TG-51 reference dosimetry for the Halcyon™: A clinical experience

Adapting a practical EPR dosimetry protocol to measure output factors in small fields with alanine

PURPOSE

Modern radiotherapy techniques often deliver small radiation fields. In this work, a practical Electron Paramagnetic Resonance (EPR) dosimetry protocol is adapted and applied to measure output factors (OF) in small fields of a 6 MV radiotherapy system. Correction factors and uncertainties are presented and OFs are compared to the values obtained by following TRS-483 using an ionization chamber (IC).

METHODS

Irradiations were performed at 10 cm depth inside a water phantom positioned at 90 cm source to surface distance with a 6 MV flattening filter free photon beam of a Halcyon radiotherapy system. OFs for different nominal field sizes (1 × 1, 2 × 2, 3 × 3, 4 × 4, normalized to 10 × 10 cm2 ) were determined with a PinPoint 3D (PTW 31022) IC following TRS-483 as well as with alanine pellets with a diameter of 4 mm and a height of 2.4 mm. EPR readout was performed with a benchtop X-band spectrometer. Correction factors due to volume averaging and due to positional uncertainties were derived from 2D film measurements.

RESULTS

OFs obtained from both dosimeter types agreed within 0.7% after applying corrections for the volume averaging effect. For the used alanine pellets, volume averaging correction factors of 1.030(2) for the 1 × 1 cm2 field and <1.002 for the larger field sizes were determined. The correction factor for positional uncertainties of 1 mm was in the order of 1.018 for the 1 × 1 cm2 field. Combined relative standard uncertainties uc for the OFs resulting from alanine measurements were estimated to be below 1.5% for all field sizes. For IC measurements, uc was estimated to be below 1.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

A practical EPR dosimetry protocol is adaptable for precisely measuring OFs in small fields down to 1 × 1 cm2 . It is recommended to consider the effect of positional uncertainties for field sizes <2 × 2 cm2 .

Dosimetric performance evaluation of the Halcyon treatment platform for stereotactic radiotherapy: A pooled study

With the advancement of radiotherapy equipment, stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) has been increasingly used. Among the many radiotherapy devices, Halcyon shows promising applications. This article reviews the dosimetric performance such as plan quality, plan complexity, and gamma passing rates of SRT plans with Halcyon to determine the effectiveness and safety of Halcyon SRT plans. This article retrieved the last 5 years of PubMed studies on the effectiveness and safety of the Halcyon SRT plans. Two authors independently reviewed the titles and abstracts to decide whether to include the studies. A search was conducted to identify publications relevant to evaluating the dosimetric performance of SRT plans on Halcyon using the key strings Halcyon, stereotactic radiosurgery, SRT, stereotactic body radiotherapy, and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy. A total of 18 eligible publications were retrieved. Compared to SRT plans on the TrueBeam, the Halcyon has advantages in terms of plan quality, plan complexity, and gamma passing rates. The high treatment speed of SRT plans on the Halcyon is impressive, while the results of its plan evaluation are also encouraging. As a result, Halcyon offers a new option for busy radiotherapy units while significantly improving patient comfort in treatment. For more accurate results, additional relevant publications will need to be followed up in subsequent studies.

A roadmap for implementation of kV-CBCT online adaptive radiation therapy and initial first year experiences

PURPOSE

Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy (oART) follows a different treatment paradigm than conventional radiotherapy, and because of this, the resources, implementation, and workflows needed are unique. The purpose of this report is to outline our institution's experience establishing, organizing, and implementing an oART program using the Ethos therapy system.

METHODS

We include resources used, operational models utilized, program creation timelines, and our institutional experiences with the implementation and operation of an oART program. Additionally, we provide a detailed summary of our first year's clinical experience where we delivered over 1000 daily adaptive fractions. For all treatments, the different stages of online adaption, primary patient set-up, initial kV-CBCT acquisition, contouring review and edit of influencer structures, target review and edits, plan evaluation and selection, Mobius3D 2nd check and adaptive QA, 2nd kV-CBCT for positional verification, treatment delivery, and patient leaving the room, were analyzed.

RESULTS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 97 patients treated from August 2021-August 2022. One thousand six hundred seventy seven individual fractions were treated and analyzed, 632(38%) were non-adaptive and 1045(62%) were adaptive. Seventy four of the 97 patients (76%) were treated with standard fractionation and 23 (24%) received stereotactic treatments. For the adaptive treatments, the generated adaptive plan was selected in 92% of treatments. On average(±std), adaptive sessions took 34.52 ± 11.42 min from start to finish. The entire adaptive process (from start of contour generation to verification CBCT), performed by the physicist (and physician on select days), was 19.84 ± 8.21 min.

CONCLUSION

We present our institution's experience commissioning an oART program using the Ethos therapy system. It took us 12 months from project inception to the treatment of our first patient and 12 months to treat 1000 adaptive fractions. Retrospective analysis of delivered fractions showed that the average overall treatment time was approximately 35 min and the average time for the adaptive component of treatment was approximately 20 min.

