Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 14, 2026

08:17
Dynamic Lung Tumor Tracking for Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiation Therapy
Published on: June 7, 2015
16.3K
On the use of a convolution-superposition algorithm for plan checking in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy
Nicholas Hardcastle1, Bradley M Oborn, Annette Haworth
1Royal North Shore Hospital; University of Wollongong. nick.hardcastle@gmail.com.
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
|September 30, 2016
Summary
This study evaluated M3D software for verifying lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) plans. M3D showed closer agreement with Monte Carlo simulations than other methods, offering a valuable tool for SBRT verification.
Area of Science:
- Medical Physics
- Radiation Oncology
- Radiotherapy Dosimetry
Background:
- Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for lung tumors requires precise dose delivery.
- Dosimetric verification of lung SBRT is challenging due to anatomical complexities and tumor motion.
- Advanced algorithms are needed for accurate dose calculation and verification in lung SBRT.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the accuracy of a new software, M3D, for dosimetric verification of lung SBRT treatment plans.
- To compare M3D's performance against established methods like Monte Carlo (MC), AAA, and XiO.
- To assess the clinical applicability of M3D in lung SBRT verification.
Main Methods:
- Ten lung SBRT patient plans were analyzed.
- Dose calculations were performed using M3D (collapsed-cone-convolution), Eclipse AAA, XiO (superposition), and in-house Monte Carlo (MC).
- Target doses, lung doses (V20 Gy, V5 Gy), and gamma passing rates were compared using MC as the reference.
Main Results:
- M3D and RadCalc generally calculated higher point doses than MC, with M3D showing statistical significance.
- AAA and XiO calculated lower point doses than MC, with AAA being statistically significant.
- M3D calculated higher near-maximum and median target doses and lung doses compared to MC.
- M3D achieved high gamma passing rates (>95% for 5%/1 mm, >80% for 3%/1 mm).
Conclusions:
- M3D demonstrates closer agreement with Monte Carlo simulations for lung SBRT dosimetric verification compared to AAA and XiO.
- Discrepancies between treatment planning systems and M3D are expected for lung SBRT.
- M3D serves as a valuable supplement to direct measurements for lung SBRT verification, accounting for patient-specific heterogeneities.

