Evaluation of two-dimensional electronic portal imaging device using integrated images during volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to evaluate analysis criteria for the identification of the presence of rectal gas during volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer patients by using electronic portal imaging device (EPID)-based in vivo dosimetry (IVD).Materials and methodsAll measurements were performed by determining the cumulative EPID images in an integrated acquisition mode and analyzed using PerFRACTION commercial software. Systematic setup errors were simulated by moving the anthropomorphic phantom in each translational and rotational direction. The inhomogeneity regions were also simulated by the I’mRT phantom attached to the Quasar phantom. The presence of small and large air cavities (12 and 48 cm³) was controlled by moving the Quasar phantom in several timings during VMAT. Sixteen prostate cancer patients received EPID-based IVD during VMAT.ResultsIn the phantom study, no systematic setup error was detected in the range that can happen in clinical (< 5-mm and < 3 degree). The pass rate of 2% dose difference (DD2%) in small and large air cavities was 98.74% and 79.05%, respectively, in the appearance of the air cavity after irradiation three quarter times. In the clinical study, some fractions caused a sharp decline in the DD2% pass rate. The proportion for DD2% < 90% was 13.4% of all fractions. Rectal gas was confirmed in 11.0% of fractions by acquiring kilo-voltage X-ray images after the treatment.ConclusionsOur results suggest that analysis criteria of 2% dose difference in EPID-based IVD was a suitable method for identification of rectal gas during VMAT for prostate cancer patients.     

Initial clinical experience with Epid-based in-vivo dosimetry for VMAT treatments of head-and-neck tumors

We evaluated an EPID-based in-vivo dosimetry algorithm (IVD) for complex VMAT treatments in clinical routine. 19 consecutive patients with head-and-neck tumors and treated with Elekta VMAT technique using Simultaneous Integrated Boost strategy were enrolled. In-vivo tests were evaluated by means of (i) ratio R between daily in-vivo isocenter dose and planned dose and (ii) γ-analysis between EPID integral portal images in terms of percentage of points with γ-value smaller than one (γ_%) and mean γ-values (γ_mean), using a global 3%–3 mm criteria. Alert criteria of ±5% for R ratio, γ_% < 90% and γ_mean > 0.67 were chosen. A total of 350 transit EPID images were acquired during the treatment fractions. The overall mean R ratio was equal to 1.002 ± 0.019 (1 SD), with 95.9% of tests within ±5%. The 2D portal images of γ-analysis showed an overall γ_mean of 0.42 ± 0.16 with 93.3% of tests within alert criteria, and a mean γ% equal to 92.9 ± 5.1% with 85.9% of tests within alert criteria. Relevant discrepancies were observed in three patients: a set-up error was detected for one patient and two patients showed major anatomical variations (weight loss/tumor shrinkage) in the second half of treatment. The results are supplied in quasi real-time, with IVD tests displayed after only 1 minute from the end of arc delivery. This procedure was able to detect when delivery was inconsistent with the original plans, allowing physics and medical staff to promptly act in case of major deviations between measured and planned dose.     

Characterization of robust optimization for VMAT plan for liver cancer

PurposeWe investigated the feasibility of robust optimization for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver cancer in comparison with planning target volume (PTV)-based optimized plans. Treatment plan quality, robustness, complexity, and accuracy of dose delivery were assessed.MethodsTen liver cancer patients were selected for this study. PTV-based optimized plans with an 8-mm PTV margin and robust optimized plans with an 8-mm setup uncertainty were generated. Plan perturbed doses were evaluated using a setup error of 8 mm in all directions from the isocenter. The dosimetric comparison parameters were clinical target volume (CTV) doses (D_98%, D_50%, and D_2%), liver doses, and monitor unit (MU). Plan complexity was evaluated using the modulation complexity score for VMAT (MCSv).ResultsThere was no significant difference between the two optimizations with respect to CTV doses and MUs. Robust optimized plans had a higher liver dose than did PTV-based optimized plans. Plan perturbed dose evaluations showed that doses to the CTV for the robust optimized plans had small variations. Robust optimized plans were less complex than PTV-based optimized plans. Robust optimized plans had statistically significant fewer leaf position errors than did PTV-based optimized plans.ConclusionsComparison of treatment plan quality, robustness, and plan complexity of both optimizations showed that robust optimization could be feasibile for VMAT of liver cancer.     

