Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Radiol. Nov 28, 2014; 6(11): 874-880
Published online Nov 28, 2014. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v6.i11.874
Table 3 Clinical impact of dose calculation algorithms
Ref.Tumor site/techniqueAlgorithms studied Results/conclusion
Nielsen et al[34], 2011NSCLCEclipse AAA OTP CC Pinnacle CC XiO Sup OTP PB XiO FFTDifferences in dose to target predicted by the different algorithms are of a magnitude. Calculated NTCP values for pneumonitis are more sensitive to the choice of algorithm than mean lung dose and V20
Chandrasekaran et al[38], 2011Lung/3DCRT,SBRTPBC, Eclipse AAA, Pinnacle CCC, Masterplan PBC and CCCPBC yielded higher TCP in comparison with other algorithms. For small tumor, TCP was overestimated by 4%-13% by PBC; for large tumor, there was an increase of up to 6%-22%
Liu et al[39], 2013Lung/SABREPL, MCEPL overestimates dose by amounts that substantially decrease TCP in a large proportion. Compared with MC, prescribing based on EPL translated to a median TCP decrement of 4.3% (range, 1.2%-37%) and a > 5% decrement in 46% of tumors
Bufacchi et al[33], 2013Prostate, HN, Lung, Breast /3DCRTPBC, AAANTCP calculated with AAA was lower than the NTCP calculated with PBC, except for the breast treatments
Chetty et al[30], 2013NSCLC/SABREPL-1D, EPL-3D, AAA, CCC, Acuros, MCAverage TCP decrements (5%-10%, ranging up to approximately 50%) were observed with model-based algorithms relative to the EPL-based methods