Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Biomed Phys Eng Express ; 8(5)2022 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35732139

ABSTRACT

Objective. Auto-contouring of organs at risk (OAR) is becoming more common in radiotherapy. An important issue in clinical decision making is judging the quality of the auto-contours. While recent studies considered contour quality by looking at geometric errors only, this does not capture the dosimetric impact of the errors. In this work, we studied the relationship between geometrical errors, the local dose and the dosimetric impact of the geometrical errors.Approach. For 94 head and neck patients, unmodified atlas-based auto-contours and clinically used delineations of the parotid glands and brainstem were retrieved. VMAT plans were automatically optimized on the auto-contours and evaluated on both contours. We defined the dosimetric impact on evaluation (DIE) as the difference in the dosimetric parameter of interest between the two contours. We developed three linear regression models to predict the DIE using: (1) global geometric metrics, (2) global dosimetric metrics, (3) combined local geometric and dosimetric metrics. For model (3), we next determined the minimal amount of editing information required to produce a reliable prediction. Performance was assessed by the root mean squared error (RMSE) of the predicted DIE using 5-fold cross-validation.Main results. In model (3), the median RMSE of the left parotid was 0.4 Gy using 5% of the largest editing vectors. For the right parotid and brainstem the results were 0.5 Gy using 10% and 0.4 Gy using 1% respectively. The median RMS of the DIE was 0.6 Gy, 0.7 Gy and 0.9 Gy for the left parotid, the right parotid and the brainstem, respectively. Model (3), combining local dosimetric and geometric quantities, outperformed the models that used only geometric or dosimetric information.Significance. We showed that the largest local errors plus the local dose suffice to accurately predict the dosimetric impact, opening the door to automated dosimetric QA of auto-contours.


Subject(s)
Organs at Risk , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted , Head , Humans , Radiometry , Radiotherapy Dosage , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods
2.
Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol ; 19: 60-65, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34307920

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Automatic approaches are widely implemented to automate dose optimization in radiotherapy treatment planning. This study systematically investigates how to configure automatic planning in order to create the best possible plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Automatic plans were generated using protocol based automatic iterative optimization. Starting from a simple automation protocol which consisted of the constraints for targets and organs at risk (OAR), the performance of the automatic approach was evaluated in terms of target coverage, OAR sparing, conformity, beam complexity, and plan quality. More complex protocols were systematically explored to improve the quality of the automatic plans. The protocols could be improved by adding a dose goal on the outer 2 mm of the PTV, by setting goals on strategically chosen subparts of OARs, by adding goals for conformity, and by limiting the leaf motion. For prostate plans, development of an automated post-optimization procedure was required to achieve precise control over the dose distribution. Automatic and manually optimized plans were compared for 20 head and neck (H&N), 20 prostate, and 20 rectum cancer patients. RESULTS: Based on simple automation protocols, the automatic optimizer was not always able to generate adequate treatment plans. For the improved final configurations for the three sites, the dose was lower in automatic plans compared to the manual plans in 12 out of 13 considered OARs. In blind tests, the automatic plans were preferred in 80% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: With adequate, advanced, protocols the automatic planning approach is able to create high-quality treatment plans.

3.
J Appl Clin Med Phys ; 20(1): 308-320, 2019 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30508315

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate organ doses in routine and low-dose chest computed tomography (CT) protocols using an experimental methodology. To compare experimental results with results obtained by the National Cancer Institute dosimetry system for CT (NCICT) organ dose calculator. To address the differences on organ dose measurements using tube current modulation (TCM) and fixed tube current protocols. METHODS: An experimental approach to evaluate organ doses in pediatric and adult anthropomorphic phantoms using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) was employed in this study. Several analyses were performed in order to establish the best way to achieve the main results in this investigation. The protocols used in this study were selected after an analysis of patient data collected from the Institute of Radiology of the School of Medicine of the University of São Paulo (InRad). The image quality was evaluated by a radiologist from this institution. Six chest adult protocols and four chest pediatric protocols were evaluated. Lung doses were evaluated for the adult phantom and lung and thyroid doses were evaluated for the pediatric phantom. The irradiations were performed using both a GE and a Philips CT scanner. Finally, organ doses measured with dosimeters were compared with Monte Carlo simulations performed with NCICT. RESULTS: After analyzing the data collected from all CT examinations performed during a period of 3 yr, the authors identified that adult and pediatric chest CT are among the most applied protocol in patients in that clinical institution, demonstrating the relevance on evaluating organ doses due to these examinations. With regards to the scan parameters adopted, the authors identified that using 80 kV instead of 120 kV for a pediatric chest routine CT, with TCM in both situations, can lead up to a 28.7% decrease on the absorbed dose. Moreover, in comparison to the standard adult protocol, which is performed with fixed mAs, TCM, and ultra low-dose protocols resulted in dose reductions of up to 35.0% and 90.0%, respectively. Finally, the percent differences found between experimental and Monte Carlo simulated organ doses were within a 20% interval. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained in this study measured the impact on the absorbed dose in routine chest CT by changing several scan parameters while the image quality could be potentially preserved.


Subject(s)
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/methods , Monte Carlo Method , Phantoms, Imaging , Radiation Dosimeters , Radiography, Thoracic/methods , Tomography Scanners, X-Ray Computed , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Adult , Child , Humans , Organs at Risk/radiation effects , Radiotherapy Dosage , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...