Comparison of three commercial dosimetric systems in detecting clinically significant VMAT delivery errors

AimTo study the sensitivity of three commercial dosimetric systems, Delta4, Multicube and Octavius4D, in detecting Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) delivery errors.MethodsFourteen prostate and head and neck (H&N) VMAT plans were considered for this study. Three types of errors were introduced into the original plans: gantry angle independent and dependent MLC errors, and gantry angle dependent dose errors. The dose matrix measured by each detector system for the no-error and error introduced delivery were compared with the reference Treatment Planning System (TPS) calculated dose matrix for no-error plans using gamma (γ) analysis with 2%/2 mm tolerance criteria. The ability of the detector system in identifying the minimum error in each scenario was assessed by analysing the gamma pass rates of no error delivery and error delivery using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The relative sensitivity of the system was assessed by determining the slope of the gamma pass line for studied error magnitude in each error scenario.ResultsIn the gantry angle independent and dependent MLC error scenario the Delta4, Multicube and Octavius4D systems detected a minimum 2 mm error. In the gantry angle dependent dose error scenario all studied systems detected a minimum 3% and 2% error in prostate and H&N plans respectively. In the studied detector systems Multicube showed relatively less sensitivity to the errors in the majority of error scenarios.ConclusionThe studied systems identified the same magnitude of minimum errors in all considered error scenarios.     

Dosimetric and localization accuracy of Elekta high definition dynamic radiosurgery

Background and PurposeWith the increasingly prominent role of stereotactic radiosurgery in radiation therapy, there is a clinical need for robust, efficient, and accurate solutions for targeting multiple sites with one patient setup. The end-to-end accuracy of high definition dynamic radiosurgery with Elekta treatment planning and delivery systems was investigated in this study.Materials and MethodsA patient-derived CT scan was used to create a radiosurgery plan to seven targets in the brain. Monaco was used for treatment planning using 5 VMAT non-coplanar arcs. Prior to delivery, 3D-printed phantoms from RTsafe were ordered including a gel phantom for 3D dosimetry, phantom with 2D film insert, and an ion chamber phantom for point dose measurement. Delivery was performed using the Elekta VersaHD, XVI cone-beam CT, and HexaPOD six degree of freedom tabletop.ResultsAbsolute dose accuracy was verified within 2%. 3D global gamma analysis in the film measurement revealed 3%/2 mm passing rates >95%. Gel dosimetry 3D global gamma analysis (3%/2 mm) were above 90% for all targets with the exception of one. Results were indicative of typical end-to-end accuracies (<1 mm spatial uncertainty, 2% dose accuracy) within 4 cm of isocenter. Beyond 4 cm, 2 mm accuracy was found.ConclusionsHigh definition dynamic radiosurgery expands clinically acceptable stereotactic accuracy to a sphere around isocenter allowing for radiosurgery of several targets with one setup with a high degree of dosimetric precision. Gel dosimetry proved to be an essential tool for the validation of the 3D dose distributions in this technique.     

Quantification of residual dose estimation error on log file-based patient dose calculation

PurposeThe log file-based patient dose estimation includes a residual dose estimation error caused by leaf miscalibration, which cannot be reflected on the estimated dose. The purpose of this study is to determine this residual dose estimation error.Methods and materialsModified log files for seven head-and-neck and prostate volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans simulating leaf miscalibration were generated by shifting both leaf banks (systematic leaf gap errors: ±2.0, ±1.0, and ±0.5 mm in opposite directions and systematic leaf shifts: ±1.0 mm in the same direction) using MATLAB-based (MathWorks, Natick, MA) in-house software. The generated modified and non-modified log files were imported back into the treatment planning system and recalculated. Subsequently, the generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) was quantified for the definition of the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risks.ResultsFor MLC leaves calibrated within ±0.5 mm, the quantified residual dose estimation errors that obtained from the slope of the linear regression of gEUD changes between non- and modified log file doses per leaf gap are in head-and-neck plans 1.32 ± 0.27% and 0.82 ± 0.17 Gy for PTV and spinal cord, respectively, and in prostate plans 1.22 ± 0.36%, 0.95 ± 0.14 Gy, and 0.45 ± 0.08 Gy for PTV, rectum, and bladder, respectively.ConclusionsIn this work, we determine the residual dose estimation errors for VMAT delivery using the log file-based patient dose calculation according to the MLC calibration accuracy.     

