Micro ionization chamber dosimetry in IMRT verification: Clinical implications of dosimetric errors in the PTV

Monte Carlo methods for device simulations in radiation therapy

Monte Carlo (MC) simulations play an important role in radiotherapy, especially as a method to evaluate physical properties that are either impossible or difficult to measure. For example, MC simulations (MCSs) are used to aid in the design of radiotherapy devices or to understand their properties. The aim of this article is to review the MC method for device simulations in radiation therapy. After a brief history of the MC method and popular codes in medical physics, we review applications of the MC method to model treatment heads for neutral and charged particle radiation therapy as well as specific in-room devices for imaging and therapy purposes. We conclude by discussing the impact that MCSs had in this field and the role of MC in future device design.

Determination of small-field correction factors for cylindrical ionization chambers using a semiempirical method

A semiempirical method based on the averaging effect of the sensitive volumes of different air-filled ionization chambers (ICs) was employed to approximate the correction factors for beam quality produced from the difference in the sizes of the reference field and small fields.We measured the output factors using several cylindrical ICs and calculated the correction factors using a mathematical method similar to deconvolution; in the method, we modeled the variable and inhomogeneous energy fluence function within the chamber cavity. The parameters of the modeled function and the correction factors were determined by solving a developed system of equations as well as on the basis of the measurement data and the geometry of the chambers. Further, Monte Carlo (MC) computations were performed using the Monaco® treatment planning system to validate the proposed method.The determined correction factors () were comparable to the values derived from the MC computations performed using Monaco®. For example, for a 6 MV photon beam and a field size of 1  ×  1 cm2, was calculated to be for a PTW 31010 chamber and for a PTW 31016 chamber. On the other hand, the values determined from the MC computations were 1.121 and 1.031, respectively; the difference between the proposed method and the MC computation is less than 2%. In addition, we determined the values for PTW 30013, PTW 31010, PTW 31016, IBA FC23-C, and IBA CC13 chambers as well.We devised a method for determining from both the measurement of the output factors and model-based mathematical computation. The proposed method can be useful in case the MC simulation would not be applicable for the clinical settings.

Step-and-Shoot IMRT by Siemens Beams: An EPID Dosimetry Verification During Treatment

PURPOSE

This work reports the extension of a semiempirical method based on the correlation ratios to convert electronic portal imaging devices transit signals into in vivo doses for the step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy Siemens beams. The dose reconstructed at the isocenter point Diso, compared to the planned dose, Diso,TPS, and a γ-analysis between 2-dimensional electronic portal imaging device images obtained day to day, seems to supply a practical method to verify the beam delivery reproducibility.

METHOD

The electronic portal imaging device images were obtained by the superposition of many segment fields, and the algorithm for the Diso reconstruction for intensity-modulated radiotherapy step and shoot was formulated using a set of simulated intensity-modulated radiotherapy beams. Moreover, the in vivo dose-dedicated software was integrated with the record and verify system of the centers.

RESULTS

Three radiotherapy centers applied the in vivo dose procedure at 30 clinical intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatments, each one obtained with 5 or 7 beams, and planned for patients undergoing radiotherapy for prostatic tumors. Each treatment beam was checked 5 times, obtaining 900 tests of the ratios R = Diso/Diso,TPS. The average R value was equal to 1.002 ± 0.056 (2 standard deviation), while the mean R value for each patient was well within 5%, once the causes of errors were removed. The γ-analysis of the electronic portal imaging device images, with 3% 3 mm acceptance criteria, showed 90% of the tests with Pγ < 1 ≥ 95% and γmean ≤ 0.5. The off-tolerance tests were found due to incorrect setup or presence of morphological changes. This preliminary experience shows the great utility of obtaining the in vivo dose results in quasi real time and close to the linac, where the radiotherapy staff may immediately spot possible causes of errors. The in vivo dose procedure presented here is one of the objectives of a project, for the development of practical in vivo dose procedures, financially supported by the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare.

aSi-EPID transit signal calibration for dynamic beams: a needful step for the IMRT in vivo dosimetry

