SU‐GG‐T‐68

Dosimetric Effect of the Source Position Uncertainty for the Mammosite‐Based Brachytherapy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To study the dosimetric effect of the source position at axial dimension for the mammosite‐based brachytherapy. Method and Materials: Four typical patients with different mammosite‐balloon catheters and PTVs were included: 1) ellipsoidal balloon and PTV is breast tissue of 1cm expansion from balloon surface; 2) ellipsoidal balloon and PTV is 1cm expansion but limited to 5mm from the skin surface and excluded from the chest wall; 3) spherical balloon with the same PTV as patient 1; 4) spherical balloon with the same PTV as patient 2. The treatment plans were evaluated based on the criteria of RTOG protocol 0413: %PTV coverage≥90%, maximum skin dose≤145% prescription dose, V150<50cc, V200<10cc, and V50<60% of normal breast. Five dwell positions 1cm apart with middle one at the center of balloon were used for ellipsoidal balloon catheter, while one position at the center of balloon was used for spherical balloon. For each patient, the dwell position was intentionally displaced ±1mm, ±2mm, and ±3mm, then new plans were compared to the original plan. The change was also compared among four patients. Results: Within 3mm displacements, all plans were still acceptable. %PTV coverage and hotspot V200 were most sensitive to the dwell position change. With 1mm displacement, the %PTV coverage/V200 was decreased/increased by 0.3%/0.6cc, 1.2%/0.2cc, 1.4%/0.2cc, and 1.6% /0.9cc for patient 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. With 2 mm displacement, the %PTV/V200 coverage was decreased/ increased by 1.3%/1cc, 2.9%/0.8cc, 4%/1.1cc, and 4.3%/2.4cc. With 3 mm displacement, the %PTV coverage/V200 was decreased/ increased by 3%/1.8cc, 5%/1.7cc, 7.7%/2.9cc, and 7.4%/3.9cc. The other criteria changes were ignorable compared to the large tolerance. The plan with ellipsoidal balloon catheter was more robust than spherical one. Conclusion: The dwell position for mammosite‐based brachytherapy may tolerate more than lmm, especially for the ellipsoidal balloon with five dwell positions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Number of pages1
JournalMedical physics
Volume37
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2010

Fingerprint

Brachytherapy
Uncertainty
Catheters
Breast
Tissue Expansion
Skin
Thoracic Wall
Prescriptions

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{190b02a018434e5dade5360a066a6ea2,
title = "SU‐GG‐T‐68: Dosimetric Effect of the Source Position Uncertainty for the Mammosite‐Based Brachytherapy",
abstract = "Purpose: To study the dosimetric effect of the source position at axial dimension for the mammosite‐based brachytherapy. Method and Materials: Four typical patients with different mammosite‐balloon catheters and PTVs were included: 1) ellipsoidal balloon and PTV is breast tissue of 1cm expansion from balloon surface; 2) ellipsoidal balloon and PTV is 1cm expansion but limited to 5mm from the skin surface and excluded from the chest wall; 3) spherical balloon with the same PTV as patient 1; 4) spherical balloon with the same PTV as patient 2. The treatment plans were evaluated based on the criteria of RTOG protocol 0413: {\%}PTV coverage≥90{\%}, maximum skin dose≤145{\%} prescription dose, V150<50cc, V200<10cc, and V50<60{\%} of normal breast. Five dwell positions 1cm apart with middle one at the center of balloon were used for ellipsoidal balloon catheter, while one position at the center of balloon was used for spherical balloon. For each patient, the dwell position was intentionally displaced ±1mm, ±2mm, and ±3mm, then new plans were compared to the original plan. The change was also compared among four patients. Results: Within 3mm displacements, all plans were still acceptable. {\%}PTV coverage and hotspot V200 were most sensitive to the dwell position change. With 1mm displacement, the {\%}PTV coverage/V200 was decreased/increased by 0.3{\%}/0.6cc, 1.2{\%}/0.2cc, 1.4{\%}/0.2cc, and 1.6{\%} /0.9cc for patient 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. With 2 mm displacement, the {\%}PTV/V200 coverage was decreased/ increased by 1.3{\%}/1cc, 2.9{\%}/0.8cc, 4{\%}/1.1cc, and 4.3{\%}/2.4cc. With 3 mm displacement, the {\%}PTV coverage/V200 was decreased/ increased by 3{\%}/1.8cc, 5{\%}/1.7cc, 7.7{\%}/2.9cc, and 7.4{\%}/3.9cc. The other criteria changes were ignorable compared to the large tolerance. The plan with ellipsoidal balloon catheter was more robust than spherical one. Conclusion: The dwell position for mammosite‐based brachytherapy may tolerate more than lmm, especially for the ellipsoidal balloon with five dwell positions.",
author = "S. Chen and Sumin Zhou and Wahl, {Andrew O} and Sicong Li and Thompson, {Robert Bruce} and Enke, {Charles Arthur}",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1118/1.3468454",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "37",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - SU‐GG‐T‐68

T2 - Dosimetric Effect of the Source Position Uncertainty for the Mammosite‐Based Brachytherapy

AU - Chen, S.

AU - Zhou, Sumin

AU - Wahl, Andrew O

AU - Li, Sicong

AU - Thompson, Robert Bruce

AU - Enke, Charles Arthur

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - Purpose: To study the dosimetric effect of the source position at axial dimension for the mammosite‐based brachytherapy. Method and Materials: Four typical patients with different mammosite‐balloon catheters and PTVs were included: 1) ellipsoidal balloon and PTV is breast tissue of 1cm expansion from balloon surface; 2) ellipsoidal balloon and PTV is 1cm expansion but limited to 5mm from the skin surface and excluded from the chest wall; 3) spherical balloon with the same PTV as patient 1; 4) spherical balloon with the same PTV as patient 2. The treatment plans were evaluated based on the criteria of RTOG protocol 0413: %PTV coverage≥90%, maximum skin dose≤145% prescription dose, V150<50cc, V200<10cc, and V50<60% of normal breast. Five dwell positions 1cm apart with middle one at the center of balloon were used for ellipsoidal balloon catheter, while one position at the center of balloon was used for spherical balloon. For each patient, the dwell position was intentionally displaced ±1mm, ±2mm, and ±3mm, then new plans were compared to the original plan. The change was also compared among four patients. Results: Within 3mm displacements, all plans were still acceptable. %PTV coverage and hotspot V200 were most sensitive to the dwell position change. With 1mm displacement, the %PTV coverage/V200 was decreased/increased by 0.3%/0.6cc, 1.2%/0.2cc, 1.4%/0.2cc, and 1.6% /0.9cc for patient 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. With 2 mm displacement, the %PTV/V200 coverage was decreased/ increased by 1.3%/1cc, 2.9%/0.8cc, 4%/1.1cc, and 4.3%/2.4cc. With 3 mm displacement, the %PTV coverage/V200 was decreased/ increased by 3%/1.8cc, 5%/1.7cc, 7.7%/2.9cc, and 7.4%/3.9cc. The other criteria changes were ignorable compared to the large tolerance. The plan with ellipsoidal balloon catheter was more robust than spherical one. Conclusion: The dwell position for mammosite‐based brachytherapy may tolerate more than lmm, especially for the ellipsoidal balloon with five dwell positions.

AB - Purpose: To study the dosimetric effect of the source position at axial dimension for the mammosite‐based brachytherapy. Method and Materials: Four typical patients with different mammosite‐balloon catheters and PTVs were included: 1) ellipsoidal balloon and PTV is breast tissue of 1cm expansion from balloon surface; 2) ellipsoidal balloon and PTV is 1cm expansion but limited to 5mm from the skin surface and excluded from the chest wall; 3) spherical balloon with the same PTV as patient 1; 4) spherical balloon with the same PTV as patient 2. The treatment plans were evaluated based on the criteria of RTOG protocol 0413: %PTV coverage≥90%, maximum skin dose≤145% prescription dose, V150<50cc, V200<10cc, and V50<60% of normal breast. Five dwell positions 1cm apart with middle one at the center of balloon were used for ellipsoidal balloon catheter, while one position at the center of balloon was used for spherical balloon. For each patient, the dwell position was intentionally displaced ±1mm, ±2mm, and ±3mm, then new plans were compared to the original plan. The change was also compared among four patients. Results: Within 3mm displacements, all plans were still acceptable. %PTV coverage and hotspot V200 were most sensitive to the dwell position change. With 1mm displacement, the %PTV coverage/V200 was decreased/increased by 0.3%/0.6cc, 1.2%/0.2cc, 1.4%/0.2cc, and 1.6% /0.9cc for patient 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. With 2 mm displacement, the %PTV/V200 coverage was decreased/ increased by 1.3%/1cc, 2.9%/0.8cc, 4%/1.1cc, and 4.3%/2.4cc. With 3 mm displacement, the %PTV coverage/V200 was decreased/ increased by 3%/1.8cc, 5%/1.7cc, 7.7%/2.9cc, and 7.4%/3.9cc. The other criteria changes were ignorable compared to the large tolerance. The plan with ellipsoidal balloon catheter was more robust than spherical one. Conclusion: The dwell position for mammosite‐based brachytherapy may tolerate more than lmm, especially for the ellipsoidal balloon with five dwell positions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024792923&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024792923&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.3468454

DO - 10.1118/1.3468454

M3 - Article

VL - 37

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 6

ER -