Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39287551›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024

Comparative assessment and QA measurement array validation of Monte Carlo and Collapsed Cone dose algorithms for small fields and clinical treatment plans.

Guus B Spenkelink, Sophie C Huijskens, Jaap D Zindler, Marc de Goede, Wilhelmus J van der Star, Jaap van Egmond, Anna L Petoukhova

Abstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Guus B SpenkelinkHaaglanden Medical Center, Department of Medical Physics, Leidschendam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2371-2553
Sophie C HuijskensHaaglanden Medical Center, Department of Medical Physics, Leidschendam, The Netherlands.
Jaap D ZindlerHaaglanden Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Leidschendam, The Netherlands.
Marc de GoedeHaaglanden Medical Center, Department of Medical Physics, Leidschendam, The Netherlands.
Wilhelmus J van der StarHaaglanden Medical Center, Department of Medical Physics, Leidschendam, The Netherlands.
Jaap van EgmondHaaglanden Medical Center, Department of Medical Physics, Leidschendam, The Netherlands.
Anna L PetoukhovaHaaglanden Medical Center, Department of Medical Physics, Leidschendam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4617-0622

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMany studies have demonstrated superior performance of Monte Carlo (MC) over type B algorithms in heterogeneous structures. However, even in homogeneous media, MC dose simulations should outperform type B algorithms in situations of electronic disequilibrium, such as small and highly modulated fields. Our study compares MC and Collapsed Cone (CC) dose algorithms in RayStation 12A. Under consideration are 6 MV and 6 MV flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beams, relevant for VMAT plans such as head-and-neck and stereotactic lung treatments with heterogeneities, as well as plans for multiple brain metastases in one isocenter, involving highly modulated small fields. We aim to investigate collimator angle dependence of small fields and performance differences between different combinations of ArcCHECK configuration and dose algorithm.

methodsSeveral verification tests were performed, ranging from simple rectangular fields to highly modulated clinical plans. To evaluate and compare the performance of the models, the agreements between calculation and measurement are compared between MC and CC. Measurements include water tank measurements for test fields, ArcCHECK measurements for test fields and VMAT plans, and film dosimetry for small fields. RESULTS AND

conclusionsIn very small or narrow fields, our measurements reveal a strong dependency of dose output to collimator angle for VersaHD with Agility MLC, reproduced by both dose algorithms. ArcCHECK results highlight a suboptimal agreement between measurements and MC calculations for simple rectangular fields when using inhomogeneous ArcCHECK images. Therefore, we advocate for the use of homogeneous phantom images, particularly for static fields, in ArcCHECK verification with MC. MC might offer performance benefits for more modulated treatment fields. In ArcCHECK results for clinical plans, MC performed comparable to CC for 6 MV. For 6 MV FFF and the preferred homogeneous phantom image, MC resulted in consistently better results (13%-64% lower mean gamma index) compared to CC.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMonte Carlo MethodPhantoms, ImagingRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedComputer SimulationHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansNeoplasmsPhotonsQuality Assurance, Health CareArcCHECKCollapsed Cone algorithmMonte Carlo algorithmsmall field dosimetry

Identifiers

PMID39287551
PMCPMC11633799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.