Retrospective analysis of 2D patient-specific IMRT verifications

Retrospective analysis of portal dosimetry pre-treatment quality assurance of intracranial SRS/SRT VMAT treatment plans

Background:

The complexity associated with the treatment planning and delivery of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans which employs continuous dynamic modulation of dose rate, field aperture and gantry speed necessitates diligent pre-treatment patient-specific quality assurance (QA). Numerous techniques for pre-treatment VMAT treatment plans QA are currently available with the aid of several different devices including the electronic portal imager (EPID). Although several studies have provided recommendations for gamma criteria for VMAT pre-treatment QA, there are no specifics for SRS/SRT VMAT QA. Thus, we conducted a study to evaluate intracranial SRS/SRT VMAT QA to determine clinical action levels for gamma criteria based on the institutional estimated means and standard deviations.

Materials and methods:

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 118 EPID patient-specific pre-treatment QA dosimetric measurements of 47 brain SRS/SRT VMAT treatment plans using the integrated Varian solution (RapidArcTM planning, EPID and Portal dosimetry system) for planning, delivery and EPID QA analysis. We evaluated the maximum gamma (γmax), average gamma (γave) and percentage gamma passing rate (%GP) for different distance-to-agreement/dose difference (DTA/DD) criteria and low-dose thresholds.

Results:

The gamma index analysis shows that for patient-specific SRS/SRT VMAT QA with the portal dosimetry, the mean %GP is ≥98% for 2–3 mm/1–3% and Field+0%, +5% and +10% low-dose thresholds. When applying stricter spatial criteria of 1 mm, the mean %GP is >90% for DD of 2–3% and ≥88% for DD of 1%. The mean γmax ranges: 1·32 ± 1·33–2·63 ± 2·35 for 3 mm/1–3%, 1·57 ± 1·36–2·87 ± 2·29 for 2 mm/1–3% and 2·36 ± 1·83–3·58 ± 2·23 for 1 mm/1–3%. Similarly the mean γave ranges: 0·16 ± 0·06–0·19 ± 0·07 for 3 mm/1–3%, 0·21 ± 0·08–0·27 ± 0·10 for 2 mm/1–3% and 0·34 ± 0·14–0·49 ± 0·17 for 1 mm/1–3%. The mean γmax and mean γave increase with increased DTA and increased DD for all low-dose thresholds.

Conclusions:

The establishment of gamma criteria local action levels for SRS/SRT VMAT pre-treatment QA based on institutional resources is imperative as a useful tool for standardising the evaluation of EPID-based patient-specific SRS/SRT VMAT QA. Our data suggest that for intracranial SRS/SRT VMAT QA measured with the EPID, a stricter gamma criterion of 1 mm/2% or 1 mm/3% with ≥90% %GP could be used while still maintaining an in-control QA process with no extra burden on resources and time constraints.

A single-optical kernel for a phosphor-screen-based geometric QA system (RavenQA™) as a tool for patient-specific IMRT/VMAT QA

It has been proven that portal dosimetry can be derived from a mirror-based fluorescent EPID system by applying multiple kernels that are position dependent. The purpose of this study is to show that patient-specific IMRT/VMAT verification with a single kernel which is acquired from a series of output measurements of a few field sizes is feasible using a commercially available phosphor-screen-based geometric QA system. The optical scatter component in the RavenQA^™ (LAP GmbH Laser Applications; Lüneberg, Germany) is corrected by deconvolution with a two-dimensional (2D) spatially invariant single optical scatter kernel (OSK). We assume that the OSK is a 2D isotropic point spread function that decreases as a function of distance from the scatter center. The OSK is determined by comparing output factors of various field sizes. We report on performance testing of the system using 12 intensity-modulated radiation therapy and three volumetric-modulated arc therapy cases. A single spatially invariant OSK can be employed, because the shapes of the OSK across the image plate are almost identical. The average 3%/3 mm gamma passing rate for 15 patients was 97.6%  ±  1.1%. The passing rate was  >95% for all patients. It is feasible to perform the patient-specific IMRT/VMAT verification with a single kernel using a commercially available phosphor-screen-based mechanical QA device in accordance with AAPM TG-142. It is also practical to implement since it only requires to measure the optical intensities of the field centers of several square fields, in order to obtain the OSK.

Isodose feature-preserving voxelization (IFPV) for radiation therapy treatment planning

PURPOSE

Inverse planning involves iterative optimization of a large number of parameters and is known to be a labor-intensive procedure. To reduce the scale of computation and improve characterization of isodose plan, this paper presents an isodose feature-preserving voxelization (IFPV) framework for radiation therapy applications and demonstrates an implementation of inverse planning in the IFPV domain.