Quantification of the role of lead foil in flattening filter free beam reference dosimetry

PURPOSE

To quantify the potential error in outputs for flattening filter free (FFF) beams associated with use of a lead foil in beam quality determination per the addendum protocol for TG-51, we examined differences in measurements of the beam quality conversion factor k_Q when using or not using lead foil.

METHODS

Two FFF beams, a 6 MV FFF and a 10 MV FFF, were calibrated on eight Varian TrueBeams and two Elekta Versa HD linear accelerators (linacs) according to the TG-51 addendum protocol by using Farmer ionization chambers [TN 30013 (PTW) and SNC600c (Sun Nuclear)] with traceable absorbed dose-to-water calibrations. In determining k_Q , the percentage depth-dose at 10 cm [PDD(10)] was measured with 10×10 cm² field size at 100 cm source-to-surface distance (SSD). PDD(10) values were measured either with a 1 mm lead foil positioned in the path of the beam [%dd(10)_Pb ] or with omission of a lead foil [%dd(10)]. The %dd(10)x values were then calculated and the k_Q factors determined by using the empirical fit equation in the TG-51 addendum for the PTW 30013 chambers. A similar equation was used to calculate k_Q for the SNC600c chamber, with the fitting parameters taken from a very recent Monte Carlo study. The differences in k_Q factors were compared for with lead foil vs. without lead foil.

RESULTS

Differences in %dd(10)x with lead foil and with omission of lead foil were 0.9 ± 0.2% for the 6 MV FFF beam and 0.6 ± 0.1% for the 10 MV FFF beam. Differences in k_Q values with lead foil and with omission of lead foil were -0.1 ± 0.02% for the 6 MV FFF and -0.1 ± 0.01% for the 10 MV FFF beams.

CONCLUSION

With evaluation of the lead foil role in determination of the k_Q factor for FFF beams. Our results suggest that the omission of lead foil introduces approximately 0.1% of error for reference dosimetry of FFF beams on both TrueBeam and Versa platforms.

AAPM WGTG51 Report 374: Guidance for TG-51 reference dosimetry

Practical guidelines that are not explicit in the TG-51 protocol and its Addendum for photon beam dosimetry are presented for the implementation of the TG-51 protocol for reference dosimetry of external high-energy photon and electron beams. These guidelines pertain to: (i) measurement of depth-ionization curves required to obtain beam quality specifiers for the selection of beam quality conversion factors, (ii) considerations for the dosimetry system and specifications of a reference-class ionization chamber, (iii) commissioning a dosimetry system and frequency of measurements, (iv) positioning/aligning the water tank and ionization chamber for depth ionization and reference dose measurements, (v) requirements for ancillary equipment needed to measure charge (triaxial cables and electrometers) and to correct for environmental conditions, and (vi) translation from dose at the reference depth to that at the depth required by the treatment planning system. Procedures are identified to achieve the most accurate results (errors up to 8% have been observed) and, where applicable, a commonly used simplified procedure is described and the impact on reference dosimetry measurements is discussed so that the medical physicist can be informed on where to allocate resources.

Clinical commissioning of an adaptive radiotherapy platform: Results and recommendations

Online adaptive radiotherapy platforms present a unique challenge for commissioning as guidance is lacking and specialized adaptive equipment, such as deformable phantoms, are rare. We designed a novel adaptive commissioning process consisting of end-to-end tests using standard clinical resources. These tests were designed to simulate anatomical changes regularly observed at patient treatments. The test results will inform users of the magnitude of uncertainty from on-treatment changes during the adaptive workflow and the limitations of their systems. We implemented these tests for the cone-beam computed tomography (CT)-based Varian Ethos online adaptive platform. Many adaptive platforms perform online dose calculation on a synthetic CT (synCT). To assess the impact of the synCT generation and online dose calculation on dosimetric accuracy, we conducted end-to-end tests using commonly available equipment: a CIRS IMRT Thorax phantom, PinPoint ionization chamber, Gafchromic film, and bolus. Four clinical scenarios were evaluated: weight gain and weight loss were simulated by adding and removing bolus, internal target shifts were simulated by editing the CTV during the adaptive workflow to displace it, and changes in gas were simulated by removing and reinserting rods in varying phantom locations. The effect of overriding gas pockets during planning was also assessed. All point dose measurements agreed within 2.7% of the calculated dose, with one exception: a scenario simulating gas present in the planning CT, not overridden during planning, and dissipating at treatment. Relative film measurements passed gamma analysis (3%/3 mm criteria) for all scenarios. Our process validated the Ethos dose calculation for online adapted treatment plans. Based on our results, we made several recommendations for our clinical adaptive workflow. This commissioning process used commonly available equipment and, therefore, can be applied in other clinics for their respective online adaptive platforms.

