deep inspiration breath hold. Differences between the mean tumor dose correlated with tumor volume and path length of the beams. The TCP values changed from 99.87% ± 0.24% to 96.78% ± 4.81% for both PB- and MC-calculated plans (P =.009). When a fraction of hypoxic cells was considered, the mean TCP values changed from 76.01% ± 5.83% to 34.78% ± 18.06% for the differently calculated plans (P

KW - Monte Carlo calculation

KW - stereotactic lung radiotherapy

KW - tumor control probability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84954520128&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84954520128&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1533034614547451

DO - 10.1177/1533034614547451

M3 - Article

C2 - 25223324

AN - SCOPUS:84954520128

VL - 14

SP - 334

EP - 342

JO - Technology in Cancer Research and Treatment

JF - Technology in Cancer Research and Treatment

SN - 1533-0346

IS - 3

ER -