METHODS

A dose distribution in IFPV scheme is characterized by partitioning the voxels into subgroups according to their geometric and dosimetric values. Computationally, the isodose feature-preserving (IFP) clustering combines the conventional voxels that are spatially and dosimetrically close into physically meaningful clusters. A K-means algorithm and support vector machine (SVM) runs sequentially to group the voxels into IFP clusters. The former generates initial clusters according to the geometric and dosimetric information of the voxels and SVM is invoked to improve the connectivity of the IFP clusters. To illustrate the utility of the formalism, an inverse planning framework in the IFPV domain is implemented, and the resultant plans of three prostate IMRT and one head-and-neck cases are compared quantitatively with that obtained using conventional inverse planning technique.

RESULTS

The IFPV generates models with significant dimensionality reduction without compromising the spatial resolution seen in traditional downsampling schemes. The implementation of inverse planning in IFPV domain is demonstrated. In addition to the improved computational efficiency, it is found that, for the cases studied here, the IFPV-domain inverse planning yields better treatment plans than that of DVH-based planning, primarily because of more effective use of both geometric and dose information of the system during plan optimization.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed IFPV provides a low parametric representation of isodose plan without compromising the essential characteristics of the plan, thus providing a practically valuable framework for various applications in radiation therapy.

Interpretation of Gamma Index for Quality Assurance of Simultaneously Integrated Boost (SIB) IMRT Plans for Head and Neck Carcinoma

Objective: The Gamma Index is prerequisite to estimate point-by-point difference between measured and calculated dose distribution in terms of both Distance to Agreement (DTA) and Dose Difference (DD). This study aims to inquire what percentage of pixels passing a certain criteria assure a good quality plan and suggest gamma index as efficient mechanism for dose verification of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy plans.

Method: In this study, dose was calculated for 14 head and neck patients and IMRT Quality Assurance was performed with portal dosimetry using the Eclipse treatment planning system. Eclipse software has a Gamma analysis function to compare measured and calculated dose distribution. Plans of this study were deemed acceptable when passing rate was 95% using tolerance for Distance to agreement (DTA) as 3mm and Dose Difference (DD) as 5%.

Result and Conclusion: Thirteen cases pass tolerance criteria of 95% set by our institution. Confidence Limit for DD is 9.3% and for gamma criteria our local CL came out to be 2.0% (i.e., 98.0% passing). Lack of correlation was found between DD and γ passing rate with R2 of 0.0509. Our findings underline the importance of gamma analysis method to predict the quality of dose calculation. Passing rate of 95% is achieved in 93% of cases which is adequate level of accuracy for analyzed plans thus assuring the robustness of SIB IMRT treatment technique. This study can be extended to investigate gamma criteria of 5%/3mm for different tumor localities and to explore confidence limit on target volumes of small extent and simple geometry.

Factors influencing the performance of patient specific quality assurance for pencil beam scanning IMPT fields

PURPOSE

A detailed analysis of 2728 intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) fields that were clinically delivered to patients between 2007 and 2013 at Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI) was performed. The aim of this study was to analyze the results of patient specific dosimetric verifications and to assess possible correlation between the quality assurance (QA) results and specific field metrics.

METHODS

Dosimetric verifications were performed for every IMPT field prior to patient treatment. For every field, a steering file was generated containing all the treatment unit information necessary for treatment delivery: beam energy, beam angle, dose, size of air gap, nuclear interaction (NI) correction factor, number of range shifter plates, number of Bragg peaks (BPs) with their position and weight. This information was extracted and correlated to the results of dosimetric verification of each field which was a measurement of two orthogonal profiles using an orthogonal ionization chamber array in a movable water column.

RESULTS

The data analysis has shown more than 94% of all verified plans were within defined clinical tolerances. The differences between measured and calculated dose depend critically on the number of BPs, total thickness of all range shifter plates inserted in the beam path, and maximal range. An increase of the dose difference was observed with smaller number of BPs (i.e., smaller tumor) and smaller ranges (i.e., superficial tumors). The results of the verification do not depend, however, on the prescribed dose, NI correction, or the size of the air gap. There is no dependency of the transversal and longitudinal spot position precision on the beam angle. The value of NI correction depends on the number of spots and number of range shifter plates.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented study has shown that the verification method used at Centre for Proton Therapy at Paul Scherrer Institute is accurate and reproducible for performing patient specific QA. The results confirmed that the dose discrepancy is dependent on the size and location of the tumor.

A comparison of the gamma index analysis in various commercial IMRT/VMAT QA systems

PURPOSE

To investigate the variability of the global gamma index (γ) analysis in various commercial IMRT/VMAT QA systems and to assess the impact of measurement with low resolution detector arrays on γ.