Using eclipse scripting to fully automate in-vivo image analysis to improve treatment quality and safety

PURPOSE

An automated, in-vivo system to detect patient anatomy changes and machine output was developed using novel analysis of in-vivo electronic portal imaging device (EPID) images for every fraction of treatment on a Varian Halcyon. In-vivo approach identifies errors that go undetected by routine quality assurance (QA) to compliment daily machine performance check (MPC), with minimal physicist workload.

METHODS

Images for all fractions treated on a Halcyon were automatically downloaded and analyzed at the end of treatment day. For image analysis, compared to first fraction, the mean difference of high-dose region of interest is calculated. This metric has shown to predict changes in planning treatment volume (PTV) mean dose. Flags are raised for: (Type-A) treatment fraction whose mean difference exceeds 10%, to protect against large errors, and (Type-B) patients with three consecutive fractions with mean exceeding ±3%, to protect against systematic trends. If a threshold is exceeded, a physicist is e-mailed, a report for flagged patients, for investigation. To track machine output changes, for all patients treated on a day, the average and standard deviations are uploaded to a QA portal, along with the reviewed MPC, ensuring comprehensive QA for the Halcyon. To guide clinical implementation, a retrospective study from November 2017 till December 2020 was conducted, which grouped errors by treatment site. This framework has been used prospectively since January 2021.

RESULTS

From retrospective data of 1633 patients (35 759 fractions), no Type-A errors were found and only 45 patients (2.76%) had Type-B errors. These Type-B deviations were due to head-and-neck weight loss. For 6 months of prospective use (345 patients), 13 patients (3.7%) had Type-B errors and no Type-A errors.

CONCLUSIONS

This automated system protects against errors that can occur in vivo to provide a more comprehensive QA. This fully automated framework can be implemented in other centers with a Halcyon, requiring a desktop computer and analysis scripts.

Operational Insights From the Longitudinal Analysis of a Linear Accelerator Machine Log

Purpose

This study aimed to perform a longitudinal analysis of linear accelerator (linac) technical faults reported with a cloud-based Machine Log system in use in a busy academic clinic and derive operational insights related to linac reliability, clinical utilization, and performance.

Methods

We queried the Machine Log system for the following parameters: linac type, number of reported technical faults, types of fault, number of faults where the linac was disabled, and estimated clinical downtime. The number of fractions treated and monitor units (MU) delivered were obtained from the record and verify system as metrics of linac utilization and to normalize the number of reported linac faults, facilitating inter-comparison. Two Varian TrueBeam C-arm linacs (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA), one Varian 21iX C-arm linac (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA), and one newly installed Varian Halcyon ring gantry linac (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) were evaluated. The linacs were studied over a 30-month period from September 2017 to March 2020. 

Results

Over 30 months, comprising 677 clinical days, 1234 faults were reported from all linacs, including 153 “linac down” events requiring rescheduling or cancellation of treatments. The TrueBeam linacs reported nearly twice as many imaging, multileaf collimator (MLC), and beam generation faults per fraction, and MU as the Halcyon. Halcyon experienced fewer beam generation/steering, accessory, and cooling-related faults than the other linacs but reported more computer and networking issues. Although it employs a relatively new MLC design compared to the C-arm linacs and delivers primarily intensity-modulated treatments, Halcyon reported fewer MLC faults than the other linacs. The 21iX linac had the fewest software-related faults but was subject to the most cooling-related faults, which we attributed to extensive use of this linac for treatment techniques with extended beam-on times.

Conclusions

A longitudinal analysis of a cloud-based Machine Log system yielded operational insights into the utilization, performance, and technical reliability of the linacs in use at our institution. Several trends in linac sub-system reliability were identified and could be attributed to either age, design, clinical use, or operational demands. The results of this analysis will be used as a basis for designing linac quality assurance schedules that reflect actual linac usage and observed sub-system reliability. Such a practice may contribute to a clinic workflow subject to fewer disruptions from linac faults, ultimately improving efficiency and patient safety.

Commissioning and quality assurance of HalcyonTM 2.0 linear accelerator

BACKGROUND

Varian Medical Systems has introduced a new medical linear accelerator called HalcyonTM 2.0, which is based on the ring delivery system (RDS). It is a true IGRT machine having 6MV FFF photon energy. In addition to the planar and MV-CBCT imaging techniques it also has an option of ultra-fast kV-iCBCT which enhances the image reconstruction and improves the visualization of soft tissue. The field portals are shaped by a unique dual layer MLC with special stacked and staggered design which enables high modulation with low radiation leakage. Recently, we have commissioned our first Halcyon 2.0 machine. The aim of this work was to systematically investigate various parameters of a newly installed HalcyonTM 2.0 linear accelerator.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Detailed measurements were conducted as per various guidelines. Also, the measurements were performed to fulfil the national regulatory requirements. Commissioning data of Halcyon 6 MV-FFF beam was performed in a water tank. For absolute measurements, a 0.6-cc waterproof Farmer chamber and electrometer were used. All relative measurements (PDDs, in-line, cross-line and angular profiles) were performed with 0.0125 cc point chamber.

