title: Dynamically accumulated dose and 4D accumulated dose for moving tumors.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of this work was to investigate the relationship between dynamically accumulated dose (dynamic dose) and 4D accumulated dose (4D dose) for irradiation of moving tumors, and to quantify the dose uncertainty induced by tumor motion.
  
  
  METHODS
  The authors established that regardless of treatment modality and delivery properties, the dynamic dose will converge to the 4D dose, instead of the 3D static dose, after multiple deliveries. The bounds of dynamic dose, or the maximum estimation error using 4D or static dose, were established for the 4D and static doses, respectively. Numerical simulations were performed (1) to prove the principle that for each phase, after multiple deliveries, the average number of deliveries for any given time converges to the total number of fractions (K) over the number of phases (N); (2) to investigate the dose difference between the 4D and dynamic doses as a function of the number of deliveries for deliveries of a "pulsed beam"; and (3) to investigate the dose difference between 4D dose and dynamic doses as a function of delivery time for deliveries of a "continuous beam." A Poisson model was developed to estimate the mean dose error as a function of number of deliveries or delivered time for both pulsed beam and continuous beam.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The numerical simulations confirmed that the number of deliveries for each phase converges to K∕N, assuming a random starting phase. Simulations for the pulsed beam and continuous beam also suggested that the dose error is a strong function of the number of deliveries and∕or total deliver time and could be a function of the breathing cycle, depending on the mode of delivery. The Poisson model agrees well with the simulation.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Dynamically accumulated dose will converge to the 4D accumulated dose after multiple deliveries, regardless of treatment modality. Bounds of the dynamic dose could be determined using quantities derived from 4D doses, and the mean dose difference between the dynamic dose and 4D dose as a function of number of deliveries and∕or total deliver time was also established.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. hengli@mdanderson.org
authors.forename: Heng
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Yupeng
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Xiaodong
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Zhang
authors.forename: Xiaoqiang
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Wei
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Liu
authors.forename: Michael T
authors.initials: MT
authors.lastname: Gillin
authors.forename: X Ronald
authors.initials: XR
authors.lastname: Zhu
mesh_terms: D003198:Computer Simulation; D056973:Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D008954:Models, Biological; D009038:Motion; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D020266:Radiotherapy, Conformal / Q000379:methods*; D061089:Radiotherapy, Image-Guided / Q000379:methods*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity