TU‐FF‐A1‐04: Benchmarking a Flexible Monte Carlo (MC) Tool Based On the Dose Planning Method (DPM) for Use in Evaluating IMRT Treatment Planning Systems

S. Davidson; J. Cui; D. Followill; G. Ibbott; J. Deasy

doi:10.1118/1.2761452

TU‐FF‐A1‐04: Benchmarking a Flexible Monte Carlo (MC) Tool Based On the Dose Planning Method (DPM) for Use in Evaluating IMRT Treatment Planning Systems

S. Davidson, J. Cui, D. Followill, G. Ibbott, J. Deasy

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Purpose: To benchmark a flexible Monte Carlo (MC) tool based on the Dose Planning Method (DPM) for use in evaluating Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) treatment planning systems. Method and Materials: A dose calculation tool based on a flexible machine model using the Dose Planning Method (DPM),a “fast” Monte Carlo ((MC) computer code, is being developed. Initial benchmark testing included a simple 10cm × 10cm multileaf collimator (MLC) diamond shaped pattern, a 3D conformal lung plan with the MLCs fully retracted, and an IMRT lung plan. Irradiations were performed using a 6MV photon beam from a Varian linear accelerator. Measurements were made in slab and anthropomorphic phantom geometries using thermoluminescent detectors (TLDs) and radiochromic film. The DPM calculation was then compared to measurements and also the calculation from the Pinnacle treatment planning system. Results: Profile comparisons from the MLC diamond pattern irradiation showed good agreement in the penumbra region where MLC inter and intra leaf transmission effects were present. The point dose comparisons between the DPM calculation and measurement of the tumor for the 3D conformal and IMRT lung plans where within 2%. For the heart and spinal cord, the calculation for the 3D conformal and IMRT lung plans where within 7.5% of measurement, except in the conformal plan where the calculated dose point to the heart was positioned in a steep dose gradient and was 25% lower than measurement. Dose profiles through the center of the tumor showed good agreement in the PTV region, penumbra, and low dose lung regions. Conclusion: This work demonstrates the feasibility of a source model based the DPM computer code to calculate dose distributions as part of the quality assurance program for clinical trials. Conflict of Interest: This work supported by PHS CA010953, CA081647, and CA085181 awarded by NCI, DHHS.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	2574-2575
Number of pages	2
Journal	Medical Physics
Volume	34
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2761452
State	Published - Jun 2007
Externally published	Yes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Biophysics
Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Access to Document

10.1118/1.2761452

Cite this

@article{c20ab97d730743df9d318dac528677d1,

title = "TU‐FF‐A1‐04: Benchmarking a Flexible Monte Carlo (MC) Tool Based On the Dose Planning Method (DPM) for Use in Evaluating IMRT Treatment Planning Systems",

abstract = "Purpose: To benchmark a flexible Monte Carlo (MC) tool based on the Dose Planning Method (DPM) for use in evaluating Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) treatment planning systems. Method and Materials: A dose calculation tool based on a flexible machine model using the Dose Planning Method (DPM),a “fast” Monte Carlo ((MC) computer code, is being developed. Initial benchmark testing included a simple 10cm × 10cm multileaf collimator (MLC) diamond shaped pattern, a 3D conformal lung plan with the MLCs fully retracted, and an IMRT lung plan. Irradiations were performed using a 6MV photon beam from a Varian linear accelerator. Measurements were made in slab and anthropomorphic phantom geometries using thermoluminescent detectors (TLDs) and radiochromic film. The DPM calculation was then compared to measurements and also the calculation from the Pinnacle treatment planning system. Results: Profile comparisons from the MLC diamond pattern irradiation showed good agreement in the penumbra region where MLC inter and intra leaf transmission effects were present. The point dose comparisons between the DPM calculation and measurement of the tumor for the 3D conformal and IMRT lung plans where within 2%. For the heart and spinal cord, the calculation for the 3D conformal and IMRT lung plans where within 7.5% of measurement, except in the conformal plan where the calculated dose point to the heart was positioned in a steep dose gradient and was 25% lower than measurement. Dose profiles through the center of the tumor showed good agreement in the PTV region, penumbra, and low dose lung regions. Conclusion: This work demonstrates the feasibility of a source model based the DPM computer code to calculate dose distributions as part of the quality assurance program for clinical trials. Conflict of Interest: This work supported by PHS CA010953, CA081647, and CA085181 awarded by NCI, DHHS.",

author = "S. Davidson and J. Cui and D. Followill and G. Ibbott and J. Deasy",

year = "2007",

month = jun,

doi = "10.1118/1.2761452",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "34",

pages = "2574--2575",

journal = "Medical Physics",

issn = "0094-2405",

publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - TU‐FF‐A1‐04

T2 - Benchmarking a Flexible Monte Carlo (MC) Tool Based On the Dose Planning Method (DPM) for Use in Evaluating IMRT Treatment Planning Systems

AU - Davidson, S.

AU - Cui, J.

AU - Followill, D.

AU - Ibbott, G.

AU - Deasy, J.

PY - 2007/6

Y1 - 2007/6

N2 - Purpose: To benchmark a flexible Monte Carlo (MC) tool based on the Dose Planning Method (DPM) for use in evaluating Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) treatment planning systems. Method and Materials: A dose calculation tool based on a flexible machine model using the Dose Planning Method (DPM),a “fast” Monte Carlo ((MC) computer code, is being developed. Initial benchmark testing included a simple 10cm × 10cm multileaf collimator (MLC) diamond shaped pattern, a 3D conformal lung plan with the MLCs fully retracted, and an IMRT lung plan. Irradiations were performed using a 6MV photon beam from a Varian linear accelerator. Measurements were made in slab and anthropomorphic phantom geometries using thermoluminescent detectors (TLDs) and radiochromic film. The DPM calculation was then compared to measurements and also the calculation from the Pinnacle treatment planning system. Results: Profile comparisons from the MLC diamond pattern irradiation showed good agreement in the penumbra region where MLC inter and intra leaf transmission effects were present. The point dose comparisons between the DPM calculation and measurement of the tumor for the 3D conformal and IMRT lung plans where within 2%. For the heart and spinal cord, the calculation for the 3D conformal and IMRT lung plans where within 7.5% of measurement, except in the conformal plan where the calculated dose point to the heart was positioned in a steep dose gradient and was 25% lower than measurement. Dose profiles through the center of the tumor showed good agreement in the PTV region, penumbra, and low dose lung regions. Conclusion: This work demonstrates the feasibility of a source model based the DPM computer code to calculate dose distributions as part of the quality assurance program for clinical trials. Conflict of Interest: This work supported by PHS CA010953, CA081647, and CA085181 awarded by NCI, DHHS.

AB - Purpose: To benchmark a flexible Monte Carlo (MC) tool based on the Dose Planning Method (DPM) for use in evaluating Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) treatment planning systems. Method and Materials: A dose calculation tool based on a flexible machine model using the Dose Planning Method (DPM),a “fast” Monte Carlo ((MC) computer code, is being developed. Initial benchmark testing included a simple 10cm × 10cm multileaf collimator (MLC) diamond shaped pattern, a 3D conformal lung plan with the MLCs fully retracted, and an IMRT lung plan. Irradiations were performed using a 6MV photon beam from a Varian linear accelerator. Measurements were made in slab and anthropomorphic phantom geometries using thermoluminescent detectors (TLDs) and radiochromic film. The DPM calculation was then compared to measurements and also the calculation from the Pinnacle treatment planning system. Results: Profile comparisons from the MLC diamond pattern irradiation showed good agreement in the penumbra region where MLC inter and intra leaf transmission effects were present. The point dose comparisons between the DPM calculation and measurement of the tumor for the 3D conformal and IMRT lung plans where within 2%. For the heart and spinal cord, the calculation for the 3D conformal and IMRT lung plans where within 7.5% of measurement, except in the conformal plan where the calculated dose point to the heart was positioned in a steep dose gradient and was 25% lower than measurement. Dose profiles through the center of the tumor showed good agreement in the PTV region, penumbra, and low dose lung regions. Conclusion: This work demonstrates the feasibility of a source model based the DPM computer code to calculate dose distributions as part of the quality assurance program for clinical trials. Conflict of Interest: This work supported by PHS CA010953, CA081647, and CA085181 awarded by NCI, DHHS.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024805656&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024805656&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.2761452

DO - 10.1118/1.2761452

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85024805656

SN - 0094-2405

VL - 34

SP - 2574

EP - 2575

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

IS - 6

ER -

TU‐FF‐A1‐04: Benchmarking a Flexible Monte Carlo (MC) Tool Based On the Dose Planning Method (DPM) for Use in Evaluating IMRT Treatment Planning Systems

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this