Benchmarking Monte-Carlo dose calculation for MLC CyberKnife treatments.
Clicks: 352
ID: 56573
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
73.5
/100
352 views
237 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #1 of 3 articles by views in radiation oncology (london, england)
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Vendor-independent Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation (IDC) for patient-specific quality assurance of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) based CyberKnife treatments is used to benchmark and validate the commercial MC dose calculation engine for MLC based treatments built into the CyberKnife treatment planning system (Precision MC).The benchmark included dose profiles in water in 15 mm depth and depth dose curves of rectangular MLC shaped fields ranging from 7.6 mm × 7.7 mm to 115.0 mm × 100.1 mm, which were compared between IDC, Precision MC and measurements in terms of dose difference and distance to agreement. Dose distributions of three phantom cases and seven clinical lung cases were calculated using both IDC and Precision MC. The lung PTVs ranged from 14 cm to 93 cm. Quantitative comparison of these dose distributions was performed using dose-volume parameters and 3D gamma analysis with 2% global dose difference and 1 mm distance criteria and a global 10% dose threshold. Time to calculate dose distributions was recorded and efficiency was assessed.Absolute dose profiles in 15 mm depth in water showed agreement between Precision MC and IDC within 3.1% or 1 mm. Depth dose curves agreed within 2.3% / 1 mm. For the phantom and clinical lung cases, mean PTV doses differed from - 1.0 to + 2.3% between IDC and Precision MC and gamma passing rates were > =98.1% for all multiple beam treatment plans. For the lung cases, lung V20 agreed within ±1.5%. Calculation times ranged from 2.2 min (for 39 cm PTV at 1.0 × 1.0 × 2.5 mm native CT resolution) to 8.1 min (93 cm at 1.1 × 1.1 × 1.0 mm), at 2% uncertainty for Precision MC for the 7 examined lung cases and 4-6 h for IDC, which, however, is not optimized for efficiency but used as a gold standard for accuracy.Both accuracy and efficiency of Precision MC in the context of MLC based planning for the CyberKnife M6 system were benchmarked against MC based IDC framework. Precision MC is used in clinical practice at our institute.
| Reference Key |
mackeprang2019benchmarkingradiation
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Mackeprang, P-H;Vuong, D;Volken, W;Henzen, D;Schmidhalter, D;Malthaner, M;Mueller, S;Frei, D;Kilby, W;Aebersold, D M;Fix, M K;Manser, P; |
| Journal | radiation oncology (london, england) |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
10.1186/s13014-019-1370-5
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.