This work reports a method based on correlation functions to convert EPID transit signals into in vivo dose values at the isocenter point, D_iso, of dynamic IMRT beams supplied by Varian linac. Dose reconstruction for intensity-modulated beams required significant corrections of EPID response, due to the X-ray component transmitted through multileaf collimator. The algorithm was formulated using a set of simulated IMRT beams. The beams were parameterized by means of a fluence inhomogeneity index, FI, introduced to describe the degree of beam modulation with respect to open beams. This way, all dosimetric parameters involved in D_iso reconstruction algorithm, such as the correlation functions, the correction factor for EPID to phantom distance and the modulated tissue maximum ratios, were determined as a function of the FI index. Clinical IMRT beams were used to irradiate a homogeneous phantom, and for each beam, the agreement between the reconstructed dose, D_iso, and the dose computed by TPS, D_iso,TPS, was well within 5 %. Moreover, the average ratios, R, between the D_iso, and D_iso,TPS, resulted equal to 1.002 ± 0.030. Thirty-five IMRT fields of 5 different patients undergoing radiotherapy for head–neck tumors were tested and the results were displayed on a computer screen after 2 min from the end of the treatment. However, 350 in vivo tests supplied an average ratio R equal to 1.004 ± 0.040. The in vivo dosimetry procedure here presented is among the objectives of a National Project financially supported by the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare for the development of in vivo dosimetry procedures (Piermattei et al. in Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res B 274:42–50, 2012) connected to the Record–Verify system of the radiotherapy center.

A patient-specific quality assurance study on absolute dose verification using ionization chambers of different volumes in RapidArc treatments

The recalculation of 1 fraction from a patient treatment plan on a phantom and subsequent measurements have become the norms for measurement-based verification, which combines the quality assurance recommendations that deal with the treatment planning system and the beam delivery system. This type of evaluation has prompted attention to measurement equipment and techniques. Ionization chambers are considered the gold standard because of their precision, availability, and relative ease of use. This study evaluates and compares 5 different ionization chambers: phantom combinations for verification in routine patient-specific quality assurance of RapidArc treatments. Fifteen different RapidArc plans conforming to the clinical standards were selected for the study. Verification plans were then created for each treatment plan with different chamber-phantom combinations scanned by computed tomography. This includes Medtec intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) phantom with micro-ionization chamber (0.007 cm(3)) and pinpoint chamber (0.015 cm(3)), PTW-Octavius phantom with semiflex chamber (0.125 cm(3)) and 2D array (0.125 cm(3)), and indigenously made Circular wax phantom with 0.6 cm(3) chamber. The measured isocenter absolute dose was compared with the treatment planning system (TPS) plan. The micro-ionization chamber shows more deviations when compared with semiflex and 0.6 cm(3) with a maximum variation of -4.76%, -1.49%, and 2.23% for micro-ionization, semiflex, and farmer chambers, respectively. The positive variations indicate that the chamber with larger volume overestimates. Farmer chamber shows higher deviation when compared with 0.125 cm(3). In general the deviation was found to be <1% with the semiflex and farmer chambers. A maximum variation of 2% was observed for the 0.007 cm(3) ionization chamber, except in a few cases. Pinpoint chamber underestimates the calculated isocenter dose by a maximum of 4.8%. Absolute dose measurements using the semiflex ionization chamber with intermediate volume (0.125 cm(3)) shows good agreement with the TPS calculated among the detectors used in this study. Positioning is very important when using smaller volume chambers because they are more sensitive to geometrical errors within the treatment fields. It is also suggested to average the dose over the sensitive volume for larger-volume chambers. The ionization chamber-phantom combinations used in this study can be used interchangeably for routine RapidArc patient-specific quality assurance with a satisfactory accuracy for clinical practice.

Optimized point dose measurement for monitor unit verification in intensity modulated radiation therapy using 6 MV photons by three different methodologies with different detector-phantom combinations: A comparative study

The study was aimed to compare accuracy of monitor unit verification in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using 6 MV photons by three different methodologies with different detector phantom combinations. Sixty patients were randomly chosen. Zero degree couch and gantry angle plans were generated in a plastic universal IMRT verification phantom and 30×30×30 cc water phantom and measured using 0.125 cc and 0.6 cc chambers, respectively. Actual gantry and couch angle plans were also measured in water phantom using 0.6 cc chamber. A suitable point of measurement was chosen from the beam profile for each field. When the zero-degree gantry, couch angle plans and actual gantry, couch angle plans were measured by 0.6 cc chamber in water phantom, the percentage mean difference (MD) was 1.35%, 2.94 % and Standard Deviation (SD) was 2.99%, 5.22%, respectively. The plastic phantom measurements with 0.125 cc chamber Semiflex ionisation chamber (SIC) showed an MD=4.21% and SD=2.73 %, but when corrected for chamber-medium response, they showed an improvement, with MD=3.38 % and SD=2.59 %. It was found that measurements with water phantom and 0.6cc chamber at gantry angle zero degree showed better conformity than other measurements of medium-detector combinations. Correction in plastic phantom measurement improved the result only marginally, and actual gantry angle measurement in a flat- water phantom showed higher deviation.

Statistical analysis of IMRT dosimetry quality assurance measurements for local delivery guideline

Purpose

To establish our institutional guideline for IMRT delivery, we statistically evaluated the results of dosimetry quality assurance (DQA) measurements and derived local confidence limits using the concept confidence limit of |mean|+1.96σ.

Materials and methods

From June 2006 to March 2009, 206 patients with head and neck cancer, prostate cancer, liver cancer, or brain tumor were treated using LINAC-based IMRT technique. In order to determine site specific DQA tolerances at a later stage, a hybrid plan with the same fluence maps as in the treatment plan was generated on CT images of a cylindrical phantom of acryl. Points of measurement using a 0.125 cm³ ion-chamber were typically located in the region of high and uniform doses. The planar dose distributions perpendicular to the central axis were measured by using a diode array in solid water with all fields delivered, and assessed using gamma criteria of 3%/3 mm. The mean values and standard deviations were used to develop the local confidence and tolerance limits. The dose differences and gamma pass rates for the different treatment sites were also evaluated in terms of total monitor uints (MU), MU/cGy, and the number of PTV's pieces.

Results

The mean values and standard deviations of ion-chamber dosimetry differences between calculated and measured doses were -1.6 ± 1.2% for H&N cancer, -0.4 ± 1.2% for prostate and abdominal cancer, and -0.6 ± 1.5% for brain tumor. Most of measured doses (92.2%) agreed with the calculated doses within a tolerance limit of ±3% recommended in the literature. However, we found some systematic under-dosage for all treatment sites. The percentage of points passing the gamma criteria, averaged over all treatment sites was 97.3 ± 3.7%. The gamma pass rate and the agreement of ion-chamber dosimetry generally decreased with increasing the number of PTV's pieces, the degree of modulation (MU/cGy), and the total MU beyond 700. Our local confidence limits were comparable to those of AAPM TG 119 and ESTRO guidelines that were provided as a practical baseline for center-to-center commissioning comparison. Thus, our institutional confidence and action limits for IMRT delivery were set into the same levels of those guidelines.

Discussion and Conclusions

The systematic under-dosage were corrected by tuning up the MLC-related factors (dosimetric gap and transmission) in treatment planning system (TPS) and further by incorporating the tongue-and groove effect into TPS. Institutions that have performed IMRT DQA measurements over a certain period of time need to analyze their accrued DQA data. We confirmed the overall integrity of our IMRT system and established the IMRT delivery guideline during this procedure. Dosimetric corrections for the treatment plans outside of the action level can be suggested only with such rigorous DQA and statistical analysis.

