Statistical evaluation of dosimetric differences changes between the Modified Batho's density correction method and the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm for clinical practice
Purpose: The aim of this work was to assess and to quantify, for clinical practice, the differences in computed doses using two types of dose calculation algorithm for the heterogeneity correction including target volumes and organs at risk (OARs).
Methods: 35 patients having lung, breast, spine, head & neck, brain and pelvic tumors, were studied. For each patient, 2 treatment plans were generated. In plan 1, the dose was calculated using the Modified Batho's (MB) density correction method integrated in the Pencil Beam Convolution algorithm. In plan 2, the dose was calculated using the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA). To compare the two plans a dosimetric analysis was carried out including cumulative and differential dose volume histograms (DVH), coverage index, and conformity index. Wilcoxon signed rank and Spearman’s tests were used to calculate p-values and correlation coefficients (r), respectively. Bootstrap simulation with 1000 random samplings was used to calculate the 95% confidence interval (95% CI).
Results: The analysis of DVH showed that the AAA method calculated significantly higher doses for OARs for all cancer sites and lower doses for target volumes, especially for targets located in lung, with p < 0.05. The data demonstrated a strong correlation between MB and AAA for all cancer sites with r > 0.9.
Conclusion: This study confirms that using the AAA integrated into Eclipse® TPS, the calculated dose will be increased to OARs, and reduced to target volumes. Thus, when changing from the MB algorithm to AAA, attention should be paid to avoid any bias of over/under estimating the dose given by AAA and to hold discussions between physicists and oncologists regarding any necessary modification in the prescription method.
Papanikolaou N, Battista J, Mackie T, et al. Tissue inhomogeneity corrections for megavoltage photon beams. AAPM Report No 85; Task Group No. 65, 2004.
Ahnesjö A, Aspradakis M M. Dose calculations for external photon beams in radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 1999; 44 :99-155.
Batho HF. Lung corrections in cobalt 60 beam therapy. J Can Assoc Radiol. 1964;15:79-83.
El-Khatib E, Battista J J. Improved lung dose calculation using tissue-maximum ratios in the Batho correction. Med Phys.1984;11:279-86.
Thomas S J. A modified power low formula for inhomogeneity corrections in beams of high energy x rays. Med Phys. 1991;18:719-23.
Rana S. Clinical dosimetric impact of Acuros XB and analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) on real lung cancer treatment plans: review. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2014;2:02019.
Ojala J. The accuracy of the Acuros XB algorithm in external beam radiotherapy – a comprehensive review. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2014;2:020417.
Rana S, Pokharel S. Dose-to-medium vs. dose-to-water: Dosimetric evaluation of dose reporting modes in Acuros XB for prostate, lung and breast cancer. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2014;2:020421.
Chaikh A, Balosso J. Should the dose prescription be readjusted when using tissues density corrections algorithms for radiation oncology? J Case Rep Onc Ther. 2014; 1(1):01018.
Feuvret L, Noël G, Mazeron JJ, Bey J. Conformity index: a review. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys. 2006; (64)2: 333–342.
Chaikh A, Giraud JY, Balosso J. A method to quantify and assess the dosimetric and clinical impact resulting from the heterogeneity correction in radiotherapy for lung cancer. Int J Cancer TherOncol. 2014; 2(1):020110.
Yoon M, Park SY, Shin D, et al. A new homogeneity index based on statistical analysis of the dose–volume histogram. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 2007, 8(2): 9-17.
Chaikh A, Giraud JY, Perrin E, et al. The choice of statistical methods for comparisons of dosimetric data in radiotherapy. Radiation oncology 2014; 9:205.
Efron B, Tibshirani RJ (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman & Hall, New York.
Gray A, Oliver LD, Johnston PN. The accuracy of the pencil beam convolution and anisotropic analytical algorithms in predicting the dose effects due to attenuation from immobilization devices and large air gaps. Med Phys. 2009; 36 (31): 81-91.
Rana S, Pokharel S. Verification of dose calculation algorithms in a multi-layer heterogeneous phantom using films. Gulf J Oncolog. 2013;1(14):63-9.
Narabayashi M, Mizowaki T, Matsuo Y, et al. Dosimetric evaluation of the impacts of different heterogeneity correction algorithms on target doses in stereotactic body radiation therapy for lung tumors. J Radiat Res. 2012;53(5):777-84.
Ahnesjö A, Aspradakis M M. Dose calculations for external photon beams in radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 1999; 44 : 99–155.
Rana S, Rogers K, Pokharel S, Cheng C. Evaluation of Acuros XB algorithm based on RTOG 0813 dosimetric criteria for SBRT lung treatment with RapidArc. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15(1):4474.
Lu L. Dose calculation algorithms in external beam photon radiation therapy. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2013; 1(2):01025.
Amankwaa-Frempong E, Vernimmen F, Blay S, Ezhilalan R. Irradiation of lung and esophagus tumors: A comparison of dose distributions calculated by anisotropic analytical algorithm and pencil beam convolution algorithm, a retrospective dosimetric study. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2014; 2(2):020210.
Chaikh A, Giraud JY, Marguet M, et al. A decision tool to adjust the prescribed dose after change in the dose calculation algorithm. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2014; 2(4):020414.
Chaikh A, Giraud JY, Balosso J. A 3D quantitative evaluation for assessing the changes of treatment planning system and irradiation techniques in radiotherapy. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2014; 2(3):02033.
Chaikh A, Desgranges C, Balosso J. Statistical methods to evaluate the correlation between measured and calculated dose using a quality assurance method in IMRT. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2015; 3(4):3411.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology (ISSN 2330-4049)
© International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology (IJCTO)
To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the 'ijcto.org' domain to your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.