An assessment of a 3D EPID-based dosimetry system using conventional two- and three-dimensional detectors for VMAT

PurposeTo provide a 3D dosimetric evaluation of a commercial portal dosimetry system using 2D/3D detectors under ideal conditions using VMAT.MethodsA 2D ion chamber array, radiochromic film and gel dosimeter were utilised to provide a dosimetric evaluation of transit phantom and pre-treatment ‘fluence’ EPID back-projected dose distributions for a standard VMAT plan. In-house 2D and 3D gamma methods compared pass statistics relative to each dosimeter and TPS dose distributions.ResultsFluence mode and transit EPID dose distributions back-projected onto phantom geometry produced 2D gamma pass rates in excess of 97% relative to other tested detectors and exported TPS dose planes when a 3%, 3 mm global gamma criterion was applied. Use of a gel dosimeter within a glass vial allowed comparison of measured 3D dose distributions versus EPID 3D dose and TPS calculated distributions. 3D gamma comparisons between modalities at 3%, 3 mm gave pass rates in excess of 92%. Use of fluence mode was indicative of transit results under ideal conditions with slightly reduced dose definition.Conclusions3D EPID back projected dose distributions were validated against detectors in both 2D and 3D. Cross validation of transit dose delivered to a patient is limited due to reasons of practicality and the tests presented are recommended as a guideline for 3D EPID dosimetry commissioning; allowing direct comparison between detector, TPS, fluence and transit modes. The results indicate achievable gamma scores for a complex VMAT plan in a homogenous phantom geometry and contributes to growing experience of 3D EPID dosimetry.     

Commissioning and initial experience with a commercial software for in vivo volumetric dosimetry

Introduction and purposeDosimetry Check (DC) (Math Resolutions) is a commercial EPID-based dosimetry software, which allows performing pre-treatment and transit dosimetry. DC provides an independent verification of the treatment, being potentially of great interest due to the high benefits of the in vivo volumetric dosimetry, which guarantee the treatment delivery and anatomy constancy. The aim of this work is to study the differences in dose between DC and the Treatment Planning System (TPS) to establish an accuracy level of the system.Material and methodsDC v.3.8 was used along with Varian Clinac iX accelerator equipped with EPID aS1000 and Eclipse v.10.0 with AAA and Acuros XB calculation algorithms. The DC evaluated version is based on a pencil beam calculation algorithm. Various plans were generated over several homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms. Isocentre point doses and gamma analysis were evaluated.ResultsTotal dose differences at the isocentre between DC and TPS for the studied plans are less than 2%, but single field contributions achieve greater values. In the presence of heterogeneities, the discrepancies can reach up to 15%. In transit mode, DC does not consider properly the couch attenuation, especially when there is an air gap between phantom and couch.ConclusionsThe possibility of this in vivo evaluation and the potentiality of this new system have a very positive impact on improving patient QA. But improvements are required in both calculation algorithm and integration with the record and verify system.     

Delta4 Discover transmission detector: A comprehensive characterization for in-vivo VMAT monitoring

ObjectiveTo investigate the dosimetric behaviour, influence on photon beam fluence and error detection capability of Delta⁴ Discover transmission detector.MethodsThe transmission detector (TRD) was characterized on a TrueBeam linear accelerator with 6 MV beams. Linearity, reproducibility and dose rate dependence were investigated. The effect on photon beam fluence was evaluated in terms of beam profiles, percentage depth dose, transmission factor and surface dose for different open field sizes. The transmission factor of the 10x10 cm² field was entered in the TPS’s configuration and its correct use in the dose calculation was verified recalculating 17 clinical IMRT/VMAT plans. Surface dose was measured for 20 IMRT fields. The capability to detect different delivery errors was investigated evaluating dose gamma index, MLC gamma index and leaf position of 15 manually modified VMAT plans.ResultsTRD showed a linear dependence on MU. No dose rate dependence was observed. Short-term and long-term reproducibility were within 0.1% and 0.5%. The presence of the TRD did not significantly affect PDDs and profiles. The transmission factor of the 10x10 cm² field size was 0.985 and 0.983, for FF and FFF beams respectively. The 17 recalculated plans met our clinical gamma-index passing rate, confirming the correct use of the transmission factor by the TPS. The surface dose differences for the open fields increase for shorter SSDs and greater field size. Differences in surface dose for the IMRT beams were less than 2%. Output variation ≥2%, collimator angle variations within 0.3°, gantry angle errors of 1°, jaw tracking and leaf position errors were detected.ConclusionsDelta⁴ Discover shows good linearity and reproducibility, is not dependent on dose rate and does not affect beam quality and dose profiles. It is also capable to detect dosimetric and geometric errors and therefore it is suitable for monitoring VMAT delivery.     

