Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWong, John YK
dc.contributor.authorLeung, Vincent WS
dc.contributor.authorHung, Rico HM
dc.contributor.authorNg, Curtise
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-21T01:14:03Z
dc.date.available2024-02-21T01:14:03Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.identifier.citationWong, J.Y.K. and Leung, V.W.S. and Hung, R.H.M. and Ng, K.C. 2024. Comparative Study of Eclipse and RayStation Multi-Criteria Optimization-Based Prostate Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Quality. Diagnostics. 14 (5): 465.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/94393
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/diagnostics14050465
dc.description.abstract

Multi-criteria optimization (MCO) function has been available on commercial radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning systems to improve plan quality; however, no study has compared Eclipse and RayStation MCO functions for prostate RT planning. The purpose of this study was to compare prostate RT MCO plan qualities in terms of discrepancies between Pareto optimal and final deliverable plans, and dosimetric impact of final deliverable plans. In total, 25 computed tomography datasets of prostate cancer patients were used for Eclipse (version 16.1) and RayStation (version 12A) MCO-based plannings with doses received by 98% of planning target volume having 76 Gy prescription (PTV76 D98%) and 50% of rectum (rectum D50%) selected as trade-off criteria. Pareto optimal and final deliverable plan discrepancies were determined based on PTV76 D98% and rectum D50% percentage differences. Their final deliverable plans were compared in terms of doses received by PTV76 and other structures including rectum, and PTV76 homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI), using a t-test. Both systems showed discrepancies between Pareto optimal and final deliverable plans (Eclipse: −0.89% (PTV76 D98%) and −2.49% (Rectum D50%); RayStation: 3.56% (PTV76 D98%) and −1.96% (Rectum D50%)). Statistically significantly different average values of PTV76 D98%, HI and CI, and mean dose received by rectum (Eclipse: 76.07 Gy, 0.06, 1.05 and 39.36 Gy; RayStation: 70.43 Gy, 0.11, 0.87 and 51.65 Gy) are noted, respectively (p < 0.001). Eclipse MCO-based prostate RT plan quality appears better than that of RayStation.

dc.publisherMDPI
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectCancer
dc.subjectGleason Score
dc.subjectOrgans at Risk
dc.subjectPareto Front
dc.subjectPareto Surface
dc.subjectProstate-Specific Antigen
dc.subjectRadiation Therapy
dc.subjectTarget Volume
dc.subjectToxicity
dc.subjectTrade-off
dc.titleComparative Study of Eclipse and RayStation Multi-Criteria Optimization-Based Prostate Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Quality
dc.typeJournal Article
dcterms.source.volume14
dcterms.source.number5
dcterms.source.issn2075-4418
dcterms.source.titleDiagnostics
dc.date.updated2024-02-21T01:14:02Z
curtin.departmentCurtin Medical School
curtin.accessStatusOpen access
curtin.facultyFaculty of Health Sciences
curtin.contributor.orcidNg, Curtise [0000-0002-5849-5857]
curtin.contributor.researcheridNg, Curtise [B-2422-2013]
curtin.identifier.article-number465
curtin.contributor.scopusauthoridNg, Curtise [26030030100]
curtin.repositoryagreementV3


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/