Characterization of cylindrical ionization chambers for patient specific IMRT QA

Proven conventional dosimetry techniques do not provide accuracy and precision in the measurement of inverse planned intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) fields. Dynamic and step-and-shoot multileaf collimation (DMLC/SMLC) challenge current ionization chamber dosimetry practices. Ionization chamber performance in these fields is evaluated for three cylindrical chambers of varying volumes (PinPoint (PP): 0.015 cm3, IC10: 0.13 cm3, Farmer type NE2571 (FT): 0.69 cm3) in terms of measurement reproducibility, dose measurement linearity, and IMRT dose measurements. Fifty IMRT patient specific quality assurance dose measurements were performed with each chamber. DMLC measurements are compared between chambers, and to dose calculations from a commercial treatment planning system (TPS) that used a finite size pencil beam model (FSPB). Ten SMLC measurements are compared to Monte Carlo simulations available in the TPS. The three chambers demonstrated adequate measurement reproducibility characteristics for both open and DMLC fields with each chamber able to perform within 2% (2SD) for DMLC fields. Both smaller volume chambers over responded (> 5%) when irradiated with a small number of monitor units in open fields. FT and IC10 chambers demonstrated dose linearity in DMLC fields down to 10 monitor units, while dose linearity for the PP chamber broke down at 100 monitor units. The evaluation of fifty DMLC treatment plan quality assurance procedures revealed that the FT chamber measurements were closest to the FSPB calculated values (FSPB: 1.0, FT: 0.973 +/- 0.044, IC10: 0.963 +/- 0.048, PP: 0.944 +/- 0.071). Quality assurance plans calculated independently with Monte Carlo more closely matched chamber measurements (FSPB: 1.0, MC: 0.97, FT: 0.95). Measurements of absorbed dose to water in IMRT fields are highly chamber and IMRT plan dependent.

Optimized point dose measurement: An effective tool for QA in intensity-modulated radiotherapy

In some cases of Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) point dose measurement, there exists significant deviation between calculated and measured dose at isocenter, sometimes greater than ±3%. This may be because IMRT fields generate complex profiles at the reference point. The deviation arises due to lack of lateral electronic equilibrium for small fields, and other factors such as leakage and scatter contribution. Measurements were done using 0.125-cc ion chamber and Universal IMRT phantom (both from PTW-Freiburg). The aim is to find a suitable point of measurement for the chamber to avoid discrepancy between calculated and measured dose. Various beam profiles were generated in the plane of the chamber for each field by implementing patient plan on the IMRT phantom. The profiles show that for the fields which are showing deviation, the ion chamber lies in the steep-gradient region. To rectify the problem, the TPS (Treatment Planning System) calculated dose is found out at various points in the measurement plane of the chamber at isocenter. The necessary displacement to the chamber, as noted from the TPS, was given to obtain the optimum result. Twenty cases were studied for optimization, whose percentage deviation was more than ±3%. The results were well within tolerance criteria of ±3% after optimization. The mean percentage deviation value for the 20 cases studied, with standard deviation of 2.33 under 95% confidence interval, was found out to be 2.10% ± 1.14. Those cases that have significant variation even after optimization are further studied with film dosimetry.

The change of response of ionization chambers in the penumbra and transmission regions: impact for IMRT verification

Significant deviations from the expected dose have been reported in the absolute dosimetry validation of an intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment when individual segments are analyzed. However, when full treatment is considered and all segment doses are added together, these discrepancies fade out, leading to overall dose deviations below a 5% action level. This contradictory behavior may be caused by a partial compensation between detector over-responding and under-responding for measurement conditions far from radiation equilibrium. We consider three treatment verification scenarios that may lead to ionization chamber miss-responding, namely: narrow beam irradiation, field penumbra location and multi-leaf collimator transmission contribution. In this work we have analyzed the response of three different ionization chambers with different active volume under these conditions by means of Monte Carlo (MC) simulation methods. Correction factors needed to convert the detector readout into actual dose to water were calculated by inserting the specific detector geometry (carefully modeled) into the simulations. This procedure required extensive use of parallel computing resources in order to achieve the desired level of uncertainty in the final results. The analysis of the simulations shows the relative contribution of each of the three previously mentioned miss-responding scenarios. Additionally, we provide some evidence on dose deviation compensation in multi-segment radiotherapy treatment verification.

Uncertainty estimation in intensity-modulated radiotherapy absolute dosimetry verification

PURPOSE

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) represents an important method for improving RT. The IMRT relative dosimetry checks are well established; however, open questions remain in reference dosimetry with ionization chambers (ICs). The main problem is the departure of the measurement conditions from the reference ones; thus, additional uncertainty is introduced into the dose determination. The goal of this study was to assess this effect systematically.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Monte Carlo calculations and dosimetric measurements with five different detectors were performed for a number of representative IMRT cases, covering both step-and-shoot and dynamic delivery.