RESULTS

All the tests were within the acceptable limit. Measured data were compared with factory data as well as the existing medical linear accelerator of the same category. The obtained results were quite satisfactory.

CONCLUSIONS

This study summarizes the commissioning experience with Halcyon linear accelerator. Evaluation of mechanical, radiation safety and dosimetric parameters were performed. The obtained parameters were well below the specified tolerance limits.

Effect of treatment planning system parameters on beam modulation complexity for treatment plans with single-layer multi-leaf collimator and dual-layer stacked multi-leaf collimator

OBJECTIVE

High levels of beam modulation complexity (MC) and monitor units (MU) can compromise the plan deliverability of intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatments. Our study evaluates the effect of three treatment planning system (TPS) parameters on MC and MU using different multi-leaf collimator (MLC) architectures.

METHODS

192 volumetric modulated arc therapy plans were calculated using one virtual prostate phantom considering three main settings: (1) three TPS-parameters (Convergence; Aperture Shape Controller, ASC; and Dose Calculation Resolution, DCR) selected from Eclipse v15.6, (2) four levels of dose-sparing priority for organs at risk (OAR), and (3) two treatment units with same nominal conformity resolution and different MLC architectures (Halcyon-v2 dual-layer MLC, DL-MLC & TrueBeam single-layer MLC, SL-MLC). We use seven complexity metrics to evaluate the MC, including two new metrics for DL-MLC, assessed by their correlation with γ passing rate (GPR) analysis.

RESULTS

DL-MLC plans demonstrated lower dose-sparing values than SL-MLC plans (p<0.05). TPS-parameters did not change significantly the complexity metrics for either MLC architectures. However, for SL-MLC, significant variations of MU, target volume dose-homogeneity, and dose spillage were associated with ASC and DCR (p<0.05). MU were found to be correlated (highly or moderately) with all complexity metrics (p<0.05) for both MLC plans. Additionally, our new complexity metrics presented a moderate correlation with GPR (r<0.65). An important correlation was demonstrated between MC (plan deliverability) and dose-sparing priority level for DL-MLC.

CONCLUSIONS

TPS-parameters selected do not change MC for DL-MLC architecture, but they might have a potential use to control the MU, PTV homogeneity or dose spillage for SL-MLC. Our new DL-MLC complexity metrics presented important information to be considered in future pre-treatment quality assurance programs. Finally, the prominent dependence between plan deliverability and priority applied to OAR dose sparing for DL-MLC needs to be analyzed and considered as an additional predictor of GPRs in further studies.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Dose-sparing priority might influence in modulation complexity of DL-MLC.

Patient-specific quality assurance on a Varian Halcyon linear accelerator using a PTW Octavius 4D device

This study investigates and validates the use of the Octavius 4D system for patient specific quality assurance on Halcyon, which is capable of rotating at 4 revolutions per minute (RPM). A commercially available PTW Octavius 4D system was used for this study which had a maximum rotation speed of 3 RPM. Initial validation included testing the accuracy of the inclinometer, percent depth doses (PDD), output factors, and dose profiles for selected static square fields. The same static fields were also subject to a gamma comparison with the TPS. This was followed by an evaluation of twelve clinical treatment plans and seven non-clinical plans with varying gantry rotation speeds. All testing was completed using detector array measurement times of 200 ms and 100 ms. Inclinometer accuracy was within 0.3° of actual gantry angle. Output factors varied less than 0.6%, PDD differences were no greater than 1.4%, and dose profile differences were less than 2.2%. Gamma pass rates for the static fields were 96.7% (2%/2mm) and 99.7% (3%/3mm). A prototype control unit, which had a maximum rotation speed of 4 RPM was also used to test the clinical and non-clinical plans. For the clinical plans, the mean gamma pass rates (2%/2mm) were 86.1% and 88.1% for the commercial unit and prototype unit respectively. Results using a measurement time of 200 ms were superior to those using 100 ms. For Halcyon deliveries greater than 3 RPM, worst case gamma results for the commercial unit were 28.6% compared to 98.5% using the prototype unit. Accurate patient specific quality assurance results can be obtained using the Octavius 4D system with a Halcyon linac, provided that the system measurement time is kept at 200 ms and the rotation speed of Halycon does not exceed 3 RPM. For higher RPM deliveries, an Octavius 4D unit with 4 RPM rotation capability is recommended.

Out-of-field doses from radiotherapy using photon beams: A comparative study for a pediatric renal treatment

PURPOSE

First, this experimental study aims at comparing out-of-field doses delivered by three radiotherapy techniques (3DCRT, VMAT (two different accelerators), and tomotherapy) for a pediatric renal treatment. Secondly, the accuracy of treatment planning systems (TPS) for out-of-field calculation is evaluated.

METHODS

EBT3 films were positioned in pediatric phantoms (5 and 10 yr old). They were irradiated according to four plans: 3DCRT (Clinac 2100CS, Varian), VMAT (Clinac 2100CS and Halcyon, Varian), and tomotherapy for a same target volume. 3D dose determination was performed with an in-house Matlab tool using linear interpolation of film measurements. 1D and 3D comparisons were made between techniques. Finally, measurements were compared to the Eclipse (Varian) and Tomotherapy (Accuray) TPS calculations.

