MATERIALS AND METHODS: The particleboard was fabricated using a hot pressing technique at target density of 1.0 g·cm-3 and the elemental fraction was recorded for the simulation. The PDD was simulated in the GATE simulation using the linear accelerator Elekta Synergy model for the water phantom and Rhizophora phantom, and the results were compared with the experimental PDD performed by several studies. Beam flatness and beam symmetry were also measured in this study.
RESULTS: The simulated PDD for Rhizophora and water was in agreement with the experimental PDD of water with overall discrepancies of 0% to 8.7% at depth ranging from 1.0 to 15.0 cm. In the GATE simulation, all the points passed the clinical 3%/3 mm criterion in comparison with water, with the final percentage of 2.34% for Rhizophora phantom and 2.49% for the water phantom simulated in GATE. Both the symmetries are all within the range of an acceptable value of 2.0% according to the recommendation, with the beam symmetry of the water phantom and Rhizophora phantom at 0.58% and 0.28%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study provide the necessary foundation to confidently use the phantom for radiotherapy purposes, especially in treatment planning.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Computed tomography (CT)-based liver HDR-IBT using Oncentra Brachy treatment planning system (TPS) plans of patients with malignant liver tumor (MLT) from September 2018 to June 2023 were reviewed to identify patients, whose diaphragm and lung tissue were within 100% prescription isodose. These organs at risk (OARs) were contoured in axial CT slices. Maximum point dose (Dmax), dose to 0.2 cc, 0.5 cc, 1 cc (D0.2cc, D0.5cc, D1cc), and volume receiving 30 Gy and 50 Gy (V30Gy and V50Gy) were analyzed. Toxicity data of these patients were retrieved from hospital electronic records.
RESULTS: The analysis included 27 patients with 43 and 36 MLTs, whose 100% prescription isodose of liver HDR-IBT plan was within diaphragm and lung tissue. Median prescription dose was 25 Gy (range, 15-25 Gy) in single-fraction. Median Dmax, D0.2cc, D0.5cc, and D1cc of the diaphragm were 302 Gy (range, 54-396 Gy), 68 Gy (range, 38-234 Gy), 48 Gy (range, 32-128 Gy), and 35 Gy (range, 27-88 Gy), while for the lung, 90 Gy (range, 39-295 Gy), 55 Gy (range, 32-207 Gy), 44 Gy (range, 29-117 Gy), and 34 Gy (range, 25-79 Gy), respectively. Median V30Gy and V50Gy for the diaphragm were 1.1 cc (range, 0-5.8 cc) and 0.2 cc (range, 0-2.5 cc), while for the lung, 0.8 cc (range, 0-10.1 cc) and 0.1 cc (range, 0-2.3 cc), receptively. Two patients with repeated HDR-IBT sessions received cumulative Dmax diaphragm of 698 Gy and 792 Gy. At median follow-up of 23 months, no patient reported any suspicious symptom of radiation-induced diaphragm or lung injury.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first publication reporting diaphragm and lung tissue dose-volume and clinical toxicity in liver HDR-IBT. Small volume of diaphragm and lung tissue tolerated extreme high radiation doses [5 times of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) range in single fraction] without clinically significant toxicity. A standardized reporting for diaphragm and lung dose volume is needed for future liver HDR-IBT studies. The results of the current study can be employed in future for expanded indication of brachytherapy, such as CT-guided trans-thoracic lung brachytherapy.