Accuracy Verification of the Plan Evaluation Tools on Eclipse Treatment Planning System Version 8.1

Authors

  • Lalida Tuntipumiamorn Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology. Faculty of Medicine. Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
  • Lukkana Apipunyasopon Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology. Faculty of Medicine. Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
  • Porntip Lampongpaiboon Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology. Faculty of Medicine. Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
  • Nuanpen Damrongkijudom Department of Radiological Technology . Faculty of Medical Technology, Mahidol University
  • Piyanan Liammookda ivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology. Faculty of Medicine. Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University

Keywords:

plan evaluation, quality assurance, dose volume histogram, cumulative DVH, IAEA TRS-430

Abstract

Objectives: Performance of the dose display and cumulative dose volume histogram(DVH) tools on Eclipse version 8.1 treatment planning system (TPS), was investigated using IAEA TRS-430 test protocol.

Materials & Methods: All tests were carried out by using a simple plan on a water-like test phantom. The agreement of isodose lines with color wash and point doses, reports of the hot spot and cold spot dose, correct representation of relative and absolute dose on plan normalization and consistency of dose display with varied total dose were evaluated. For cumulative DVH. some basic parameters for DVH calculations such as volume of structure. dimension of histogram dose bin and calculation grid were investigated. Relative or absolute mode DVH. DVH dose statistics and DVH statistical reports were all the subjects of interest for assessment the cumulative DVH characteristics.

Results: Consistency of the dose display tool was well maintained, since most of the deviations on all tests were found to be within ± 2 mm. For cumulative DVH. discrepancies of the calculated volumes, ranging in size from < 1 cc (optic chiasm) to > 10.000 cc (body) were shown to be within ±2 % of the known volumes. The reported doses and volumes on DVH statistical reports and graphs were exhibited accurately. Dose statistics were correctly presented. Varying histogram dose bin from 1 cGy to 5 and 10 cGy, showed the variations in DVH calculations about 2% and 5%, respectively. In the present work. size of the calculation grid showed no effect on DVH calculations. Relative or absolute mode DVH were also found to effectively perform.

Discussion & Conclusion: General performance of the Eclipse 8.1 plan evaluation tool, was evaluated to be accurate for clinical implementation. For more complicated application, uncertainty in DVHs should be addressed with further investigation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Fraass BA. McShan DL. Three-dimensional photon beam treatment planning. In Smith AR: Radiation therapy physics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, Germany. 1995:43-93

Austin-Seymour MM. Chen GTY, et al. Dose volume histogram analysis for liver radiation tolerance. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.1986:12:31-5.

Drymala RE, Brewster L, Chu J. Goitein M, Harms W, Urie M. Dose volume histogram. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991:21:71-8.

Lawrence TS. Tesser RJ, Ten Haken RK. An application of dose volume histogram to treatment of intrahepatic malignancies with radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990:19:1041-7

IAEA . Technical Reports Series no. 430. Commissioning and quality assurance of computerized planning system for radiation treatment of cancer. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 2004.

Mijnheer B, Olszewska A, Fiorino C, Hartmenn G, Knoos T, Rosenwald JC, Welleweerd H. Quality assurance of treatment planning systems. Practical examples for non-IMRT photon beams. ESTRO physics booklet no. 7 (European society for therapeutic radiation oncology). 2004

Panitsa E, Rosenwald JC, Kappas C. Quality control of dose histogram computation characteristics of 3D treatment planning systems. Phys Med Biol, 1998:43:2807-16.

Chen GTY. Dose volume histogram in treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1988:14:1319-20.

Henriquez FC, Castrillon SV. A novel method for the evaluation of uncertainty in dose-volume histogram computation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008:70(4): 1263-71.

Niemierko A . Goitein M . Random sampling for evaluating treatment plans. Med Phys. 1990:17(5):753-62

Lu XQ, Chin LM. Sampling techniques for the evaluation of treatment plans. Med Phys. 1993; 20(1):151-61.

Jackson A. Mohan R, Baldwin B. Comments on ‘Sampling techniques for the evaluation of treatment plans’. Med Phys. 1993; 20(5):1375-6.

Niemierko A, Goitein M. Comments on ‘Sampling techniques for the evaluation of treatment plans’. Med Phys. 1993:20(5):1377-80.

Kooy HM, Nedzi LA, Alexander E 3rd, Loeffler JS, Ledoux RJ. Dose-volume histogram computations for small intracranial volumes. Med Phys. 1993:20(3):755-60.

Varian Medical Systems. Inc. Eclipse treatment planning system version 8.1 customer release note.

Lu Wang, Jinsheng Li, Kamen Paskalev, Peter Hoban. Wei Luo. Lili Chen, Shawn McNeeley. Robert Price, and Charlie Ma. Commissioning and quality assurance on commercial stereotactic treatment-planning system for extracranial IMRT. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. 2006;7(1):21-34.

Downloads

Published

2023-04-28

How to Cite

1.
Tuntipumiamorn L, Apipunyasopon L, Lampongpaiboon P, Damrongkijudom N, Liammookda P. Accuracy Verification of the Plan Evaluation Tools on Eclipse Treatment Planning System Version 8.1. ASEAN J Radiol [Internet]. 2023 Apr. 28 [cited 2024 Mar. 29];16(2):122-9. Available from: https://asean-journal-radiology.org/index.php/ajr/article/view/850

Issue

Section

Original Article

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.