RESULTS

Advanced radiotherapy techniques (VMATs and tomotherapy) deliver higher out-of-field doses compared to 3DCRT due to increased beam-on time triggered by intensity modulation. Differences increase with distance to target and reach a factor of 3 between VMAT and 3DCRT. Besides, tomotherapy delivers lower doses than VMAT: although tomotherapy beam-on time is higher than in VMAT, the additional shielding of the Hi-Art system reduces out-of-field doses. The latest generation Halcyon system proves to deliver lower peripheral doses than conventional accelerators. Regarding TPS calculation, tomotherapy proves to be suitable for out-of-field dose determination up to 30 cm from field edge whereas Eclipse (AAA and AXB) largely underestimates those doses.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the high dose conformation allowed by advanced radiotherapy is done at the cost of higher peripheral doses. In the context of treatment-related risk estimation, the consequence of this increase might be significative. Modern systems require adapted head shielding and a particular attention has to be taken regarding on-board imaging dose. Finally, TPS advanced dose calculation algorithms do not certify dose accuracy beyond field edges, and thus, those doses are not suitable for risk assessment.

Simplified sigmoidal curve fitting for a 6 MV FFF photon beam of the Halcyon to determine the field size for beam commissioning and quality assurance

Background

An O-ring gantry-type linear accelerator (LINAC) with a 6-MV flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beam, Halcyon, includes a reference beam that contains representative information such as the percent depth dose, profile and output factor for commissioning and quality assurance. However, because it does not provide information about the field size, we proposed a method to determine all field sizes according to all depths for radiation therapy using simplified sigmoidal curve fitting (SCF).

Methods

After mathematical definition of the SCF using four coefficients, the defined curves were fitted to both the reference data (RD) and the measured data (MD). For good agreement between the fitting curve and the profiles in each data set, the field sizes were determined by identifying the maximum point along the third derivative of the fitting curve. The curve fitting included the field sizes for beam profiles of 2 × 2, 4 × 4, 6 × 6, 8 × 8, 10 × 10, 20 × 20 and 28 × 28 cm² as a function of depth (at 1.3, 5, 10 and 20 cm). The field size results from the RD were compared with the results from the MD using the same condition.

Results

All fitting curves show goodness of fit, R², values that are greater than 0.99. The differences in field size between the RD and the MD were within the range of 0 to 0.2 cm. The smallest difference in the field sizes at a depth of 10 cm, which is a surface-to-axis distance, was reported.

Conclusion

Application of the SCF method has been proven to accurately capture the field size of the preconfigured RD and the measured FFF photon beam data for the Halcyon system. The current work can be useful for beam commissioning as a countercheck methodology to determine the field size from RD in the treatment planning system of a newly installed Halcyon system and for routine quality assurance to ascertain the correctness of field sizes for clinical use of the Halcyon system.

Automated and robust beam data validation of a preconfigured ring gantry linear accelerator using a 1D tank with synchronized beam delivery and couch motions

PURPOSE

To develop an efficient and automated methodology for beam data validation for a preconfigured ring gantry linear accelerator using scripting and a one-dimensional (1D) tank with automated couch motions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using an application programming interface, a program was developed to allow the user to choose a set of beam data to validate with measurement. Once selected the program generates a set of instructions for radiation delivery with synchronized couch motions for the linear accelerator in the form of an extensible markup language (XML) file to be delivered on the ring gantry linear accelerator. The user then delivers these beams while measuring with the 1D tank and data logging electrometer. The program also automatically calculates this set of beams on the measurement geometry within the treatment planning system (TPS) and extracts the corresponding calculated dosimetric data for comparison to measurement. Once completed the program then returns a comparison of the measurement to the predicted result from the TPS to the user and prints a report. In this work lateral, longitudinal, and diagonal profiles were taken for fields sizes of 6 × 6, 8 × 8, 10 × 10, 20 × 20, and 28 × 28 cm² at depths of 1.3, 5, 10, 20, and 30 cm. Depth dose profiles were taken for all field sizes.

RESULTS

Using this methodology, the TPS was validated to agree with measurement. All compared points yielded a gamma value less than 1 for a 1.5%/1.5 mm criteria (100% passing rate). Off axis profiles had >98.5% of data points producing a gamma value <1 with a 1%/1 mm criteria. All depth profiles produced 100% of data points with a gamma value <1 with a 1%/1 mm criteria. All data points measured were within 1.5% or 2 mm distance to agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

This methodology allows for an increase in automation in the beam data validation process. Leveraging the application program interface allows the user to use a single system to create the measurement files, predict the result, and then compare to actual measurement increasing efficiency and reducing the chance for user input errors.

