Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 12, 2026
Dynamic Lung Tumor Tracking for Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiation Therapy
Published on: June 7, 2015
Technical note: reconstructing dose distributions from manually planned electron boosts in breast radiotherapy
Tanwiwat Jaikuna1, Isobel Dawes2, Hannah Chamberlin2
1Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Christie NHS Foundation Trust Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom; Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Purpose:
In breast radiotherapy, delivery of manually-calculated electron boosts limits retrospective dose-response analyses as dose distribution is unavailable. This work evaluates the feasibility of reconstructing dose distributions from manually planned electron boosts in breast-conserving radiotherapy.
Methods:
Only 72 out of 198 breast cancer patients had complete stored dose distributions from sequential electron boosts in the REQUITE study. Arbitrary data from 70/72 patients were used to develop and validate dose reconstruction method. Twenty patients were used to determine optimal parameters for Monte-Carlo-based (MC) electron dose reconstruction on RayStation (v.11B-R), considering CT-calibration curve, MC-history number, andcalculation grid resolution. Remaining 50 patients were used to quantify dose reconstruction accuracy. The similarity between reconstructed and stored dose was evaluated using 3D-gamma index and dosimetric parameters extracted from breast and tumour bed contours. Dose difference location was evaluated using dose-location histogram.
Results:
Calculation grid resolution significantly impacted electron dose distribution (p < 0.01), where the finest grid (0.15 cm) showed highest similarity to stored doses. CT-calibration curve and MC-history number had a negligible influence on dose reconstruction. Dosimetric difference between reconstructed and stored doses was < 1 Gy for breast and tumour bed. Reconstructed dose was achieved > 90% gamma passing rate in the validation set. However, around 2.5 Gy dose differences were observed at the skin and tissue interface regions.
Conclusions:
Retrospective electron boost dose reconstruction is feasible with acceptable accuracy, and could increase data completeness in large cohort studies. Caution is advised when assessing dose near tissue interface and further validation is needed outside the REQUITE dataset.
