Evaluation of pencil beam convolution and anisotropic analytical algorithms in stereotactic lung irradiation

Tania De La Fuente Herman, Kerry Hibbitts, Terence Herman, Salahuddin Ahmad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Scopus citations

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in dose distributions in stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment plans for lung tumors calculated with pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm with modified Batho power law (MBPL) versus heterogeneity corrected anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) of the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system. The four-dimensional computed tomography images from 20 patients with lung cancer were used to create treatment plans. Plans used five to seven nonopposing coplanar 6 MV beams. Plans generated with the PBC algorithm and MBPL for tissue heterogeneity corrections were optimized to deliver 60 Gy in three fractions to at least 95% of the planned target volume, and the normal tissue doses for spinal cord, esophagus, heart, and ipsilateral bronchus were restricted to less than 18, 27, 30, and 30 Gy, respectively. Plans were recalculated with AAA, retaining identical beam arrangements, photon beam fluences, and monitor units. The pencil beam plans, designed to deliver 60 Gy, delivered on average 51.6 Gy when re-calculated with the AAA, suggesting a reduction of at least 10% to prescription dose is appropriate when calculating with the AAA.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)234-238
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Medical Physics
Volume36
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2011
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Anisotropic analytical algorithm
  • dose calculation algorithm
  • lung cancer
  • pencil beam convolution

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation of pencil beam convolution and anisotropic analytical algorithms in stereotactic lung irradiation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this