The impact of the grid size on tomotherapy for prostate cancer

Discretization errors due to the digitization of computed tomography images and the calculation grid are a significant issue in radiation therapy. Such errors have been quantitatively reported for a fixed multifield intensity-modulated radiation therapy using traditional linear accelerators. The aim...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Motohiro Kawashima, Hidemasa Kawamura, Masahiro Onishi, Yosuke Takakusagi, Noriyuki Okonogi, Atsushi Okazaki, Tetsuo Sekihara, Yoshitaka Ando, Takashi Nakano
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2017-01-01
Series:Journal of Medical Physics
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.jmp.org.in/article.asp?issn=0971-6203;year=2017;volume=42;issue=3;spage=144;epage=150;aulast=Kawashima
id doaj-97620824ee5e4734b9db39725bcd855c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-97620824ee5e4734b9db39725bcd855c2020-11-24T20:41:42ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Medical Physics0971-62031998-39132017-01-0142314415010.4103/jmp.JMP_123_16The impact of the grid size on tomotherapy for prostate cancerMotohiro KawashimaHidemasa KawamuraMasahiro OnishiYosuke TakakusagiNoriyuki OkonogiAtsushi OkazakiTetsuo SekiharaYoshitaka AndoTakashi NakanoDiscretization errors due to the digitization of computed tomography images and the calculation grid are a significant issue in radiation therapy. Such errors have been quantitatively reported for a fixed multifield intensity-modulated radiation therapy using traditional linear accelerators. The aim of this study is to quantify the influence of the calculation grid size on the dose distribution in TomoTherapy. This study used ten treatment plans for prostate cancer. The final dose calculation was performed with “fine” (2.73 mm) and “normal” (5.46 mm) grid sizes. The dose distributions were compared from different points of view: the dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters for planning target volume (PTV) and organ at risk (OAR), the various indices, and dose differences. The DVH parameters were used Dmax, D2%, D2cc, Dmean, D95%, D98%, and Dmin for PTV and Dmax, D2%, and D2cc for OARs. The various indices used were homogeneity index and equivalent uniform dose for plan evaluation. Almost all of DVH parameters for the “fine” calculations tended to be higher than those for the “normal” calculations. The largest difference of DVH parameters for PTV was Dmax and that for OARs was rectal D2cc. The mean difference of Dmax was 3.5%, and the rectal D2cc was increased up to 6% at the maximum and 2.9% on average. The mean difference of D95% for PTV was the smallest among the differences of the other DVH parameters. For each index, whether there was a significant difference between the two grid sizes was determined through a paired t-test. There were significant differences for most of the indices. The dose difference between the “fine” and “normal” calculations was evaluated. Some points around high-dose regions had differences exceeding 5% of the prescription dose. The influence of the calculation grid size in TomoTherapy is smaller than traditional linear accelerators. However, there was a significant difference. We recommend calculating the final dose using the “fine” grid size.http://www.jmp.org.in/article.asp?issn=0971-6203;year=2017;volume=42;issue=3;spage=144;epage=150;aulast=KawashimaCalculation grid sizedose distributionTomoTherapytreatment planning
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Motohiro Kawashima
Hidemasa Kawamura
Masahiro Onishi
Yosuke Takakusagi
Noriyuki Okonogi
Atsushi Okazaki
Tetsuo Sekihara
Yoshitaka Ando
Takashi Nakano
spellingShingle Motohiro Kawashima
Hidemasa Kawamura
Masahiro Onishi
Yosuke Takakusagi
Noriyuki Okonogi
Atsushi Okazaki
Tetsuo Sekihara
Yoshitaka Ando
Takashi Nakano
The impact of the grid size on tomotherapy for prostate cancer
Journal of Medical Physics
Calculation grid size
dose distribution
TomoTherapy
treatment planning
author_facet Motohiro Kawashima
Hidemasa Kawamura
Masahiro Onishi
Yosuke Takakusagi
Noriyuki Okonogi
Atsushi Okazaki
Tetsuo Sekihara
Yoshitaka Ando
Takashi Nakano
author_sort Motohiro Kawashima
title The impact of the grid size on tomotherapy for prostate cancer
title_short The impact of the grid size on tomotherapy for prostate cancer
title_full The impact of the grid size on tomotherapy for prostate cancer
title_fullStr The impact of the grid size on tomotherapy for prostate cancer
title_full_unstemmed The impact of the grid size on tomotherapy for prostate cancer
title_sort impact of the grid size on tomotherapy for prostate cancer
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
series Journal of Medical Physics
issn 0971-6203
1998-3913
publishDate 2017-01-01
description Discretization errors due to the digitization of computed tomography images and the calculation grid are a significant issue in radiation therapy. Such errors have been quantitatively reported for a fixed multifield intensity-modulated radiation therapy using traditional linear accelerators. The aim of this study is to quantify the influence of the calculation grid size on the dose distribution in TomoTherapy. This study used ten treatment plans for prostate cancer. The final dose calculation was performed with “fine” (2.73 mm) and “normal” (5.46 mm) grid sizes. The dose distributions were compared from different points of view: the dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters for planning target volume (PTV) and organ at risk (OAR), the various indices, and dose differences. The DVH parameters were used Dmax, D2%, D2cc, Dmean, D95%, D98%, and Dmin for PTV and Dmax, D2%, and D2cc for OARs. The various indices used were homogeneity index and equivalent uniform dose for plan evaluation. Almost all of DVH parameters for the “fine” calculations tended to be higher than those for the “normal” calculations. The largest difference of DVH parameters for PTV was Dmax and that for OARs was rectal D2cc. The mean difference of Dmax was 3.5%, and the rectal D2cc was increased up to 6% at the maximum and 2.9% on average. The mean difference of D95% for PTV was the smallest among the differences of the other DVH parameters. For each index, whether there was a significant difference between the two grid sizes was determined through a paired t-test. There were significant differences for most of the indices. The dose difference between the “fine” and “normal” calculations was evaluated. Some points around high-dose regions had differences exceeding 5% of the prescription dose. The influence of the calculation grid size in TomoTherapy is smaller than traditional linear accelerators. However, there was a significant difference. We recommend calculating the final dose using the “fine” grid size.
topic Calculation grid size
dose distribution
TomoTherapy
treatment planning
url http://www.jmp.org.in/article.asp?issn=0971-6203;year=2017;volume=42;issue=3;spage=144;epage=150;aulast=Kawashima
work_keys_str_mv AT motohirokawashima theimpactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT hidemasakawamura theimpactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT masahiroonishi theimpactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT yosuketakakusagi theimpactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT noriyukiokonogi theimpactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT atsushiokazaki theimpactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT tetsuosekihara theimpactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT yoshitakaando theimpactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT takashinakano theimpactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT motohirokawashima impactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT hidemasakawamura impactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT masahiroonishi impactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT yosuketakakusagi impactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT noriyukiokonogi impactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT atsushiokazaki impactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT tetsuosekihara impactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT yoshitakaando impactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
AT takashinakano impactofthegridsizeontomotherapyforprostatecancer
_version_ 1716824151129325568