Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium

Tesering Dorje

doi:doi:10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium

Tesering Dorje

Published in Journal of Cancer Treatment and Research (Volume 2, Issue 1)

Received: 6 January 2014 Published: 20 February 2014

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to investigate the accuracy of pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm when high-density inhomogeneity is involved along the photon beam path. This study will help the PBC users understand the limitation of PBC during the treatment planning of real cancer treatment plans, especially when tumor is located beyond high-density tissue such as bone. Methods: Inhomogeneous phantom (30 cm x 30 cm, 17 cm deep) with a 5 cm thick solid water as the top layer followed by 5 cm thick PVC and 7 cm solid water was manufactured for depth dose calculations and measurements. Data were obtained beyond PVC medium for three field sizes: 5 x 5 cm2, 10 x 10 cm2, and 20 x 20 cm2. Dose calculations were performed using PBC and measurements were done using chamber. Measured and calculated data were compared against each other. Results: PBC produced dose prediction errors beyond high density medium by 3.7% to 7.3% for field size 5 x 5 cm2, by 4.8% to 6.9% for field size 10 x 10 cm2, and by 5.9% to 7.3% for field size 20 x 20 cm2. The results of this study, however, showed no clear dependency on the field size. Similarly, difference between the PBC and measurements did not show a clear trend when results at various points were compared with each other. Conclusion: PBC can overestimate the dose by up to 7.3% beyond high-density medium. High density materials such metallic immobilization devices must be avoided in the beam path during the patient treatment.

Published in	Journal of Cancer Treatment and Research (Volume 2, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11
Page(s)	1-4
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2014. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Dose Calculation, PBC, Inhomogeneity Correction

References

[1]	International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU), "Determination of Absorbed Dose in a Patient Irradiated by Beams of X and Gamma Rays in Radiotherapy Procedures," ICRU Report, Bethesda, 1976.
[2]	A. Gray, L. Oliver, P. Johnson, "The accuracy of the pencil beam convolution and anisotropic analytical algorithms in predicting the dose effects due to the attenuation from immobilization devices and large air gaps," Medical Physics, Vol. 36, No. 7, 2009; pp. 3181-91. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.3147204
[3]	P. Storchi , L. Van Battum , E. Woudstra, "Calculation of a pencil beam kernel from measured photon beam data," Physics in Medicine and Biology, Vol. 44, No. 12, 1999; pp. 2917-28. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/12/305
[4]	M. Sontag, J. Cunningham, "Corrections to absorbed dose calculations for tissue inhomogeneities," Medical Physics, Vol. 4, No. 5, 1977; pp. 431-6. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.594329
[5]	C. Hurkmans, T. Knoos, P. Nilsson, G. Svahn-Tapper, H. Danielsson, "Limitations of a Pencil Beam approach to photon dose calculations in the head and neck region," Radiotherapy Oncology, Vol. 37, No.1, 1995; pp. 74-80. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-8140(95)01609-K
[6]	S. B. Rana, "Dose prediction accuracy of anisotropic analytical algorithm and pencil beam convolution algorithm beyond high density heterogeneity interface," South Asian Journal of Cancer, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2013; pp. 26-30. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-330X.105888
[7]	T. P. Wong, P. E. Metcalfe, T. Kron, and T. G. Emeleus, "Radiotherapy x-ray dose distribution beyond air cavities," Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine, Vol. 15, No. 3, 1992;pp. 138–146.
[8]	L. Lu, "Dose calculation algorithms in external beam photon radiation therapy," International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2013; 01025. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0102.5
[9]	B. H. Shahine, M. S. A. L. Al-Ghazi, and E. El-Khatib, "Experimental evaluation of interface doses in the presence of air cavities compared with treatment planning algorithms," Medical Physics, Vol. 26, No. 3, 1999; pp. 350–355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.598526
[10]	S. Oyewale, "Dose prediction accuracy of collapsed cone convolution superposition algorithm in a multi-layer inhomogenous phantom," International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013; 01016. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0101.6
[11]	X. A. Li, C. Yu, and T. Holmes, "A systematic evaluation of air cavity dose perturbation in megavoltage x-ray beams," Medical Physics, Vol. 27, No. 5, 2000; pp. 1011–1017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.598966
[12]	S. Rana, S. Pokharel, "Verification of dose calculation algorithms in a multi-layer heterogeneous phantom using films," Gulf Journal of Oncology, Vol. 1, No. 14, 2013; pp. 63-9.
[13]	S. Hawke, A. Torrance, L. Tremethick, "Evaluation of planned dosimetry when beam energies are substituted for a fraction of the treatment course," International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2013; 01014. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0102.4
[14]	S. Pokharel, "Dosimetric impact of mixed-energy volumetric modulated arc therapy plans for high-risk prostate cancer.," International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 1, No.1, 2013; 01011. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0101.1
[15]	S. Rana, "Clinical dosimetric impact of Acuros XB and analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) on real lung cancer treatment plans: review, " International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 2, No, 1; 02019. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0201.9
[16]	S. Moorthy, H. Sakr, S. Hasan, et. al "Dosimetric study of SIB-IMRT versus SIB-3DCRT for breast cancer with breath-hold gated technique," International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013, 010110. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0101.10
[17]	P. Mavroidis, "Clinical implementation of radiobiological measures in treatment planning. Why has it taken so long? "International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013; 010109. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0101.9
[18]	W. Ulmer, "Notes of the editorial board on the role of medical physics in radiotherapy," International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013; 01014. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0101.4
[19]	X. Zhang, Y. Li, X. Pan, et al. , "Intensity-modulated proton therapy reduces the dose to normal tissue compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy or passive scattering proton therapy and enables individualized radical radiotherapy for extensive stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer: a virtual clinical study," Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, Vol 77, No. 2, 2010;pp 357-66.
[20]	S. Rana, H. Singh, "Impact of heterogeneities on lateral penumbra in uniform scanning proton therapy," International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2013; 01026. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0102.6
[21]	U. Schneider, S. Agosteo, E. Pedroni, J. Besserer, "Secondary neutron dose during proton therapy using spot scaninng," Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys, Vol 53, No. 1, 2002; pp 244-251.
[22]	MR. Islam, "Secondary neutrons issue in proton radiotherapy-a brief report," International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2014; 02017.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0201.7

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Tesering Dorje. (2014). Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium. Journal of Cancer Treatment and Research, 2(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Tesering Dorje. Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium. J. Cancer Treat. Res. 2014, 2(1), 1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Tesering Dorje. Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium. J Cancer Treat Res. 2014;2(1):1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11,
  author = {Tesering Dorje},
  title = {Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium},
  journal = {Journal of Cancer Treatment and Research},
  volume = {2},
  number = {1},
  pages = {1-4},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jctr.20140201.11},
  abstract = {Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to investigate the accuracy of pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm when high-density inhomogeneity is involved along the photon beam path. This study will help the PBC users understand the limitation of PBC during the treatment planning of real cancer treatment plans, especially when tumor is located beyond high-density tissue such as bone. Methods: Inhomogeneous phantom (30 cm x 30 cm, 17 cm deep) with a 5 cm thick solid water as the top layer followed by 5 cm thick PVC and 7 cm solid water was manufactured for depth dose calculations and measurements. Data were obtained beyond PVC medium for three field sizes: 5 x 5 cm2, 10 x 10 cm2, and 20 x 20 cm2. Dose calculations were performed using PBC and measurements were done using chamber. Measured and calculated data were compared against each other. Results: PBC produced dose prediction errors beyond high density medium by 3.7% to 7.3% for field size 5 x 5 cm2, by 4.8% to 6.9% for field size 10 x 10 cm2, and by 5.9% to 7.3% for field size 20 x 20 cm2. The results of this study, however, showed no clear dependency on the field size. Similarly, difference between the PBC and measurements did not show a clear trend when results at various points were compared with each other. Conclusion: PBC can overestimate the dose by up to 7.3% beyond high-density medium. High density materials such metallic immobilization devices must be avoided in the beam path during the patient treatment.},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download

TY - JOUR
T1 - Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium
AU - Tesering Dorje
Y1 - 2014/02/20
PY - 2014
N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11
DO - 10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11
T2 - Journal of Cancer Treatment and Research
JF - Journal of Cancer Treatment and Research
JO - Journal of Cancer Treatment and Research
SP - 1
EP - 4
PB - Science Publishing Group
SN - 2376-7790
UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11
AB - Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to investigate the accuracy of pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm when high-density inhomogeneity is involved along the photon beam path. This study will help the PBC users understand the limitation of PBC during the treatment planning of real cancer treatment plans, especially when tumor is located beyond high-density tissue such as bone. Methods: Inhomogeneous phantom (30 cm x 30 cm, 17 cm deep) with a 5 cm thick solid water as the top layer followed by 5 cm thick PVC and 7 cm solid water was manufactured for depth dose calculations and measurements. Data were obtained beyond PVC medium for three field sizes: 5 x 5 cm2, 10 x 10 cm2, and 20 x 20 cm2. Dose calculations were performed using PBC and measurements were done using chamber. Measured and calculated data were compared against each other. Results: PBC produced dose prediction errors beyond high density medium by 3.7% to 7.3% for field size 5 x 5 cm2, by 4.8% to 6.9% for field size 10 x 10 cm2, and by 5.9% to 7.3% for field size 20 x 20 cm2. The results of this study, however, showed no clear dependency on the field size. Similarly, difference between the PBC and measurements did not show a clear trend when results at various points were compared with each other. Conclusion: PBC can overestimate the dose by up to 7.3% beyond high-density medium. High density materials such metallic immobilization devices must be avoided in the beam path during the patient treatment.
VL - 2
IS - 1
ER -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Tesering Dorje

National Hospital, Gongphel Lam, Thimpu, Bhutan

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Tesering Dorje. (2014). Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium. Journal of Cancer Treatment and Research, 2(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Tesering Dorje. Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium. J. Cancer Treat. Res. 2014, 2(1), 1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Tesering Dorje. Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium. J Cancer Treat Res. 2014;2(1):1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11,
  author = {Tesering Dorje},
  title = {Limitation of Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm for Photon Dose Calculations in Inhomogeneous Medium},
  journal = {Journal of Cancer Treatment and Research},
  volume = {2},
  number = {1},
  pages = {1-4},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jctr.20140201.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jctr.20140201.11},
  abstract = {Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to investigate the accuracy of pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm when high-density inhomogeneity is involved along the photon beam path. This study will help the PBC users understand the limitation of PBC during the treatment planning of real cancer treatment plans, especially when tumor is located beyond high-density tissue such as bone. Methods: Inhomogeneous phantom (30 cm x 30 cm, 17 cm deep) with a 5 cm thick solid water as the top layer followed by 5 cm thick PVC and 7 cm solid water was manufactured for depth dose calculations and measurements. Data were obtained beyond PVC medium for three field sizes: 5 x 5 cm2, 10 x 10 cm2, and 20 x 20 cm2. Dose calculations were performed using PBC and measurements were done using chamber. Measured and calculated data were compared against each other. Results: PBC produced dose prediction errors beyond high density medium by 3.7% to 7.3% for field size 5 x 5 cm2, by 4.8% to 6.9% for field size 10 x 10 cm2, and by 5.9% to 7.3% for field size 20 x 20 cm2. The results of this study, however, showed no clear dependency on the field size. Similarly, difference between the PBC and measurements did not show a clear trend when results at various points were compared with each other. Conclusion: PBC can overestimate the dose by up to 7.3% beyond high-density medium. High density materials such metallic immobilization devices must be avoided in the beam path during the patient treatment.},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download