Browsing by Author "Srivastava, Shiv P."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Dosimetric Comparison of Treatment Techniques: Brachytherapy, Intensity- Modulated Radiation Therapy, and Proton Beam in Partial Breast Irradiation
    (2015) Hansen, Tara M.; Bartlett, Gregory K.; Mannina, Edward M. Jr.; Srivastava, Shiv P.; Cox, John A.; Das, Indra J.; Department of Radiation Oncology, IU School of Medicine
    Purpose: To perform a dosimetric comparison of 3 accelerated partial breast irradiation techniques: catheter-based brachytherapy (BT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and proton beam therapy (PBT). Patients and Methods: Twelve patients with left-sided breast cancer treated with SAVI (Strut-Adjusted Volume Implant) were selected in this study. The original BT plans were compared with optimum plans using IMRT and PBT for 34 Gy (RBE) with 1.1 RBE in 10 fractions using identical parameters for target and organs at risk. Results: Significant reduction in maximum dose to the ipsilateral breast was observed with PBT and IMRT (mean 108.58% [PBT] versus 107.78% [IMRT] versus 2194.43% [BT], P = .001 for both PBT and IMRT compared to BT). The mean dose to the heart was 0%, 1.38%, and 3.85%, for PBT, IMRT, and BT, respectively (P < .001 and P = .026). The chest wall mean dose was 10.07%, 14.65%, and 29.44% for PBT, IMRT, and BT, respectively (P = .001 and .013 compared to BT). The PBT was superior in reducing the mean ipsilateral lung dose (mean 0.04% versus 2.13% versus 5.4%, P = .025 and P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in the maximum dose to the ipsilateral lung, chest wall, 3-mm skin rind or in the mean ipsilateral breast V50% among the 3 techniques (P = .168, .405, .067, and .780, respectively). PBT exhibited the greatest mean dose homogeneity index of 4.75 compared to 7.18 for IMRT (P = .001) and 195.82 for BT (P < .001). All techniques resulted in similar dose conformality (P = .143). Conclusion: This study confirms the dosimetric feasibility of PBT and IMRT to lower dose to organs at risk while still maintaining high target dose conformality. Though the results of this comparison are promising, continued clinical research is needed to better define the role of PBT and IMRT in the accelerated partial breast irradiation treatment of early-stage breast cancer.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Variability of Low-Z Inhomogeneity Correction in IMRT/SBRT: A Multi-Institutional Collaborative Study
    (MDPI, 2023-01-23) Yadav, Poonam; DesRosiers, Colleen M.; Mitra, Raj K.; Srivastava, Shiv P.; Das, Indra J.; Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine
    Dose-calculation algorithms are critical for radiation treatment outcomes that vary among treatment planning systems (TPS). Modern algorithms use sophisticated radiation transport calculation with detailed three-dimensional beam modeling to provide accurate doses, especially in heterogeneous medium and small fields used in IMRT/SBRT. While the dosimetric accuracy in heterogeneous mediums (lung) is qualitatively known, the accuracy is unknown. The aim of this work is to analyze the calculated dose in lung patients and compare the validity of dose-calculation algorithms by measurements in a low-Z phantom for two main classes of algorithms: type A (pencil beam) and type B (collapse cone). The CT scans with volumes (target and organs at risk, OARs) of a lung patient and a phantom build to replicate the human lung data were sent to nine institutions for planning. Doses at different depths and field sizes were measured in the phantom with and without inhomogeneity correction across multiple institutions to understand the impact of clinically used dose algorithms. Wide dosimetric variations were observed in target and OAR coverage in patient plans. The correction factor for collapsed cone algorithms was less than pencil beam algorithms in the small fields used in SBRT. The pencil beam showed ≈70% variations between measured and calculated correction factors for various field sizes and depths. For large field sizes the trends of both types of algorithms were similar. The differences in measured versus calculated dose for type-B algorithms were within ±10%. Significant variations in the target and OARs were observed among various TPS. The results suggest that the pencil beam algorithm does not provide an accurate dose and should not be considered with small fields (IMRT/SBRT). Type-B collapsed-cone algorithms provide better agreement with measurements, but still vary among various systems.