RESULTS

Using ICs with volumes of about 0.125 cm(3) or less, good agreement was observed among the detectors in most of the situations studied. These results also agreed well with the Monte Carlo-calculated nonreference correction factors (c factors). Additionally, we found a general correlation between the IC position relative to a segment and the derived correction factor c, which can be used to estimate the expected overall uncertainty of the treatment.

CONCLUSION

The increase of the reference dose relative standard uncertainty measured with ICs introduced by nonreference conditions when verifying an entire IMRT plan is about 1-1.5%, provided that appropriate small-volume chambers are used. The overall standard uncertainty of the measured IMRT dose amounts to about 2.3%, including the 0.5% of reproducibility and 1.5% of uncertainty associated with the beam calibration factor. Solid state detectors and large-volume chambers are not well suited to IMRT verification dosimetry because of the greater uncertainties. An action level of 5% is appropriate for IMRT verification. Greater discrepancies should lead to a review of the dosimetric procedure, including visual inspection of treatment segments and energy fluence.

Intensity modulated radiotherapy dosimetry with ion chambers, TLD, MOSFET and EDR2 film

Purpose of this study was to report in a together our experience of using ion chambers, TLD, MOSFET and EDR2 film for dosimetric verification of IMRT plans delivered with dynamic multileaf collimator (DMLC). Two ion chambers (0.6 and 0.13 CC) were used. All measurements were performed with a 6MV photon beam on a Varian Clinac 6EX LINAC equipped with a Millennium MLC. All measurements were additionally carried out with (LiF:Mg,TI) TLD chips. Five MOSFET detectors were also irradiated. EDR2 films were used to measure coronal planar dose for 10 patients. Measurements were carried out simultaneously for cumulative fields at central axis and at off-axis at isocenter plane (+/- 1, and +/- 2 cm). The mean percentage variation between measured cumulative central axis dose with 0.6 cc ion chamber and calculated dose with TPS was -1.4% (SD 3.2). The mean percentage variation between measured cumulative absolute central axis dose with 0.13 cc ion chamber and calculated dose with TPS was -0.6% (SD 1.9). The mean percentage variation between measured central axis dose with TLD and calculated dose with TPS was -1.8% (SD 2.9). A variation of less than 5% was found between measured off-axis doses with TLD and calculated dose with TPS. For all the cases, MOSFET agreed within +/- 5%. A good agreement was found between measured and calculated isodoses. Both ion chambers (0.6 CC and 0.13 CC) were found in good agreement with calculated dose with TPS.

A new method for output factor determination in MLC shaped narrow beams

A new method for the measurement of output factors of narrow beams is presented in this work. By combining a new large area parallel plane ionization chamber (PTW model T34070) with a relative film dosimetry the output factors of small square fields of a 6 MV beam shaped by a MLC were measured. Several detectors (three ionization chambers, two solid state detectors and film) and Monte Carlo simulation were also employed to validate this new methodology and also to determine those detectors more suitable for narrow beam output factor determination. The proposed method for output factor measurement has shown to be in a very good agreement with diamond, diode and Monte Carlo results while it is insensitive to position displacements. Several uncertainties associated to the process of narrow beam dosimetry have also been addressed.

Monte Carlo correction factors for a Farmer 0.6 cm3ion chamber dose measurement in the build-up region of the 6 MV clinical beam

Reference dosimetry of photon fields is a well-established subject and currently available protocols (such as the IAEA TRS-398 and AAPM TG-51) provide methods for converting the ionization chamber (IC) reading into dose to water, provided reference conditions of charged particle equilibrium (CPE) are fulfilled. But these protocols cannot deal with the build-up region, where the lack of CPE limits the applicability of the cavity theorems and so the chamber correction factors become depth dependent. By explicitly including the IC geometry in the Monte Carlo simulations, depth-dependent dose correction factors are calculated for a PTW 30001 0.6 cm(3) ion chamber in the build-up region of the 6 MV photon beam. The corrected percentage depth dose (PDD) agrees within 2% with that measured using the NACP 02 plane-parallel ion chamber in the build-up region at depths greater than 0.4 cm, where the Farmer chamber wall reaches the phantom surface.