Treatment planning comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy employing a dual-layer stacked multi-leaf collimator and helical tomotherapy for cervix uteri

Purpose

To ascertain the dosimetric performance of a new delivery system (the Halcyon system, H) equipped with dual-layer stacked multi-leaf collimator (MLC) for risk-adapted targets in cervix uteri cancer patients compared to another ring-based system in clinical operation (Helical Tomotherapy, HT).

Methods

Twenty patients were retrospectively included in a treatment planning study (10 with positive lymph nodes and 10 without). The dose prescription (45Gy to the primary tumour volume and a simultaneously integrated boost up to 55Gy for the positive patients) and the clinical planning objectives were defined consistently as recommended by an ongoing multicentric clinical trial. Halcyon plans were optimised for the volumetric modulated arc therapy. The plan comparison was performed employing the quantitative analysis of the dose-volume histograms.

Results

The coverage of the primary and nodal target volumes was comparable for both techniques and both subsets of patients. The primary planning target volume (PTV) receiving at least 95% of the prescription isodose ranged from 97.2 ± 1.1% (node-negative) to 99.1 ± 1.2% (node-positive) for H and from 96.5 ± 1.9% (node-negative) to 98.3 ± 0.9% (node-positive) for HT. The uncertainty is expressed at one standard deviation from the cohort of patient per each group. For the nodal clinical target volumes, the dose received by 98% of the planning target volume ranged 55.5 ± 0.1 to 56.0 ± 0.8Gy for H and HT, respectively. The only significant and potentially relevant differences were observed for the bowels. In this case, V_40Gy resulted 226.3 ± 35.9 and 186.9 ± 115.9 cm³ for the node-positive and node-negative patients respectively for Halcyon. The corresponding findings for HT were: 258.9 ± 60.5 and 224.9 ± 102.2 cm³. On the contrary, V_15Gy resulted 1279.7 ± 296.5 and 1557.2 ± 359.9 cm³ for HT and H respectively for node-positive and 1010.8 ± 320.9 versus 1203.8 ± 332.8 cm³ for node-negative.

Conclusion

This retrospective treatment planning study, based on the dose constraints derived from the Embrace II study protocol, suggested the essential equivalence between Halcyon based and Helical Tomotherapy based plans for the intensity-modulated rotational treatment of cervix uteri cancer. Different levels of sparing were observed for the bowels with H better protecting in the high-dose region and HT in the mid-low dose regions. The clinical impact of these differences should be further addressed.

[Comparison of O-ring and General Linacs for Treatment Planning of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy]

PURPOSE

Novel linac improvements in speed of gantry, collimator, leaf and dose rate may increase the time-efficiency of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery, however remains to be investigated. In this study, a fast-rotating O-ring linac (Halcyon) with fast moving leaves is compared with a general linac (TrueBeam: TB) in terms of plan quality for VMAT of C-shape, prostate, multi target and, head and neck (H&N) cases from AAPM TG-119.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For the four test cases, VMAT planning was performed using single to four-arc VMAT on a Halcyon and using single to three-arc VMAT on a TrueBeam. Same conditions for optimization were used in each test case. Target coverage metrics and organ at risks (OAR) dose were compared. Monitor unit (MU) and irradiation time in each plan were also compared.

RESULTS

In all cases, single-arc plans of Halcyon were inferior to TB plans on dose objectives. Conformity index (CI) to outer target of C-shape case was better for Halcyon (1-arc: 1.242, 2-arc: 1.202, 3-arc: 1.198, 4-arc: 1.181) than for TB (1-arc: 1.247, 2-arc: 1.211, 3-arc: 1.211) except to single arc. D₅ (Gy) of core for C-shape case was better for halcyon (1-arc: 23.29, 2-arc: 21.01, 3-arc: 20.64, 4-arc: 20.47) than for TB (1-arc: 24.04, 2-arc: 22.94, 3-arc: 23.04). Calculated MU was smaller for Halcyon than for TB. In addition, Halcyon is more faster than TB because mechanical movements were improved.

CONCLUSION

For VMAT plan in each case, Halcyon as well or better at the plan quality of two or three arcs on TB while reducing the delivery time.

Technical Note: Dosimetric characterization of the dynamic beam flattening MLC sequence on a ring shaped, Jawless Linear Accelerator with double stacked MLC

PURPOSE

To characterize the dosimetric features and limitations of the dynamic beam flattening (DBF) on the Halcyon 2.0 linear accelerator (Varian Medical Systems).

METHODS

A predefined multi-leaf collimator (MLC) sequence was introduced and used to flatten the 6 MV flattening filter free (FFF) beam on the Halcyon 2.0. Dosimetric characterizations of the flattened beams, including beam flatness, symmetry, percent depth dose (PDD), output factor and MU linearity, were investigated. Flatness and symmetry were obtained from profile measurements with both radiographic films (EDR2) and a two dimensional ion-chamber array (IC Profiler, Sun Nuclear Corporation). MU linearity, output factors, and PDDs were measured in a water tank with a CC13 ion chamber (Scanditronix Wellhöfer, Nuremburg, Germany). In addition, the effect of the DBF sequence on 3D plan quality was evaluated by creating DBF plans for a 4-field box rectum and an AP/PA spine plan. Patient specific QA was performed on these plans.

