Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 13, 2025

Expedited Radiation Biodosimetry by Automated Dicentric Chromosome Identification ADCI and Dose Estimation
Published on: September 4, 2017
Impact of discrepancies between CT numbers of brain-tissue-equivalent density plug and actual brain tissue on dose
Shogo Tsunemine1, Shuichi Ozawa2,3, Minoru Nakao4,5
1Department of Radiation and Proton Therapy Office, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Abstract:
This study quantitatively evaluated the impact of differences in computed tomography (CT) numbers and elemental compositions between commercially available brain-tissue-equivalent density plugs (BDPs) and actual brain tissue on dose calculations in a radiation therapy treatment planning system (RTPS). The mass density and elemental composition of BDP were analyzed using elemental analysis and X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy. The CT numbers of the BDP and actual brain tissue were measured and compared, with effective atomic numbers (EANs) calculated based on compositional analysis and the International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 110 data for brain tissues. The theoretical CT numbers were derived using the stoichiometric CT number calibration (SCC) method. The dose calculations were performed using the modified CT number-to-relative electron density (RED) and mass density (MD) conversion tables in Eclipse v16.1, employing AAA and Acuros XB algorithms, employing the physical material table in AcurosXB_13.5. The dose metrics D2%, D50%, and D98% were evaluated. Significant differences in elemental composition were found, particularly in carbon (73.26% in BDP vs. 14.3% in brain tissue) and oxygen (12.52% in BDP vs. 71.3% in brain tissue). The EANs were 6.6 for BDP and 7.4 for brain tissue. The mean CT numbers were 23.30 HU for the BDP and 37.30 HU for brain tissue, a 14 HU discrepancy. Nevertheless, dose calculation deviations were minimal, typically within ± 0.2%, with a maximum discrepancy of 0.6% for D98%. Although CT numbers and elemental compositions exhibited notable differences, their impact on dose calculations in the evaluated RTPS algorithms was negligible.
More Related Videos
06:33Construction of a Preclinical Multimodality Phantom Using Tissue-mimicking Materials for Quality Assurance in Tumor Size Measurement
Published on: July 29, 2013
10:13Non-Destructive Evaluation of Regional Cell Density Within Tumor Aggregates Following Drug Treatment
Published on: June 21, 2022