Evaluation of the systematic error in using 3D dose calculation in scanning beam proton therapy for lung cancer

Heng Li, Wei Liu, Peter Park, Jason Matney, Zhongxing Liao, Joe Chang, Xiaodong Zhang, Yupeng Li, Ronald X. Zhu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate and understand the systematic error between the planned three-dimensional (3D) dose and the delivered dose to patient in scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors. Single-field and multifield optimized scanning beam proton therapy plans were generated for ten patients with stage II-III lung cancer with a mix of tumor motion and size. 3D doses in CT datasets for different respiratory phases and the time-weighted average CT, as well as the four-dimensional (4D) doses were computed for both plans. The 3D and 4D dose differences for the targets and different organs at risk were compared using dose-volume histogram (DVH) and voxel-based techniques, and correlated with the extent of tumor motion. The gross tumor volume (GTV) dose was maintained in all 3D and 4D doses, using the internal GTV override technique. The DVH and voxel-based techniques are highly correlated. The mean dose error and the standard deviation of dose error for all target volumes were both less than 1.5% for all but one patient. However, the point dose difference between the 3D and 4D doses was up to 6% for the GTV and greater than 10% for the clinical and planning target volumes. Changes in the 4D and 3D doses were not correlated with tumor motion. The planning technique (single-field or multifield optimized) did not affect the observed systematic error. In conclusion, the dose error in 3D dose calculation varies from patient to patient and does not correlate with lung tumor motion. Therefore, patient-specific evaluation of the 4D dose is important for scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)47-56
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of applied clinical medical physics
Volume15
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Proton Therapy
Systematic errors
proton beams
systematic errors
lungs
Tumors
therapy
Lung Neoplasms
cancer
Scanning
dosage
scanning
evaluation
Tumor Burden
Neoplasms
tumors
Lung
Planning Techniques
Organs at Risk
Proton beam therapy

Keywords

  • 4D CT
  • Dose calculation
  • Motion management
  • Pencil beam scanning
  • Proton therapy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiation
  • Instrumentation
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Evaluation of the systematic error in using 3D dose calculation in scanning beam proton therapy for lung cancer. / Li, Heng; Liu, Wei; Park, Peter; Matney, Jason; Liao, Zhongxing; Chang, Joe; Zhang, Xiaodong; Li, Yupeng; Zhu, Ronald X.

In: Journal of applied clinical medical physics, Vol. 15, No. 5, 01.01.2014, p. 47-56.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Li, Heng ; Liu, Wei ; Park, Peter ; Matney, Jason ; Liao, Zhongxing ; Chang, Joe ; Zhang, Xiaodong ; Li, Yupeng ; Zhu, Ronald X. / Evaluation of the systematic error in using 3D dose calculation in scanning beam proton therapy for lung cancer. In: Journal of applied clinical medical physics. 2014 ; Vol. 15, No. 5. pp. 47-56.
@article{4fda39f9d96340908aa78308a2116d1d,
title = "Evaluation of the systematic error in using 3D dose calculation in scanning beam proton therapy for lung cancer",
abstract = "The objective of this study was to evaluate and understand the systematic error between the planned three-dimensional (3D) dose and the delivered dose to patient in scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors. Single-field and multifield optimized scanning beam proton therapy plans were generated for ten patients with stage II-III lung cancer with a mix of tumor motion and size. 3D doses in CT datasets for different respiratory phases and the time-weighted average CT, as well as the four-dimensional (4D) doses were computed for both plans. The 3D and 4D dose differences for the targets and different organs at risk were compared using dose-volume histogram (DVH) and voxel-based techniques, and correlated with the extent of tumor motion. The gross tumor volume (GTV) dose was maintained in all 3D and 4D doses, using the internal GTV override technique. The DVH and voxel-based techniques are highly correlated. The mean dose error and the standard deviation of dose error for all target volumes were both less than 1.5{\%} for all but one patient. However, the point dose difference between the 3D and 4D doses was up to 6{\%} for the GTV and greater than 10{\%} for the clinical and planning target volumes. Changes in the 4D and 3D doses were not correlated with tumor motion. The planning technique (single-field or multifield optimized) did not affect the observed systematic error. In conclusion, the dose error in 3D dose calculation varies from patient to patient and does not correlate with lung tumor motion. Therefore, patient-specific evaluation of the 4D dose is important for scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors.",
keywords = "4D CT, Dose calculation, Motion management, Pencil beam scanning, Proton therapy",
author = "Heng Li and Wei Liu and Peter Park and Jason Matney and Zhongxing Liao and Joe Chang and Xiaodong Zhang and Yupeng Li and Zhu, {Ronald X.}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1120/jacmp.v15i5.4810",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "47--56",
journal = "Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics",
issn = "1526-9914",
publisher = "American Institute of Physics Publising LLC",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of the systematic error in using 3D dose calculation in scanning beam proton therapy for lung cancer

