Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dose estimation for cone-beam computed tomography in image-guided radiation therapy for pelvic cancer using adult mesh-type reference computational phantoms

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Radiological Physics and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The use of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) is expanding owing to its installation in linear accelerators for radiation therapy, and the imaging dose induced by this system has become the center of attention. Here, the dose to patients caused by the CBCT imager was investigated. Organ doses and effective doses for male and female mesh-type reference computational phantoms (MRCPs) and pelvis CBCT mode, routinely used for pelvic irradiation, were estimated using the Particle and Heavy Ion Transport Code System. The simulation results were confirmed based on the point-dose measurements. The estimated organ doses for male MRCPs with/without raised arms and for female MRCPs with/without raised arms were 0.00286–35.6 mGy, 0.00286–35.1 mGy, 0.00933–39.5 mGy, and 0.00931–39.0 mGy, respectively. The anticipated effective doses for male MRCPs with/without raised arms and female MRCPs with/without raised arms irradiated by pelvis CBCT mode were 4.25 mSv, 4.16 mSv, 7.66 mSv, and 7.48 mSv, respectively. The results of this study will be useful for patients who undergo image-guided radiotherapy with CBCT. However, because this study only covered one type of cancer with one type of imager, and image quality was not considered, more studies should be conducted to estimate the radiation dose from imaging devices in radiation therapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cumur C, Fujibuchi T, Hamada K. Dose estimation for cone-beam computed tomography in image-guided radiation therapy using mesh-type reference computational phantoms and assuming head and neck cancer. J Radiol Prot. 2022;42:021533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Marchant TE, Joshi KD. Comprehensive monte carlo study of patient doses from cone-beam CT imaging in radiotherapy. J Radiol Prot. 2017;37:13–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Islam MK, Purdie TG, Norrlinger BD, Alasti H, Moseley DJ, Sharpe MB, Siewerdsen JH, Jaffray DA. Patient dose from kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography imaging in radiation therapy [Abstract]. Med Phys. 2006;33:1573–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Abuhaimed A, Martin CJ, Sankaralingam M, Gentle DJ. A Monte Carlo investigation of cumulative dose measurements for cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60:1519–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cheng HCY, Wu VWC, Liu ESF, Kwong DLW. Evaluation of radiation dose and image quality for the varian cone beam computed tomography system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;80:291–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Alaei P, Spezi E, Reynolds M. Dose calculation and treatment plan optimization including imaging dose from kilovolltage cone beam computed tomography. Acta Oncol. 2013;53:839–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ozseven A, Dirican B. Evaluation of patient organ doses from kilovoltage cone-beam CT imaging in radiation therapy. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2021;26:251–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Moon YM, Kim HJ, Kwak DW, Kang YR, Lee MW, Ro TI, et al. Effective dose measurement for cone beam computed tomography using glass dosimeter. Nucl Eng Technol. 2014;46:255–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Abuhaimed A, Martin CJ, Sankaralingam M. A Monte Carlo study of organ and effective doses of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans in radiotherapy. J Radiol Prot. 2018;38:61–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tomita T, Isobe T, Furuyama Y, Takei H, Kobayashi D, Mori Y, Terunuma T, Sato E, Yokota H, Sakae T. Evaluation of dose distribution and normal tissue complication probability of a combined dose of cone-beam computed tomography imaging with treatment in prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy. J Med Phys. 2020;45(2):78–87.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. AAPM Task Group 23. The measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT. AAPM Rep No 96 2008

  12. Webster A, Appelt AL, Eminowicz G. Image-guided radiotherapy for pelvic cancers: a review of current evidence and clinical utilization. Clin Oncol. 2020;32:805–16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Patni N, Burela N, Pasricha R, Goyal J, Soni TP, Kumar TS, Natarajan T. Assessment of three-dimensional setup errors in image-guided pelvic radiotherapy for uterine and cervical cancer using kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography and its effect on planning target volume margins. J Cancer Res Therap. 2017;13(1):131–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. ICRP. Adult mesh-type reference computational phantoms. ICRP Publication 145. Ann ICRP. 2020;49(3):13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kawahara D, Ozawa S, Nakashima T, Suzuki T, Tsuneda M, Tanaka S, Ohno Y, Murakami Y, Nagata Y. Absorbed dose and image quality of Varian TrueBeam CBCT compared with OBI CBCT. Phys Med. 2016;32(12):1628–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gilling L, Ali O. Organ dose from Varian XI and Varian OBI systems are clinically comparable for pelvic CBCT imaging. Phys Eng Sci Med. 2022;45:279–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sato T, Iwamoto Y, Hashimoto S, Ogawa T, Furuta T, Abe S, Kai T, Tsai P, Matsuda N, Iwase H, Shigyo N, Sihver L, Niita K. Features of particle and heavy ion transport code system (PHITS) version 3.02. J Nucl Sci Technol. 2018;55:684–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Anam C, Fujibuchi T, Haryanto F, Widita R, Arif I, Dougherty G. An evaluation of computed tomography dose index measurements using a pencil ionization chamber and small detectors. J Radiol Prot. 2019;31(1):112–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Poludniowski G, Omar A, Bujila R, Andreo P. Technical note: SpekPy v2.0-a software toolkit for modelling X-ray tube spectra. Med Phys. 2021;48:3630–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. ICRP. The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007;37(2–4):2.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ahrens J, Geveci B, Law C. ParaView: an end-user tool for large data visualization visualization handbook. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kumar T, Schernberg A, Busato F, Laurans M, Fumagalli I, Dumas I, Deutsch E, Haie-Meder C, Chargari C. Correlation between pelvic bone marrow radiation dose and acute hematological toxicity in cervical cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiation. Cancer Manag Res. 2019;11:6285–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Murphy MJ, et al. The management of imaging dose during image-guided radiotherapy: report of the AAPM task group 75. Med Phys. 2007;34(10):4041–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Liu H, Gao Y, Ding A, Caracappa PF, Xu XG. The profound effects of patient arm positioning on organ doses from CT procedures calculated using Monte Carlo simulations and deformable phantoms. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2015;164:368–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kan MW, Leung LHT, Wong W, Lam N. Radiation dose from cone beam computed tomography for image-guided radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;70:272–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Nobah A, Aldelaijan S, Devic S, Tomic N, Seuntjens J, Al-Shabanah M, Moftah B. Radiochromic film based dosimetry of image-guidance procedures on different radiotherapy modalities. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15:5006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gilling L. A GATE Monte Carlo dose analysis from Varian XI cone beam computed tomography Master Thesis. 2019

  28. Nakahara S, Tachibana M, Watanabe Y. One-year analysis of Elekta CBCT image quality using NPS and MTF. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016;17:211–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Division of Medical Quantum Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1, Maidashi, Higashi-Ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan

    Ceyda Cumur

  2. Faculty of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1, Maidashi, Higashi-Ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan

    Toshioh Fujibuchi & Hiroyuki Arakawa

  3. Department of Radiological Technology, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, 3-1-1, Notame Minami-Ku, Fukuoka, 811-1395, Japan

    Keisuke Hamada

Authors
  1. Ceyda Cumur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Toshioh Fujibuchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hiroyuki Arakawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Keisuke Hamada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ceyda Cumur.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cumur, C., Fujibuchi, T., Arakawa, H. et al. Dose estimation for cone-beam computed tomography in image-guided radiation therapy for pelvic cancer using adult mesh-type reference computational phantoms. Radiol Phys Technol 16, 203–211 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-023-00708-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-023-00708-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation