Purpose: To comprehensively characterize dosimetric differences between calculations with a commercial model-based dose calculation algorithm (MBDCA) and the TG-43 formalism in application to accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) with the strut-adjusted volume implant (SAVI) applicator. Methods: Dose for 100 patients treated with the SAVI applicator was recalculated with an MBDCA for comparison to dose calculated via TG-43. For every pair of dose calculations, dose-volume histogram (DVH) metrics including V90%, V95%, V100%, V150%, and V200% for the PTV_EVAL were compared. Features were defined for each case including (1) applicator size, (2) ratio between PTV_EVAL contour and 1-cm rind surrounding SAVI applicator, (3) ratio between dwell time in central catheter and total dwell time, and (4) mean computed tomography (CT) number within the lumpectomy cavity. Wilcoxon rank sum tests were performed to test whether treatment plans could be stratified according to feature values into groups with statistically significant dosimetry differences between MBDCA and TG-43. Results: For all DVH metrics, differences between TG-43 and MBDCA calculations were statistically significant (P <.05). Minimum (maximum) relative percent differences between the MBDCA and TG-43 for V90%, V95%, and V100% were –2.1% (0.1%), –3.1% (–0.1%), and –5.0% (–0.5%), respectively. The median relative percent difference in mean PTV_EVAL dose between the MBDCA and TG-43 was –3.9%, with minimum (maximum) difference of –6.5% (–1.8%). For V90%, V95%, and V100%, plan quality worsened beyond defined thresholds in 26, 23, and 31 cases with no instances of coverage improvement. Features 1, 2, and 4 were shown to be able to stratify treatment plans into groups with statistically significant differences in dosimetry metrics between MBDCA and TG-43. Conclusions: Investigated dose metrics for SAVI treatments were found to be systematically lower with MBDCA calculation in comparison to TG-43. Plans could be stratified according to several features by the magnitude of dosimetric differences between these calculations.
|Number of pages||10|
|Journal||International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics|
|State||Published - Jul 15 2021|