Dosimetric comparison and plan evaluation of different dose computing algorithms for different radiotherapy techniques in head and neck tumours

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors

1 Department of Radiotherapy, Bangalore Baptist Hospital, Bangalore, India, Department of Applied Physics, Karunya institute of technology and sciences, Coimbatore, India

2 Department of applied Physics, Karunya Institute of Technology and Sciences, Coimbatore-641 114 Tamilnadu India

3 Chief Medical Physicist Department of Radiation Oncology Fortis Hospital Sector 62, Phase 8, SAS Nagar Moahli-160062 Punjab India

4 Department of Radiotherapy, Bangalore Baptist Hospital, Bangalore, India

5 Department of Radiation oncology, Tawam Hospital, Abu Dhabhi, UAE

6 Department of Community Medicine, Bangalore Baptist Hospital, Bangalore, India

10.22038/ijmp.2022.63548.2082

Abstract

Purpose:

The aim of the study is to compare target coverage and critical structure dose difference between various dose computing algorithms with small segment dose calculation in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy(IMRT) and large segment dose calculation in 3-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy(3DCRT) treatment plan for Head and Neck (H&N) tumour.

Methods and Materials:

For the present study, thirty-eight H&N cancer patients were selected retrospectively. Twenty-seven patients were planned with IMRT plan using Monte Carlo(MC) algorithm and eleven patients with 3DCRT plan using Collapsed Cone/Superposition(CCS) algorithm. IMRT plan was recalculated with Pencil Beam(PB) and the 3DCRT plan was recalculated with MC and PB algorithms. Independent student t-test was performed as a part of statistical analysis for dosimetric comparison of the p-value.

Results:

In the IMRT plan, mean dose, Conformity Index(CI), D2%, D98% and D50% showed significant differences in p-values (p<0.05), but the critical structure did not have a significant difference in p-value between the MC and PB algorithms, except Planning Risk Volume(PRV) spine. In the 3DCRT plan, mean dose, CI, Homogeneity Index(HI), D98%, D50% and all the critical structures showed no statistically significant p-values (p<0.05) between the CCS with MC and CCS with PB algorithms.

Conclusion:

The study concludes that in the IMRT treatment technique, PB algorithms overestimate the dose when compared with the MC algorithm, even in the head and neck treatment area. For 3DCRT treatment plans, CCS, MC and PB algorithms showed no statistically significant differences between them. Moreover, this study ensured the accuracy of various dose calculation algorithms in H&N radiotherapy.

Keywords

Main Subjects



Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 27 April 2022
  • Receive Date: 07 February 2022
  • Revise Date: 18 April 2022
  • Accept Date: 27 April 2022
  • First Publish Date: 27 April 2022