Three-dimensional electron beam dose calculations

The MDAH pencil-beam algorithm developed by Hogstrom et al (1981) has been widely used in clinics for electron beam dose calculations for radiotherapy treatment planning. The primary objective of this research was to address several deficiencies of that algorithm and to develop an enhanced version. Two enhancements have been incorporated into the pencil-beam algorithm; one models fluence rather than planar fluence, and the other models the bremsstrahlung dose using measured beam data. Comparisons of the resulting calculated dose distributions with measured dose distributions for several test phantoms have been made. From these results it is concluded (1) that the fluence-based algorithm is more accurate to use for the dose calculation in an inhomogeneous slab phantom, and (2) the fluence-based calculation provides only a limited improvement to the accuracy the calculated dose in the region just downstream of the lateral edge of an inhomogeneity. The source of the latter inaccuracy is believed primarily due to assumptions made in the pencil beam's modeling of the complex phantom or patient geometry.^ A pencil-beam redefinition model was developed for the calculation of electron beam dose distributions in three dimensions. The primary aim of this redefinition model was to solve the dosimetry problem presented by deep inhomogeneities, which was the major deficiency of the enhanced version of the MDAH pencil-beam algorithm. The pencil-beam redefinition model is based on the theory of electron transport by redefining the pencil beams at each layer of the medium. The unique approach of this model is that all the physical parameters of a given pencil beam are characterized for multiple energy bins. Comparisons of the calculated dose distributions with measured dose distributions for a homogeneous water phantom and for phantoms with deep inhomogeneities have been made. From these results it is concluded that the redefinition algorithm is superior to the conventional, fluence-based, pencil-beam algorithm, especially in predicting the dose distribution downstream of a local inhomogeneity. The accuracy of this algorithm appears sufficient for clinical use, and the algorithm is structured for future expansion of the physical model if required for site specific treatment planning problems. ^

Quantitative comparison of late effects following photon versus proton external-beam radiation therapies: Toward an evidence-based approach to selecting a treatment modality

Radiation therapy has been used as an effective treatment for malignancies in pediatric patients. However, in many cases, the side effects of radiation diminish these patients’ quality of life. In order to develop strategies to minimize radiogenic complications, one must first quantitatively estimate pediatric patients’ relative risk for radiogenic late effects, which has not become feasible till recently because of the calculational complexity. The goals of this work were to calculate the dose delivered to tissues and organs in pediatric patients during contemporary photon and proton radiotherapies; to estimate the corresponding risk of radiogenic second cancer and cardiac toxicity based on the calculated doses and on dose-risk models from the literature; to test for the statistical significance of the difference between predicted risks after photon versus proton radiotherapies; and to provide a prototype of an evidence-based approach to selecting treatment modalities for pediatric patients, taking second cancer and cardiac toxicity into account. The results showed that proton therapy confers a lower predicted risk of radiogenic second cancer, and lower risks of radiogenic cardiac toxicities, compared to photon therapy. An uncertainty analysis revealed that the qualitative findings of this study are insensitive to changes in a wide variety of host and treatment related factors.

An evaluation of sleep hypnotic and stimulant effect on human performance using a computerized psychological test battery

This study evaluated the administration-time-dependent effects of a stimulant (Dexedrine 5-mg), a sleep-inducer (Halcion 0.25-mg) and placebo (control) on human performance. The investigation was conducted on 12 diurnally active (0700-2300) male adults (23-38 yrs) using a double-blind, randomized sixway-crossover three-treatment, two-timepoint (0830 vs 2030) design. Performance tests were conducted hourly during sleepless 13-hour studies using a computer generated, controlled and scored multi-task cognitive performance assessment battery (PAB) developed at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. Specific tests were Simple and Choice Reaction Time, Serial Addition/Subtraction, Spatial Orientation, Logical Reasoning, Time Estimation, Response Timing and the Stanford Sleepiness Scale. The major index of performance was "Throughput", a combined measure of speed and accuracy.^ For the Placebo condition, Single and Group Cosinor Analysis documented circadian rhythms in cognitive performance for the majority of tests, both for individuals and for the group. Performance was best around 1830-2030 and most variable around 0530-0700 when sleepiness was greatest (0300).^ Morning Dexedrine dosing marginally enhanced performance an average of 3% with reference to the corresponding in time control level. Dexedrine AM also increased alertness by 10% over the AM control. Dexedrine PM failed to improve performance with reference to the corresponding PM control baseline. With regard to AM and PM Dexedrine administrations, AM performance was 6% better with subjects 25% more alert.^ Morning Halcion administration caused a 7% performance decrement and 16% increase in sleepiness and a 13% decrement and 10% increase in sleepiness when administered in the evening compared to corresponding in time control data. Performance was 9% worse and sleepiness 24% greater after evening versus morning Halcion administration.^ These results suggest that for evening Halcion dosing, the overnight sleep deprivation occurring in coincidence with the nadir in performance due to circadian rhythmicity together with the CNS depressant effects combine to produce performance degradation. For Dexedrine, morning administration resulted in only marginal performance enhancement; Dexedrine in the evening was less effective, suggesting the 5-mg dose level may be too low to counteract the partial sleep deprivation and nocturnal nadir in performance. ^