Comparison of two different EPID-based solutions performing pretreatment quality assurance: 2D portal dosimetry versus 3D forward projection method

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to characterize two different EPID-based solutions for pre-treatment VMAT quality assurance, the 2D portal dosimetry and the 3D projection technique. Their ability to catch the main critical delivery errors was studied.MethodsMeasurements were performed with a linac accelerator equipped with EPID aSi1000, Portal Dose Image Prediction (PDIP), and PerFRACTION softwares. Their performances were studied simulating perturbations of a reference plan through systematic variations in dose values and micromultileaf collimator position. The performance of PDIP, based on 2D forward method, was evaluated calculating gamma passing rate (%GP) between no-error and error-simulated measurements. The impact of errors with PerFRACTION, based on 3D projection technique, was analyzed by calculating the difference between reference and perturbed DVH (%ΔD). Subsequently pre-treatment verification with PerFRACTION was done for 27 patients of different pathologies.ResultsThe sensitivity of PerFRACTION was slightly higher than sensitivity of PDIP, reaching a maximum of 0.9. Specificity was 1 for PerFRACTION and 0.6 for PDIP. The analysis of patients’ DVHs indicated that the mean %ΔD was (1.2 ± 1.9)% for D2%, (0.6 ± 1.7)% for D95% and (−0.0 ± 1.2)% for Dmean of PTV. Regarding OARs, we observed important discrepancies on DVH but that the higher dose variations were in low dose area (<10 Gy).ConclusionsThis study supports the introduction of the new 3D forward projection method for pretreatment QA raising the claim that the visualization of the delivered dose distribution on patient anatomy has major advantages over traditional portal dosimetry QA systems.     

Delivering RapidArc®: A comprehensive study on accuracy and long term stability

PurposeTo establish the reliability and accuracy of a UNIQUE Linac in delivering RapidArc treatments and assess its long term stability.Materials and methodsUNIQUE performance was monitored and analyzed for a period of nearly two years. 2280 Dynalog files, related to 179 clinical RapidArc treatments were collected. Different tumor sites and dose scheduling were included, covering the full range of our treatment plans. Statistical distributions of MLC motion error, gantry rotation error and MU delivery error were evaluated. The stochastic and systematic nature of each error was investigated together with their variation in time.ResultsAll the delivery errors are found to be small and more stringent tolerances than those proposed by TG142 are suggested. Unlike MLC positional errors, where a linear relationship with leaf speed holds, other Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) parameters reveal a random nature and, consequently, a reduced clinical relevance. MLC errors are linearly related only to leaf speed no matter the shape of the MLC apertures. Gantry rotation and MU delivery are as accurate as major competing Linacs. UNIQUE was found to be reliable and accurate throughout the investigation period, regardless of the specific tumor sites and fractionation schemes.ConclusionsThe accuracy of RapidArc treatments delivered with UNIQUE has been established. The stochastic nature of delivery errors is proven. Long term statistics of the delivery parameter errors do not show significant variations, confirming the reliability of the VMAT delivery system.     

Dosimetric comparison of analytic anisotropic algorithm and Acuros XB algorithm in VMAT plans for high-grade glioma

PurposeTo investigate the dosimetric impact between the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and the Acuros XB (AXB) algorithm in volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for high-grade glioma (HGG).MethodsWe used a heterogeneous phantom to quantify the agreement between the measured and calculated doses from the AAA and from the AXB. We then analyzed 14 patients with HGG treated by VMAT, using the AAA. We newly created AXB plans for each corresponding AAA plan under the following conditions: (1) re-calculation for the same number of monitor units with an identical beam and leaf setup, and (2) re-optimization under the same conditions of dose constraints. The dose coverage for the planning target volume (PTV) was evaluated by dividing the coverage into the skull, air, and soft-tissue regions.ResultsCompared to the results obtained with the AAA, the AXB results were in good agreement with the measured profiles. The dose differences in the PTV between the AAA and re-calculated AXB plans were large in the skull region contained in the target. The dose difference in the PTV in both types of plan was significantly correlated with the volume of the skull contained in the target (r = 0.71, p = 0.0042). A re-optimized AXB plan's dose difference was lower vs. the re-calculated AXB plan's.ConclusionsWe observed dose differences between the AAA and AXB plans, in particular in the cases in which the skull region of the target was large. Considering the phantom measurement results, the AXB algorithm should be used in VMAT plans for HGG.     

Sensitivity of a helical diode array dosimeter to Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy delivery errors

PurposeTo study the sensitivity of an ArcCHECK dosimeter in detecting delivery errors during the delivery of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT).MethodsThree types of errors in Multi Leaf Collimator (MLC) position and dose delivery were simulated separately in the delivery of five prostate and five head and neck (H&N) VMAT plans: (i) Gantry independent: a systematic shift in MLC position and variation in output to the whole arc; (ii) Gantry dependent: sag in MLC position and output variation as a function of gantry angle; (iii) Control point specific MLC and output errors introduced to only a specific number of Control Points (CP). The difference in local and global gamma (γ) pass rate between the no-error and error-simulated measurements with 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm tolerances was calculated to assess the sensitivity of ArcCHECK. The clinical impact of these errors was also calculated.ResultsArcCHECK was able to detect a minimum 3 mm MLC error and 3% output error for Gantry independent errors using either local or global gamma with 2%/2 mm tolerance. For the Gantry dependent error scenario a minimum 3 mm MLC error and 3% dose error was identifiable by ArcCHECK using either global or local gamma with 2%/2 mm tolerance. In errors introduced to specific CPs a MLC error of 10 mm and dose error of 100% introduced to 4CPs were detected by ArcCHECK.ConclusionArcCHECK used with either local or global gamma analysis and 2%/2 mm criteria can be confidently used in the clinic to detect errors above the stated error values.     

Comparison of multi-institutional pre-treatment verification for VMAT of nasopharynx with delivery errors

PurposeMeasurement-based pre-treatment verification with phantoms frequently uses gamma analysis to assess acceptable delivery accuracy. This study evaluates the sensitivity of a commercial system to simulated machine errors for three different institutions’ Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) planning approaches.MethodsVMAT plans were generated for ten patients at three institutions using each institution’s own protocol (manually-planned at institution 1; auto-planned at institutions 2 and 3). Errors in Multi-Leaf Collimator (MLC) field size (FS), MLC shift (S), and collimator angle (C) of −5, −2, −1, 1, 2 and 5 mm or degrees were introduced.Dose metric constraints discriminated which error magnitudes were considered unacceptable. The smallest magnitude error treatment plans deemed clinically unacceptable (typically for a 5% dose change) were delivered to the ArcCHECK for all institutions, and with a high-dose point ion chamber measurement in 2 institutions. Error detection for different gamma analysis criteria was compared.ResultsNot all deliberately introduced VMAT plan errors were detected using a typical 3D 3%/3 mm global gamma pass rate of 95%. Considering all institutions, gamma analysis was least sensitive to negative FS errors. The most sensitive was a 2%/2 mm global analysis for institution 1, whilst for institution 2 it was 3%/3 mm global analysis. The majority of errors (58/59 for institution 1, 54/60 for institution 3) were detected using ArcCHECK and ion chamber measurements combined.ConclusionsNot all clinically unacceptable errors are detected. Combining ion chamber measurements with gamma analysis improved sensitivity and is recommended. Optimum gamma settings varied across institutions.     

