Open AccessDoes intensity modulation increase target dose calculation errors of conventional algorithms for lung SBRT ?
Author(s) -
Zheng Dandan,
Verma Vivek,
Wang Shuo,
Liang Xiaoying,
Zhou Sumin
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of applied clinical medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.83
H-Index - 48
ISSN - 1526-9914
DOI - 10.1002/acm2.12266
Subject(s) - algorithm , intensity modulation , nuclear medicine , mathematics , intensity (physics) , wilcoxon signed rank test , linear regression , medicine , physics , statistics , optics , phase modulation , phase noise , mann–whitney u test
Purpose Conventional dose algorithms (Type A and Type B) for lung SBRT can display considerable target dose errors compared to Type‐C algorithms. Intensity‐modulated techniques ( IMRT / VMAT ) are increasingly being utilized for lung SBRT . Therefore, our study aimed to assess whether intensity modulation increased target dose calculation errors by conventional algorithms over conformal techniques. Methods Twenty lung SBRT patients were parallely planned with both IMRT and dynamic conformal arc ( DCA ) techniques using a Type‐A algorithm, and another 20 patients were parallely planned with IMRT , VMAT , and DCA using a Type‐B algorithm. All 100 plans were recalculated with Type‐C algorithms using identical beam and monitor unit settings, with the Type‐A/Type‐B algorithm dose errors defined using Type‐C recalculation as the ground truth. Target dose errors for PTV and GTV were calculated for a variety of dosimetric end points. Using Wilcoxon signed‐rank tests ( p < 0.05 for statistical significance), target dose errors were compared between corresponding IMRT / VMAT and DCA plans for the two conventional algorithms. The levels of intensity modulation were also evaluated using the ratios of MU s in the IMRT / VMAT plans to those in the corresponding DCA plans. Linear regression was used to study the correlation between intensity modulation and relative dose error magnitudes. Results Overall, larger errors were found for the Type‐A algorithm than for the Type‐B algorithm. However, the IMRT / VMAT plans were not found to have statistically larger dose errors from their corresponding DCA plans. Linear regression did not identify a significant correlation between the intensity modulation level and the relative dose error. Conclusion Intensity modulation did not appear to increase target dose calculation errors for lung SBRT plans calculated with conventional algorithms.