Copyright
©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Radiol. Nov 28, 2014; 6(11): 874-880
Published online Nov 28, 2014. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v6.i11.874
Published online Nov 28, 2014. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v6.i11.874
PTV bins (cm3) | Mean PTV volume(range, cm3) | n | EPL-1D | EPL-3D | AAA | CCC | Acuros | MC |
4 ≤ v < 10 | 7.8 (4.8-9.9) | 15 | 100.0 (100-100) | 99.9 (99.6-100) | 93.1 (76.3-99.8) | 91.3 (63.0-99.9) | 91.8 (60.8-99.8) | 90.5 (51.1-99.9) |
10 ≤ v < 20 | 15.0 (10.4-19.8) | 27 | 100.0 (99.8-100) | 99.9 (99.5-100) | 91.3 (61.7-100) | 91.3 (50.4-100) | 91.4 (65.4-99.9) | 91.1 (53.2-100) |
20 ≤ v < 30 | 24.3 (20.4-29.6) | 29 | 98.5 (99.8-100) | 98.9 (77.6-100) | 92.7 (74.9-99.9) | 90.5 (46.4-99.9) | 90.9 (65.1-99.9) | 91.1 (48.4-99.9) |
30 ≤ v < 40 | 34.9 (30.2-39.8) | 18 | 99.8 (97.4-100) | 99.6 (98.2-100) | 92.0 (63.4-99.9) | 92.1 (69.7-99.9) | 90.9 (61.6-99.8) | 92.4 (56.3-99.9) |
40 ≤ v < 60 | 47.3 (40.2-58.4) | 17 | 99.5 (93.1-100) | 99.1 (95.6-100) | 92.6 (78.6-99.9) | 91.4 (64.4-99.9) | 93.6 (77.6-99.9) | 92.3 (63.6-99.9) |
60 ≤ v < 100 | 78.0 (60.4-95.9) | 16 | 99.5 (95.6-100) | 99.0 (95.8-100) | 92.7 (70.7-99.8) | 92.8 (66.2-99.9) | 93.4 (70.4-99.8) | 94.7 (74.6-99.9) |
V ≥ 100 | 162.4 (100.5-360.2) | 11 | 99.2 (96.1-99.9) | 98.7 (95.0-100) | 96.3 (89.9-100) | 95.6 (91.6-99.8) | 95.3 (83.0-99.9) | 97.1 (88.8-99.9) |
Eclipse AAA | OTP CC | Pinnacle CC | XiO Sup | OTP PB | XiO FFT | |
Combined lungs | ||||||
NTCPBurman | -0.29 | -0.2 | -0.22 | -0.25 | -0.36 | -0.45 |
NTCPSeppenwoolde | -0.19 | -0.13 | -0.12 | -0.15 | -0.23 | -0.3 |
Mean dose | -0.08 | -0.05 | -0.05 | -0.06 | -0.09 | -0.13 |
V20 | -0.06 | -0.06 | -0.04 | -0.03 | -0.05 | -0.07 |
Heart | ||||||
NTCP | -0.19 | -0.15 | -0.15 | -0.13 | -0.17 | -0.21 |
Mean dose | -0.06 | -0.05 | -0.05 | -0.05 | -0.06 | -0.09 |
V50 | -0.11 | -0.1 | -0.1 | -0.08 | -0.08 | -0.13 |
PTV | ||||||
Mean dose | -0.06 | -0.05 | -0.05 | -0.05 | -0.13 | -0.1 |
D01 | -0.05 | -0.05 | -0.04 | -0.04 | -0.1 | -0.11 |
D99 | -0.07 | -0.04 | -0.05 | -0.05 | -0.14 | -0.09 |
GTV | ||||||
Mean dose | -0.07 | -0.06 | -0.06 | -0.06 | -0.08 | -0.1 |
D01 | -0.07 | -0.07 | -0.06 | -0.06 | -0.09 | -0.11 |
D99 | -0.07 | -0.06 | -0.06 | -0.06 | -0.07 | -0.1 |
Ref. | Tumor site/technique | Algorithms studied | Results/conclusion |
Nielsen et al[34], 2011 | NSCLC | Eclipse AAA OTP CC Pinnacle CC XiO Sup OTP PB XiO FFT | Differences in dose to target predicted by the different algorithms are of a magnitude. Calculated NTCP values for pneumonitis are more sensitive to the choice of algorithm than mean lung dose and V20 |
Chandrasekaran et al[38], 2011 | Lung/3DCRT,SBRT | PBC, Eclipse AAA, Pinnacle CCC, Masterplan PBC and CCC | PBC yielded higher TCP in comparison with other algorithms. For small tumor, TCP was overestimated by 4%-13% by PBC; for large tumor, there was an increase of up to 6%-22% |
Liu et al[39], 2013 | Lung/SABR | EPL, MC | EPL overestimates dose by amounts that substantially decrease TCP in a large proportion. Compared with MC, prescribing based on EPL translated to a median TCP decrement of 4.3% (range, 1.2%-37%) and a > 5% decrement in 46% of tumors |
Bufacchi et al[33], 2013 | Prostate, HN, Lung, Breast /3DCRT | PBC, AAA | NTCP calculated with AAA was lower than the NTCP calculated with PBC, except for the breast treatments |
Chetty et al[30], 2013 | NSCLC/SABR | EPL-1D, EPL-3D, AAA, CCC, Acuros, MC | Average TCP decrements (5%-10%, ranging up to approximately 50%) were observed with model-based algorithms relative to the EPL-based methods |
- Citation: Chen WZ, Xiao Y, Li J. Impact of dose calculation algorithm on radiation therapy. World J Radiol 2014; 6(11): 874-880
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8470/full/v6/i11/874.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v6.i11.874