title: Comparison of dose calculations between pencil-beam and Monte Carlo algorithms of the iPlan RT in arc therapy using a homogenous phantom with 3DVH software.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  To create an arc therapy plan, certain current general calculation algorithms such as pencil-beam calculation (PBC) are based on discretizing the continuous arc into multiple fields to simulate an arc. The iPlan RT™ treatment planning system incorporates not only a PBC algorithm, but also a more recent Monte Carlo calculation (MCC) algorithm that does not need beam discretization. The objective of this study is to evaluate the dose differences in a homogenous phantom between PBC and MCC by using a three-dimensional (3D) diode array detector (ArcCHECK™) and 3DVH software.
  
  
  METHODS
  A cylindrically shaped 'target' region of interest (ROI) and a 'periphery ROI' surrounding the target were designed. An arc therapy plan was created to deliver 600 cGy to the target within a 350° rotation angle, calculated using the PBC and MCC algorithms. The radiation doses were measured by the ArcCHECK, and reproduced by the 3DVH software. Through this process, we could compare the accuracy of both algorithms with regard to the 3D gamma passing rate (for the entire area and for each ROI).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Comparing the PBC and MCC planned dose distributions directly, the 3D gamma passing rates for the entire area were 97.7% with the gamma 3%/3 mm criterion. Comparing the planned dose to the measured dose, the 3D gamma passing rates were 98.8% under the PBC algorithm and 100% under the MCC algorithm. The difference was statistically significant (p = 0.034). Furthermore the gamma passing rate decreases 7.5% in the PBC when using the 2%/2 mm criterion compared to only a 0.4% decrease under the MCC. Each ROI as well as the entire area showed statistically significant higher gamma passing rates under the MCC algorithm. The failure points that did not satisfy the gamma criteria showed a regular pattern repeated every 10°.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  MCC showed better accuracy than the PBC of the iPlan RT in calculating the dose distribution in arc therapy, which was validated with the ArcCHECK and the 3DVH software. This may suggest that the arc step of 10° is too large in the PBC algorithm in the iPlan RT.
authors.forename: Jin Ho
authors.initials: JH
authors.lastname: Song
authors.forename: Hun-Joo
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: Shin
authors.forename: Chul Seung
authors.initials: CS
authors.lastname: Kay
authors.forename: Soo-Min
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Chae
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiation Oncology, Incheon St, Mary's hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Incheon, Korea. sonshyun@catholic.ac.kr.
authors.forename: Seok Hyun
authors.initials: SH
authors.lastname: Son
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D006801:Humans; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional; D009010:Monte Carlo Method; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D019047:Phantoms, Imaging; D011786:Quality Control; D011829:Radiation Dosage; D011874:Radiometry / Q000379:methods*; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012984:Software; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed