Advertisement

Dosimetric comparison of analytical anisotropic algorithm and the two dose reporting modes of Acuros XB dose calculation algorithm in volumetric modulated arc therapy of carcinoma lung and carcinoma prostate

      Abstract

      Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) is an important modality for radical radiotherapy of all major treatment sites. This study aims to compare Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) and the two dose-reporting modes of Acuros XB (AXB) algorithm -the dose to medium option (Dm) and the dose to water option (Dw) in Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) of carcinoma lung and carcinoma prostate. We also compared the measured dose with Treatment Planning System calculated dose for AAA and the two dose reporting options of Acuros XB using Electronic Portal Imaging Device (EPID) and ArcCHECK phantom. Treatment plans of twenty patients each who have already undergone radiotherapy for cancer of lung and cancer of prostate were selected for the study. Three sets of VMAT plans were generated in Eclipse Treatment Planning System (TPS), one with AAA and two plans with Acuros-Dm and Acuros-Dw options. The Dose Volume Histograms (DVHs) were compared and analyzed for Planning Target Volume (PTV) and critical structures for all the plans. Verification plans were created for each plan and measured doses were compared with TPS calculated doses using EPID and ArcCHECK phantom for all the three algorithms. For lung plans, the mean dose to PTV in the AXB-Dw plans was higher by 1.7% and in the AXB-Dm plans by 0.66% when compared to AAA plans. For prostate plans, the mean dose to PTV in the AXB-Dw plans was higher by 3.0% and in the AXB-Dm plans by 1.6% when compared to AAA plans. There was no difference in the Conformity Index (CI) between AAA and AXB-Dm and between AAA and AXB-Dw plans for both sites. But the homogeneity worsened in AXB-Dw and AXB-Dm plans when compared to AAA plans for both sites. AXB-Dw calculated higher dose values for PTV and all the critical structures with significant differences with one or two exceptions. Point dose measurements in ArcCHECK phantom showed that AXB-Dm and AXB-Dw options showed very small deviations with measured dose distributions than AAA for both sites. Results of EPID QA also showed better pass rates for AXB-Dw and AXB-Dm than AAA for both sites when gamma analysis was done for 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm criteria. With reference to the results, it is always better to choose Acuros algorithm for dose calculations if it is available in the TPS. AXB-Dw plans showed very high dose values in the PTV when compared to AAA and AXB-Dm in both sites studied. Also, the volume of PTV receiving 107% dose was significantly high in AXB-Dw plans compared to AXB-Dm plans in sites involving high density bones. Considering the results of dosimetric comparison and QA measurements, it is always better to choose AXB-Dm algorithm for dose calculations for all treatment sites especially when high density bony structures and complex treatment techniques are involved. For patient specific QA purposes, choosing AXB-Dm or AXB-Dw does not make any significant difference between calculated and measured dose distributions.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Medical Dosimetry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Bouyer C.
        • Fargier-Voiron M.
        • Beneux A.
        13. Comparison of algorithms AAA and Acuros (AxB) on heterogenous medium.
        Physica Medica. 2017; 44: 7-8
        • Fogliata A
        • Nicolini G
        • Clivio A
        • Vanetti E
        • Cozzi L.
        Dosimetric evaluation of Acuros XB Advanced Dose Calculation algorithm in heterogeneous media.
        Radiat Oncol. 2011; 6: 1-5
        • Fogliata A
        • Nicolini G
        • Clivio A
        • Vanetti E
        • Cozzi L.
        Critical appraisal of Acuros XB and Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm dose calculation in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treatments.
        Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2012; 83: 1587-1595
        • Zhen H.
        • Hrycushko B.
        • Lee H.
        • et al.
        Dosimetric comparison of Acuros XB with collapsed cone convolution/superposition and anisotropic analytic algorithm for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy of thoracic spinal metastases.
        J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 2015; 16: 181-192
        • Kathirvel M.
        • Subramanian S.
        • Clivio A.
        • Arun G.
        • Fogliata A.
        • Nicolini G.
        • Subramani V.
        • Thirumalai Swamy S.
        • Vanetti E.
        • Cozzi L.
        Critical appraisal of the accuracy of Acuros-XB and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm compared to measurement and calculations with the compass system in the delivery of RapidArc clinical plans.
        Radiat Oncol. 2013; 8: 140
        • Ono K.
        • Endo S.
        • Tanaka K.
        • Hoshi M.
        • Hirokawa Y.
        Dosimetric verification of the anisotropic analytical algorithm in lung equivalent heterogeneities with and without bone equivalent heterogeneities.
        Med. Phys. 2010; 37: 4456-4463
        • Failla GA
        • Wareing T
        • Archambault Y
        • Thompson S.
        Acuros XB advanced dose calculation for the Eclipse treatment planning system.
        Palo Alto, CA: Varian Medical Systems. 2010; 20: 18
        • Andreo P.
        Dose to ‘water-like'media or dose to tissue in MV photons radiotherapy treatment planning: still a matter of debate.
        Phys Med Biol. 2014; 60: 309-337
        • Kan MW
        • Leung LH
        • Peter KN.
        Dosimetric impact of using the Acuros XB algorithm for intensity modulated radiation therapy and RapidArc planning in nasopharyngeal carcinomas.
        Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2013; 85: e73-e80
      1. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. ICRU Report 83 Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Photon-beam Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT)-Journal of the ICRU-Vol 10, Oxford, England, United Kingdom No 1 2010.
        Oxford University Press, 2010
        • Bentzen SM
        • Constine LS
        • Deasy JO
        • et al.
        Quantitative Analyses of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic (QUANTEC): an introduction to the scientific issues.
        Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2010; 76: S3-S9
        • Dearnaley D
        • Syndikus I
        • Mossop H
        • et al.
        Conventional versus hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: 5-year outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial.
        Lancet Oncol. 2016; 17: 1047-1060
        • Feuvret L
        • Noël G
        • Mazeron JJ
        • Bey P.
        Conformity index: a review.
        Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2006; 64: 333-342
        • Kataria T
        • Sharma K
        • Subramani V
        • Karrthick KP
        • Bisht SS.
        Homogeneity Index: An objective tool for assessment of conformal radiation treatments.
        J. Med. Phys. 2012; 37: 207-213
        • Kroon PS
        • Hol S
        • Essers M.
        Dosimetric accuracy and clinical quality of Acuros XB and AAA dose calculation algorithm for stereotactic and conventional lung volumetric modulated arc therapy plans.
        Radiat Oncol. 2013; 8: 1-8
        • Vassiliev ON
        • Wareing TA
        • McGhee J
        • Failla G
        • Salehpour MR
        • Mourtada F.
        Validation of a new grid-based Boltzmann equation solver for dose calculation in radiotherapy with photon beams.
        Phys Med Biol. 2010; 55: 581-598
        • Liu H.W.
        • Nugent Z.
        • Clayton R.
        • Dunscombe P.
        • Lau H.
        • Khan R.
        Clinical impact of using the deterministic patient dose calculation algorithm Acuros XB for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy.
        Acta Oncol. (Madr). 2014; 53: 324-329
        • Vassiliev ON
        • Wareing TA
        • Davis IM
        • et al.
        Feasibility of a multigroup deterministic solution method for three-dimensional radiotherapy dose calculations.
        Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2008; 72: 220-227
        • Zifodya JM
        • Challens CH
        • Hsieh WL.
        From AAA to Acuros XB-clinical implications of selecting either Acuros XB dose-to-water or dose-to-medium.
        Australas. Phys. Eng. Sci. Med. 2016; 39: 431-439
        • Fogliata A
        • Nicolini G
        • Vanetti E
        • Clivio A
        • Cozzi L.
        Dosimetric validation of the anisotropic analytical algorithm for photon dose calculation: fundamental characterization in water.
        Phys Med Biol. 2006; 51: 1421-1438
        • Ojala J
        • Kapanen M
        • Sipilä P
        • Hyödynmaa S
        • Pitkänen M.
        The accuracy of Acuros XB algorithm for radiation beams traversing a metallic hip implant—comparison with measurements and Monte Carlo calculations.
        J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 2014; 15: 162-176
        • Fogliata A
        • Scorsetti M
        • Navarria P
        • et al.
        Dosimetric comparison between VMAT with different dose calculation algorithms and protons for soft-tissue sarcoma radiotherapy.
        Acta Oncol. (Madr). 2013; 52: 545-552
      2. Rana S, Rogers K, Pokharel S, Lee T, Reed D, Biggs C. Acuros XB algorithm vs. anisotropic analytical algorithm: a dosimetric study using heterogeneous phantom and computed tomography (CT) data sets of esophageal cancer patients 4: 138-144; 2013.

        • Dogan N
        • Siebers JV
        • Keall PJ.
        Clinical comparison of head and neck and prostate IMRT plans using absorbed dose to medium and absorbed dose to water.
        Phys Med Biol. 2006; 51: 4967-4980
        • Siebers JV
        • Keall PJ
        • Nahum AE
        • Mohan R.
        Converting absorbed dose to medium to absorbed dose to water for Monte Carlo based photon beam dose calculations.
        Phys Med Biol. 2000; 45: 983-995
        • Mampuya WA
        • Nakamura M
        • Hirose Y
        • et al.
        Difference in dose-volumetric data between the analytical anisotropic algorithm, the dose-to-medium, and the dose-to-water reporting modes of the Acuros XB for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy.
        J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 2016; 17: 341-347
        • Seniwal B.
        • Bhatt C.P.
        • Fonseca T.C.
        Comparison of dosimetric accuracy of acuros XB and analytical anisotropic algorithm against Monte Carlo technique.
        Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express. 2020; 6: 015035-015047
        • Kan MW
        • Leung LH
        • So RW
        • Yu PK.
        Experimental verification of the Acuros XB and AAA dose calculation adjacent to heterogeneous media for IMRT and RapidArc of nasopharygeal carcinoma.
        Med. Phys. 2013; 40 (031714-1-19)
        • Munoz-Montplet C
        • Fuentes-Raspall R
        • Jurado-Bruggeman D
        • Agramunt-Chaler S
        • Onsès-Segarra A
        • Buxó M.
        Dosimetric impact of Acuros XB dose-to-water and dose-to-medium reporting modes on lung stereotactic body radiation therapy and its dependency on structure composition.
        Adv. Radiat. Oncol. 2021; 6: 107-115