RESULTS

At 100 cm SSD and 10 cm depth, a flatness of <3% was observed on both transversal and radial profiles for all square field sizes ≥10 cm with DBF. For both larger and smaller field sizes the flatness showed a tendency to increase as the fields got bigger or smaller, respectively. Similar trends in flatness were observed at all depths measured. All measured output factors for square field sizes ≥5 cm were within 1% of the TPS prediction. Linearity was ≤2.02% for all measurements. For both treatment sites, the MD judged the plans created for the Halcyon without the use of DBF not to be clinically acceptable, however considered both the TrueBeam plan and the Halcyon plan with the DBF sequence to be clinically acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

The DBF sequence on the Halcyon and its characteristics were investigated. The analysis indicates that the DBF sequence can be used on the Halcyon to generate clinically acceptable 3D treatment plans.

Early clinical experience with varian halcyon V2 linear accelerator: Dual-isocenter IMRT planning and delivery with portal dosimetry for gynecological cancer treatments

PURPOSE

Varian Halcyon linear accelerator version 2 (The Halcyon 2.0) was recently released with new upgraded features. The aim of this study was to report our clinical experience with Halcyon 2.0 for a dual-isocenter intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning and delivery for gynecological cancer patients and examine the feasibility of in vivo portal dosimetry.

METHODS

Twelve gynecological cancer patients were treated with extended-field IMRT technique using two isocenters on Halcyon 2.0 to treat pelvis and pelvic/or para-aortic nodes region. The prescription dose was 45 Gy in 25 fractions (fxs) with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) dose of 55 or 57.5 Gy in 25 fxs to involved nodes. All treatment plans, pretreatment patient-specific QA and treatment delivery records including daily in vivo portal dosimetry were retrospectively reviewed. For in vivo daily portal dosimetry analysis, each fraction was compared to the reference baseline (1st fraction) using gamma analysis criteria of 4 %/4 mm with 90% of total pixels in the portal image planar dose.

RESULTS

All 12 extended-field IMRT plans met the planning criteria and delivered as planned (a total of 300 fractions). Conformity Index (CI) for the primary target was achieved with the range of 0.99-1.14. For organs at risks, most were well within the dose volume criteria. Treatment delivery time was from 5.0 to 6.5 min. Interfractional in vivo dose variation exceeded gamma analysis threshold for 8 fractions out of total 300 (2.7%). These eight fractions were found to have a relatively large difference in small bowel filling and SSD change at the isocenter compared to the baseline.

CONCLUSION

Halcyon 2.0 is effective to create complex extended-field IMRT plans using two isocenters with efficient delivery. Also Halcyon in vivo dosimetry is feasible for daily treatment monitoring for organ motion, internal or external anatomy, and body weight which could further lead to adaptive radiation therapy.

Acceptance and verification of the Halcyon-Eclipse linear accelerator-treatment planning system without 3D water scanning system

We tested whether an ionization chamber array (ICA) and a one-dimensional water scanner (1DS) could be used instead of a three-dimensional water scanning system (3DWS) for acceptance testing and commissioning verification of the Varian Halcyon-Eclipse Treatment Planning System (TPS). The Halcyon linear accelerator has a single 6-MV flattening-filter-free beam and a nonadjustable beam model for the TPS. Beam data were measured with a 1DS, ICA, ionization chambers, and electrometer. Acceptance testing and commissioning were done simultaneously by comparing the measured data with TPS-calculated percent-depth-dose (PDD) and profiles. The ICA was used to measure profiles of various field sizes (10-, 20-, and 28 cm² ) at depths of d_max (1.3 cm), 5-, 10-, and 20 cm. The 1DS was used for output factors (OFs) and PDDs. OFs were measured with 1DS for various fields (2-28 cm² ) at a source-to-surface distance of 90 cm. All measured data were compared with TPS-calculations. Profiles, off-axis ratios (OAR), PDDs and OFs were also measured with a 3DWS as a secondary check. Profiles between the ICA and TPS (ICA and 3DWS) at various depths across the fields indicated that the maximum discrepancies in high-dose and low-dose tail were within 2% and 3%, respectively, and the maximum distance-to-agreement in the penumbra region was <3 mm. The largest OAR differences between ICA and TPS (ICA and 3DWS) values were 0.23% (-0.25%) for a 28 × 28 cm² field, and the largest point-by-point PDD differences between 1DS and TPS (1DS and 3DWS) were -0.41% ± 0.12% (-0.32% ± 0.17%) across the fields. Both OAR and PDD showed the beam energy is well matched to the TPS model. The average ratios of 1DS-measured OFs to the TPS (1DS to 3DWS) values were 1.000 ± 0.002 (0.999 ± 0.003). The Halcyon-Eclipse system can be accepted and commissioned without the need for a 3DWS.

