eISSN: 2081-2841
ISSN: 1689-832X
Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy
Current Issue Archive Supplements Articles in Press Journal Information Aims and Scope Editorial Office Editorial Board Register as Author Register as Reviewer Instructions for Authors Abstracting and indexing Subscription Advertising Information Links
Editorial System
Submit your Manuscript
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
Search
4/2024
vol. 16
 
Share:
Send email
Share:
abstract:
Original paper

A comparison of TG-43 and TG-186 dose calculation algorithms for treatment planning of intra-cavitary brachytherapy using tandem and ovoid applicator

Syed Mohamed Shajid
1
,
Lalit Mohan Aggarwal
1
,
Ankur Mourya
2
,
Sunil Choudhary
1
,
Gogul Priean
1
,
Ankita Singh
1
,
Saji Oommen
3

  1. Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Medicine, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India
  2. Subhash Chandra Bose Medical College, Jabalpur, (MP), India
  3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, New Delhi, India
J Contemp Brachytherapy 2024; 16, 4: 289-296
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2024.143138
Online publish date: 2024/09/12
View full text Get citation
 
Purpose:
The present study evaluated the dosimetric impact and compared the dose variations between the advanced collapsed cone engine (Task Group 186) and Task Group 43 plans for cervical cancer using tandem and ovoid applicators.

Material and methods:
Thirty cervical cancer patients underwent iridium-192 (192Ir) high-dose-rate (HDR) intra-cavitary brachytherapy using tandem and ovoid applicator. Original treatment plans for all patients were created using TG-43 dose calculation formalism. Subsequently, these plans were re-calculated using ACE (TG-186) algorithm and were not re-optimized, so that dwell time and dwell positions were identical in both plans. High-risk clinical target volume and organs at risk were contoured in each dataset. Significant air gaps within region of interest and use of high density applicator materials were also considered. The assessment encompassed a point-based evaluation, extraction of dosimetric parameters from dose-volume histogram (DVH), and plan evaluation indices for each algorithm.

Results:
Compared with ACE (TG-186) plans, TG-43 plans predicted higher doses for point A, point B, D90, D100, V100, V150, V200, and V300 for HR-CTV (p < 0.05). Similarly, TG-43 plans indicated higher doses for bladder point, rectum point, D0.1cm3, D10cm3, and D2cm3 for bladder, rectum, and sigmoid (p < 0.05). Additionally, overall plan quality score (PQS) was significantly greater in plans calculated with ACE (TG-186) formalism than in TG-43 plans (p < 0.05). In TG-186 (ACE) plans, gradient index (GI) was found to be lower than that in TG-43 plans (p < 0.05).

Conclusions:
TG-43 tends to overestimate doses compared with ACE (TG-186); nonetheless, both methods meet clinical standards. Material differences in the applicator are notable, and dose overestimations by TG-43 are within 5%.

keywords:

cervical cancer, HDR brachytherapy, intra-cavitary brachytherapy, TG-43, TG-186

  
Termedia
About us Contact
Copyright notice Privacy policy Advertising policy Contact us
Quick links
Journals Books eBooks Events
© 2024 Termedia Sp. z o.o.
Developed by Bentus.