en Radiation Biology Radiation Biology تحقيق بديع Original Research <div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:10pt"><span style="text-justify:newspaper"><span style="text-kashida-space:50%"><span style="line-height:119%"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:#1f497d"><span style="font-style:italic"><span style="font-weight:bold"><span style="language:en-US">Background</span></span></span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:#1f497d"><span style="font-weight:bold"><span style="language:en-US">:</span></span></span></span></span> <span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US">This paper makes use of Monte Carlo (MC) simulation to verify the dosimetric accuracy lung SBRT treatment plans delivered with an Elekta beam modulator multileaf collimator (MLC) system. </span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:#1f497d"><span style="font-style:italic"><span style="font-weight:bold"><span style="language:en-US">Materials and Methods: </span></span></span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US">Treatment plans of twenty early stage non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) patients were retrospectively re-calculated using the collapsed cone convolution (CCC) algorithm of the Pinnacle treatment planning system (TPS). Dose distributions were also calculated using the BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc MC user codes. A comparative analysis of target volume and organ at risk (OAR) dosimetry was performed between the TPS and MC dose calculation. A statistical analysis of the two dose distributions and parameters generated by the TPS and MC was performed to examine the significance of any differences. </span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:#1f497d"><span style="font-style:italic"><span style="font-weight:bold"><span style="language:en-US">Results: </span></span></span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US">The results showed that the TPS matched within 6% of the MC calculations for the planning treatment volume (PTV) coverage, mean and maximum PTV doses, and conformity index. The differences over all plans for the PTV were not statistically significant. For the organ at risk, the TPS overestimated the mean dose parameters over all patients but was only statistically significant for some organ at risks including the mean lung dose (MLD), V</span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:5.9939pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US">_20Gy</span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US"> to the lung and V</span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:5.9939pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US">_30Gy</span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US"> to the chest wall. </span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:#1f497d"><span style="font-style:italic"><span style="font-weight:bold"><span style="language:en-US">Conclusion: </span></span></span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US">The TPS dose calculation of lung SBRT using CCC Pinnacle</span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:5.9939pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US">³</span></span></span></span><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black"><span style="language:en-US"> algorithms is relatively closer to the MC calculation, however there may be inaccuracies in the TPS dose calculation for some patients, manifesting in some of the key dosimetric parameters that are used as correlates for irradiation related complications.&nbsp;</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div> Beam modulator, dose verification, lung cancer, Monte Carlo, stereotactic radiotherapy 757 764 http://ijrr.com/browse.php?a_code=A-10-1-1110&slc_lang=en&sid=1 S. Herwiningsih herwin@ub.ac.id 7900319475328460025238 7900319475328460025238 Yes Physics Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Brawijaya, Jl. Veteran 1, Malang, East Java, 65145, Indonesia A.L. Fielding 7900319475328460025239 7900319475328460025239 No School of Chemistry and Physics, Faculty of Science, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Queensland, 4001, Australia