Premium
BEDVH—A method for evaluating biologically effective dose volume histograms: Application to eye plaque brachytherapy implants
Author(s) -
Gagne Nolan L.,
Leonard Kara L.,
Huber Kathryn E.,
Mignano John E.,
Duker Jay S.,
Laver Nora V.,
Rivard Mark J.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.3679010
Subject(s) - brachytherapy , nuclear medicine , dosimetry , radionuclide , radiation treatment planning , context (archaeology) , implant , medicine , biomedical engineering , radiation therapy , radiology , surgery , physics , paleontology , quantum mechanics , biology
Purpose: A method is introduced to examine the influence of implant duration T , radionuclide, and radiobiological parameters on the biologically effective dose (BED) throughout the entire volume of regions of interest for episcleral brachytherapy using available radionuclides. This method is employed to evaluate a particular eye plaque brachytherapy implant in a radiobiological context. Methods: A reference eye geometry and 16 mm COMS eye plaque loaded with 103 Pd, 125 I, or 131 Cs sources were examined with dose distributions accounting for plaque heterogeneities. For a standardized 7 day implant, doses to 90% of the tumor volume ( TUMORD 90) and 10% of the organ at risk volumes ( OARD 10) were calculated. The BED equation from Dale and Jones and published α / β and μ parameters were incorporated with dose volume histograms (DVHs) for various T values such as T = 7 days (i.e., TUMOR 7BED 10and OAR 7BED 10). By calculating BED throughout the volumes, biologically effective dose volume histograms (BEDVHs) were developed for tumor and OARs. Influence of T , radionuclide choice, and radiobiological parameters on TUMOR BEDVH and OAR BEDVH were examined. The nominal dose was scaled for shorter implants to achieve biological equivalence. Results: TUMORD 90values were 102, 112, and 110 Gy for 103 Pd, 125 I, and 131 Cs, respectively. Corresponding TUMOR 7BED 10values were 124, 140, and 138 Gy, respectively. As T decreased from 7 to 0.01 days, the isobiologically effective prescription dose decreased by a factor of three. As expected, TUMOR 7 BEDVH did not significantly change as a function of radionuclide half‐life but varied by 10% due to radionuclide dose distribution. Variations in reported radiobiological parameters caused TUMOR 7BED 10to deviate by up to 46%. Over the range ofαOAR/ β values, OAR 7BED 10varied by up to 41%, 3.1%, and 1.4% for the lens, optic nerve, and lacrimal gland, respectively. Conclusions: BEDVH permits evaluation of the relative biological effectiveness for brachytherapy implants. For eye plaques, TUMOR BEDVH and OAR BEDVH were sensitive to implant duration, which may be manipulated to affect outcomes.