Clinical safety assessment of the Halcyon system

PURPOSE

The Halcyon consists of precommissioned linear accelerator and treatment planning algorithms that were designed to simplify the acceptance, commissioning, and clinical workflow for image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy. The purpose of this work was to perform a comprehensive safety assessment for the clinical use of the Halcyon.

METHODS

Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis was used as the safety assessment tool. As part of the analysis, a number of control loops and control actions are created to describe system function. Safety is assessed by determining unsafe control actions and a corresponding list of causal scenarios that leads to accidents. The scope of the analysis was from the acceptance of the Halcyon to routine patient treatments. All aspects of treating patients were considered including the roles of physicians, physicists, dosimetrists, and therapists. The analysis was completed by four physicists with input from other members of the radiation therapy team. The causal scenarios were summarized using the causality categories from the consensus recommendations for incident learning database structures in radiation oncology (Med Phys, Vol. 39, No. 12, Dec 2012).

RESULTS

Twenty-three (23) control loops containing 52 control actions were created for the clinical use of the Halcyon. One hundred forty-four (144) unsafe control actions were identified with 385 associated causal scenarios. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of the causal scenarios were related to equipment technical issues, while 73% of the causal scenarios were predominantly related to procedural issues, human behavior, and organizational management.

CONCLUSIONS

For routine clinical use of closed or largely automated radiation therapy equipment, the majority of safety concerns is related to nontechnical issues. The Halcyon and other similar systems may present opportunities to streamline, reduce, or eliminate some traditional equipment commissioning and routine quality assurance activities in exchange for an increased focus on issues related to organizational management, procedures, and human behavior.

Characterization of the HalcyonTM multileaf collimator system

PURPOSE

To characterize the stacked and staggered dual-layer multileaf collimator (MLC) on the Halcyon^TM system.

METHODS

The novel MLC assembly was reviewed and compared to the widely used Millennium^TM 120-leaf MLC system. We investigated the MLC positioning stability over 70 days using Machine Performance Check (MPC) data. We evaluated the leaf transmission, penumbra, leaf end effect, and leaf edge effect. Leaf transmission through distal, proximal, and both MLC layers was measured with a Farmer chamber, by comparing an open and a closed field. Leaf penumbra was measured using film for three different MLC-defined field sizes. The leaf end effect was measured with sweeping gap fields of varying gap sizes defined by the distal MLC. The leaf edge effect was evaluated using the Electronic Portal Imaging Device (EPID) for the different banks, gantry positions, and collimator angles. Point dose measurements for 10 test plans were compared to dose predictions of two dose calculation model versions.

RESULTS

From MPC data, the largest measured MLC positioning accuracy deviation was within 0.1 mm. The proximal MLC exhibited greater deviations compared to the distal MLC. The distal-and-proximal-combination had reduced inter-leaf and intra-leaf transmission compared to delivery with distal-only. The measured leaf transmission was 0.41% for distal-only, 0.40% for proximal-only, and negligible for distal-and-proximal-combination. The leaf end penumbra was wider compared to the leaf edge penumbra. The leaf end effect was measured to be -0.2 mm. The leaf edge effect showed minimal bank, gantry position, and collimator angle dependence. However, a systematic deviation between measurements and treatment planning system handling of the leaf edge effect was observed. The discrepancy between the measured and predicted dose in the 10 test plans improved with the latest version of the dose calculation algorithm.

CONCLUSION

The characteristics of the stacked and staggered dual-layer MLC on the Halcyon^TM system were presented.

Critical Appraisal of the Treatment Planning Performance of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy by Means of a Dual Layer Stacked Multileaf Collimator for Head and Neck, Breast, and Prostate

Purpose:

To ascertain whether a new delivery system (the Halcyon system) equipped with dual-layer stacked multileaf collimator operating in a mode, which allows independent, fully interdigitating motion of both layers and 6 flattening filter free energy, could generate plans of high clinical quality compared to a well-established delivery system with single layer multileaf collimator.

Methods:

Twenty patients in each of the 3 groups (advanced head and neck, breast, and high-risk prostate) were selected for an in silico planning study. For each patient, reference plans were developed for volumetric modulated arc therapy technique with 6 MV photon beams from a TrueBeam linear accelerator and compared against the corresponding plans for the Halcyon system. Plan comparison was performed in terms of dose volume histogram quantitative analysis.

Results:

Concerning the planning target volumes, with identical dose calculation and optimization algorithms and with identical planning techniques, no clinically relevant difference in coverage (D_98%), hot spot (D_2%), or homogeneity was observed. Similarly, for all the organs at risk, the dosimetric findings showed that (1) all planning constraints were met by the 2 delivery systems and (2) although statistical significant differences were reported for most of the parameters but none of these were judged of potential clinical relevance.

Conclusion:

The data presented confirmed that the new delivery system can generate treatment plans for volumetric modulated arc therapy with the same dosimetric quality of what is achievable with other systems routinely used in the clinics without significantly changing the current practice. Additional studies which customize the optimization parameters for each delivery device would complement the spectrum of investigations.