Ultrasound-guided intraoperative electron beam radiation therapy: A phantom study

PurposeTo develop the method for ultrasound (US)-guided intra-operative electron beam radiation therapy (IOERT).MethodsWe first established the simulation, planning, and delivery methods for US-guided IOERT and constructed appropriate hardware (the multi-function applicator, accessories, and US phantom). We tested our US-guided IOERT method using this hardware and the Monte Carlo simulation IOERT treatment planning system (TPS). The IOERT TPS used a compensator to build the conformal dose distribution. Then, we used the TPS to evaluate the effect of setup uncertainty on target coverage by introducing phantom setup error ranging from 0 mm to 10 mm to the plans with and without the compensator.ResultsThe simulation, planning, and delivery methods for US-guided IOERT were introduced and validated on a phantom. A complete technique for US-guided IOERT was established. Target coverage decreased by about 12% and 29% as the phantom setup error increased to 5 mm and 10 mm for the plans with compensator, respectively. Without compensator, the corresponding target coverage decreases were 2% and 13%, respectively.ConclusionIn our study, we developed the multi-function applicator, US Phantom, and TPS for IOERT. The procedures included not only dose distribution planning, but also intraoperative US imaging, which provided the information necessary during surgery to improve IOERT quality assurance. Target coverage was more sensitive to setup errors with compensator compared to no compensator. Further studies are needed to validate the clinical efficacy of this US-guided IOERT method.     

The robustness of dual isocenter VMAT radiation therapy for bilateral lymph node positive breast cancer

PurposeTo investigate the use of dual isocenters for VMAT planning in patients with lymph node positive synchronous bilateral breast cancer (BBC) compared to a single isocenter option.MethodsTreatment plans of 11 patients with lymph node positive BBC were retrospectively analyzed using two different VMAT planning techniques: dual-isocenter split-arc VMAT plans (Iso2) were compared with mono-isocenter VMAT plans (Iso1). For Iso2 plans, PTV dose was investigated after introducing ±2 and ±5 mm couch shift errors between the two isocenters in the lateral, longitudinal and vertical direction.ResultsFor both techniques the planning aims for PTV coverage and OARs were met. The mean dose for the bilateral lungs and heart was reduced from 11.3 Gy and 3.8 Gy to 10.9 Gy (p < .05) and 3.6 Gy (p < .05), respectively, for Iso2 plans when compared to Iso1 plans. Positive statistically significant correlation (rho = 0.76, p = .006) was found between PTV volume and D2cc_PTV for Iso1 plans. No clinically significant change was seen in the D98_CTV or D2cc_PTV after the 2 and 5 mm errors were introduced between isocenters for Iso2 plans.ConclusionsThe split arc method was shown to be a feasible treatment technique in the case of synchronous BBC for both mono and dual isocenter techniques. The dose parameters were slightly favoring dual-isocenter option instead of mono-isocenter. The dual-isocenter method was shown to be a robust treatment option in the presence of ≤5 mm errors in the shifts between the two isocenters.     

Film-based delivery quality assurance for robotic radiosurgery: Commissioning and validation

PurposeRobotic radiosurgery demands comprehensive delivery quality assurance (DQA), but guidelines for commissioning of the DQA method is missing. We investigated the stability and sensitivity of our film-based DQA method with various test scenarios and routine patient plans. We also investigated the applicability of tight distance-to-agreement (DTA) Gamma-Index criteria.Methods and materialWe used radiochromic films with multichannel film dosimetry and re-calibration and our analysis was performed in four steps: 1) Film-to-plan registration, 2) Standard Gamma-Index criteria evaluation (local-pixel-dose-difference ≤2%, distance-to-agreement ≤2 mm, pass-rate ≥90%), 3) Dose distribution shift until maximum pass-rate (Max_γ) was found (shift acceptance <1 mm), and 4) Final evaluation with tight DTA criteria (≤1 mm). Test scenarios consisted of purposefully introduced phantom misalignments, dose miscalibrations, and undelivered MU. Initial method evaluation was done on 30 clinical plans.ResultsOur method showed similar sensitivity compared to the standard End-2-End-Test and incorporated an estimate of global system offsets in the analysis. The simulated errors (phantom shifts, global robot misalignment, undelivered MU) were detected by our method while standard Gamma-Index criteria often did not reveal these deviations. Dose miscalibration was not detected by film alone, hence simultaneous ion-chamber measurement for film calibration is strongly recommended. 83% of the clinical patient plans were within our tight DTA tolerances.ConclusionOur presented methods provide additional measurements and quality references for film-based DQA enabling more sensitive error detection. We provided various test scenarios for commissioning of robotic radiosurgery DQA and demonstrated the necessity to use tight DTA criteria.     

