Original Article
Statistic and dosimetric criteria to assess the shift of the prescribed dose for lung radiotherapy plans when integrating point kernel models in medical physics: are we ready?
Abstract
Background: To apply the statistical bootstrap analysis and dosimetric criteria’s to assess the change of prescribed dose (PD) for lung cancer to maintain the same clinical results when using new generations of dose calculation algorithms.
Methods: Nine lung cancer cases were studied. For each patient, three treatment plans were generated using exactly the same beams arrangements. In plan 1, the dose was calculated using pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm turning on heterogeneity correction with modified batho (PBC-MB). In plan 2, the dose was calculated using anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and the same PD, as plan 1. In plan 3, the dose was calculated using AAA with monitor units (MUs) obtained from PBC-MB, as input. The dosimetric criteria’s include MUs, delivered dose at isocentre (Diso) and calculated dose to 95% of the target volume (D95). The bootstrap method was used to assess the significance of the dose differences and to accurately estimate the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Wilcoxon and Spearman’s rank tests were used to calculate P values and the correlation coefficient (ρ).
Results: Statistically significant for dose difference was found using point kernel model. A good correlation was observed between both algorithms types, with ρ>0.9. Using AAA instead of PBC-MB, an adjustment of the PD in the isocentre is suggested.
Conclusions: For a given set of patients, we assessed the need to readjust the PD for lung cancer using dosimetric indices and bootstrap statistical method. Thus, if the goal is to keep on with the same clinical results, the PD for lung tumors has to be adjusted with AAA. According to our simulation we suggest to readjust the PD by 5% and an optimization for beam arrangements to better protect the organs at risks (OARs).
Methods: Nine lung cancer cases were studied. For each patient, three treatment plans were generated using exactly the same beams arrangements. In plan 1, the dose was calculated using pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm turning on heterogeneity correction with modified batho (PBC-MB). In plan 2, the dose was calculated using anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and the same PD, as plan 1. In plan 3, the dose was calculated using AAA with monitor units (MUs) obtained from PBC-MB, as input. The dosimetric criteria’s include MUs, delivered dose at isocentre (Diso) and calculated dose to 95% of the target volume (D95). The bootstrap method was used to assess the significance of the dose differences and to accurately estimate the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Wilcoxon and Spearman’s rank tests were used to calculate P values and the correlation coefficient (ρ).
Results: Statistically significant for dose difference was found using point kernel model. A good correlation was observed between both algorithms types, with ρ>0.9. Using AAA instead of PBC-MB, an adjustment of the PD in the isocentre is suggested.
Conclusions: For a given set of patients, we assessed the need to readjust the PD for lung cancer using dosimetric indices and bootstrap statistical method. Thus, if the goal is to keep on with the same clinical results, the PD for lung tumors has to be adjusted with AAA. According to our simulation we suggest to readjust the PD by 5% and an optimization for beam arrangements to better protect the organs at risks (OARs).