AU - Li, Heng

AU - Liu, Wei

AU - Park, Peter

AU - Matney, Jason

AU - Liao, Zhongxing

AU - Chang, Joe

AU - Zhang, Xiaodong

AU - Li, Yupeng

AU - Zhu, Ronald X.

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - The objective of this study was to evaluate and understand the systematic error between the planned three-dimensional (3D) dose and the delivered dose to patient in scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors. Single-field and multifield optimized scanning beam proton therapy plans were generated for ten patients with stage II-III lung cancer with a mix of tumor motion and size. 3D doses in CT datasets for different respiratory phases and the time-weighted average CT, as well as the four-dimensional (4D) doses were computed for both plans. The 3D and 4D dose differences for the targets and different organs at risk were compared using dose-volume histogram (DVH) and voxel-based techniques, and correlated with the extent of tumor motion. The gross tumor volume (GTV) dose was maintained in all 3D and 4D doses, using the internal GTV override technique. The DVH and voxel-based techniques are highly correlated. The mean dose error and the standard deviation of dose error for all target volumes were both less than 1.5% for all but one patient. However, the point dose difference between the 3D and 4D doses was up to 6% for the GTV and greater than 10% for the clinical and planning target volumes. Changes in the 4D and 3D doses were not correlated with tumor motion. The planning technique (single-field or multifield optimized) did not affect the observed systematic error. In conclusion, the dose error in 3D dose calculation varies from patient to patient and does not correlate with lung tumor motion. Therefore, patient-specific evaluation of the 4D dose is important for scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors.

AB - The objective of this study was to evaluate and understand the systematic error between the planned three-dimensional (3D) dose and the delivered dose to patient in scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors. Single-field and multifield optimized scanning beam proton therapy plans were generated for ten patients with stage II-III lung cancer with a mix of tumor motion and size. 3D doses in CT datasets for different respiratory phases and the time-weighted average CT, as well as the four-dimensional (4D) doses were computed for both plans. The 3D and 4D dose differences for the targets and different organs at risk were compared using dose-volume histogram (DVH) and voxel-based techniques, and correlated with the extent of tumor motion. The gross tumor volume (GTV) dose was maintained in all 3D and 4D doses, using the internal GTV override technique. The DVH and voxel-based techniques are highly correlated. The mean dose error and the standard deviation of dose error for all target volumes were both less than 1.5% for all but one patient. However, the point dose difference between the 3D and 4D doses was up to 6% for the GTV and greater than 10% for the clinical and planning target volumes. Changes in the 4D and 3D doses were not correlated with tumor motion. The planning technique (single-field or multifield optimized) did not affect the observed systematic error. In conclusion, the dose error in 3D dose calculation varies from patient to patient and does not correlate with lung tumor motion. Therefore, patient-specific evaluation of the 4D dose is important for scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors.

KW - 4D CT

KW - Dose calculation

KW - Motion management

KW - Pencil beam scanning

KW - Proton therapy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84907030601&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84907030601&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1120/jacmp.v15i5.4810

DO - 10.1120/jacmp.v15i5.4810

M3 - Article

C2 - 25207565

AN - SCOPUS:84907030601

VL - 15

SP - 47

EP - 56

JO - Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics

JF - Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics

SN - 1526-9914

IS - 5

ER -