Comparison of three-dimensional patient-specific dosimetry systems with delivery errors: Toward a new synchronous measurement method

PurposeThis study proposed a synchronous measurement method for patient-specific dosimetry using two three-dimensional dose verification systems with delivery errors.MethodsTwenty hypofractionated radiotherapy treatment plans for patients with lung cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Monitor unit (MU) changes, leaf in-position errors, and angles of deviation of the collimator were intentionally introduced to investigate the detection sensitivity of the EDose + EPID (EE) and Dolphin + Compass (DC) systems.ResultsBoth systems accurately detected the MU modifications and had a similar ability to detect leaf in-position errors. The detection of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) errors was difficult for the whole body using different gamma criteria. When the introduced MLC error was 1.0 mm, the numbers of errors detected in the clinical target volume (CTV) by the EE system were 20, 20, and 20 and the numbers of errors detected by the DC system were 18, 19, and 20, at 3%/2 mm, 2%/2 mm, and 1%/1 mm, respectively. The average dose deviation of all DVH parameters exceeded 3%. The gamma and DVH evaluation results remained unchanged for the DC system when different collimator angle errors were introduced. The number of errors detected by the EE system was <11 for each anatomical structure for all gamma criteria. The mean dose deviation of the CTV was not distinguished.ConclusionsThis synchronous measurement approach can effectively eliminate the influence of random errors during treatment. The EE and DC systems reconstruct the three-dimensional dose distribution accurately and are convenient and reliable for dose verification.     

An investigation of the IQM signal variation and error detection sensitivity for patient specific pre-treatment QA

PurposeTo evaluate the Integral Quality Monitor (IQM) as a clinical dosimetry device for detecting photon beam delivery errors in clinically relevant conditions.Materials and methodsThe IQM’s ability to detect delivery errors introduced into clinical VMAT plans for two different treatment sites was assessed. This included measuring 103 nasopharynx VMAT plans and 78 lung SBRT VMAT plans with introduced errors in gantry angle (1–5°) and in MLC-defined field size and field shift (1–5 mm). The IQM sensitivity was compared to ArcCheck detector performance. Signal dependence on field position for on-axis and asymmetrically offset square field sizes from 1 × 1 cm² to 30 × 30 cm² was also investigated.ResultsThe IQM detected almost all introduced clinically-significant MLC field size errors, but not some small gantry angle errors or most MLC field shift errors. The IQM sensitivity was comparable to the ArcCheck for lung SBRT, but worse for the nasopharynx plans. Differences between IQM calculated/predicted and measured signals were within ± 2% for all on-axis square fields, but up to 60% for the smallest asymmetrically offset fields at large offsets.Conclusion The IQM performance was consistent and reproducible. It showed highest sensitivity to the field size errors for these plans, but did not detect some clinically-significant introduced gantry angle errors or most MLC field shift errors. The IQM calculation model is still being developed, which should improve small offset-field performance. Care is required in IQM use for plan verification or online monitoring, especially for small fields that are off-axis in the detector gradient direction.     

Correlation between gamma passing rate and complexity of IMRT plan due to MLC position errors

PurposeThis study evaluates the correlation between the susceptibility of the γ passing rate of IMRT plans to the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) position errors and a quantitative plan complexity metric.MethodsTwenty patients were selected for this study. For each patient, two IMRT plans were generated using sliding window and step-&-shoot techniques, respectively. Modulation complexity score (MCS) was calculated for all IMRT plans, and symmetric MLC leaf bank errors, ranging from 0.3 mm to 1 mm, were introduced. Original and modified plans were delivered using Varian’s Clinac iX. The obtained dose distribution using ArcCHECK was then compared with the TPS calculated dose distribution of the original plans. 3D gamma analysis was performed for each verification with passing criteria of 2%/2 mm. The γ passing rate decreasing gradient were calculated to evaluate relationship between variation of γ passing rate due to MLC errors and complexity.ResultsA linear regression analysis was applied between γ gradient and complexity, and the results showed a linear correlation (R² = 0.81 and 0.82 for open and closed MLC error types, respectively) indicating the more complex plans are more susceptible to MLC leaf bank errors. Meanwhile, correlation of re-normalized γ passing rate and complexity for all errors scenarios also presented a strong correlation (r > 0.75).ConclusionThe statistics results revealed variation relationship of dosimetry robust of plans with various complexities to MLC errors. Our results also suggested that the observed susceptibility is independent of the delivery techniques.