MATERIALS

Five commercial QA systems (PTW 2D-Array, Scandidos Delta4, SunNuclear ArcCHECK, Varian EPID, and Gafchromic EBT2 film) were investigated. The response of γ analysis to deliberately introduced errors in pelvis and head & neck IMRT and RapidArc™ plans was evaluated in each system. A theoretical γ was calculated in each commercial QA system software (PTW Verisoft, Delta4 software, SNC Patient, Varian Portal Dosimetry and IBA OmniPro, respectively), using treatment planning system resolution virtual measurements and compared to an independent calculation. Error-induced plans were measured on a linear accelerator and were evaluated against the error-free dose distribution calculated using Varian Eclipse™ in the relevant phantom CT scan. In all cases, global γ was used with a 20% threshold relative to a point selected in a high dose and low gradient region. The γ based on measurement was compared against the theoretical to evaluate the response of each system.

RESULTS

There was statistically good agreement between the predicted γ based on the virtual measurements from each software (concordance correlation coefficient, ρc>0.92) relative to the independent prediction in all cases. For the actual measured data, the agreement with the predicted γ reduces with tightening passing criteria and the variability between the different systems increases. This indicates that the detector array configuration and resolution have greater impact on the experimental calculation of γ due to under-sampling of the dose distribution, blurring effects, noise, or a combination.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important to understand the response and limitations of the gamma index analysis combined with the equipment in use. For the same pass-rate criteria, different devices and software combinations exhibit varying levels of agreement with the predicted γ analysis.

A Monte Carlo study on electron and neutron contamination caused by the presence of hip prosthesis in photon mode of a 15 MV Siemens PRIMUS linac

Several investigators have pointed out that electron and neutron contamination from high‐energy photon beams are clinically important. The aim of this study is to assess electron and neutron contamination production by various prostheses in a high‐energy photon beam of a medical linac. A 15 MV Siemens PRIMUS linac was simulated by MCNPX Monte Carlo (MC) code and the results of percentage depth dose (PDD) and dose profile values were compared with the measured data. Electron and neutron contaminations were calculated on the beam's central axis for Co‐Cr‐Mo, stainless steel, Ti‐alloy, and Ti hip prostheses through MC simulations. Dose increase factor (DIF) was calculated as the ratio of electron (neutron) dose at a point for 10×10 cm2 field size in presence of prosthesis to that at the same point in absence of prosthesis. DIF was estimated at different depths in a water phantom. Our MC‐calculated PDD and dose profile data are in good agreement with the corresponding measured values. Maximum dose increase factor for electron contamination for Co‐Cr‐Mo, stainless steel, Ti‐alloy, and Ti prostheses were equal to 1.18, 1.16, 1.16, and 1.14, respectively. The corresponding values for neutron contamination were respectively equal to: 184.55, 137.33, 40.66, and 43.17. Titanium‐based prostheses are recommended for the orthopedic practice of hip junction replacement. When treatment planning for a patient with hip prosthesis is performed for a high‐energy photon beam, attempt should be made to ensure that the prosthesis is not exposed to primary photons.

PACS numbers: 87.56.bd, 87.55.kh, 87.55.Gh

Implementation and validation of a commercial portal dosimetry software for intensity-modulated radiation therapy pre-treatment verification

Electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) are extensively used for obtaining dosimetric information of pre-treatment field verification and in-vivo dosimetry for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). In the present study, we have implemented the newly developed portal dosimetry software using independent dose prediction algorithm EPIDose^™ and evaluated this new tool for the pre-treatment IMRT plan quality assurance of Whole Pelvis with Simultaneous Integrated Boost (WP-SIB-IMRT) of prostate cases by comparing with routine two-dimensional (2D) array detector system (MapCHECK^™). We have investigated 104 split fields using γ -distributions in terms of predefined γ frequency parameters. The mean γ values are found to be 0.42 (SD: 0.06) and 0.44 (SD: 0.06) for the EPIDose and MapCHECK^™, respectively. The average γ∆ for EPIDose and MapCHECK^™ are found as 0.51 (SD: 0.06) and 0.53 (SD: 0.07), respectively. Furthermore, the percentage of points with γ < 1, γ < 1.5, and γ > 2 are 97.4%, 99.3%, and 0.56%, respectively for EPIDose and 96.4%, 99.0% and 0.62% for MapCHECK^™. Based on our results obtained with EPIDose and strong agreement with MapCHECK^™, we may conclude that the EPIDose portal dosimetry system has been successfully implemented and validated with our routine 2D array detector

Evaluation of a new VMAT QA device, or the "X" and "O" array geometries

We introduce a logical process of three distinct phases to begin the evaluation of a new 3D dosimetry array. The array under investigation is a hollow cylinder phantom with diode detectors fixed in a helical shell forming an “O” axial detector cross section (ArcCHECK), with comparisons drawn to a previously studied 3D array with diodes fixed in two crossing planes forming an “X” axial cross section (Delta⁴). Phase I testing of the ArcCHECK establishes: robust relative calibration (response equalization) of the individual detectors, minor field size dependency of response not present in a 2D predecessor, and uncorrected angular response dependence in the axial plane. Phase II testing reveals vast differences between the two devices when studying fixed‐width full circle arcs. These differences are primarily due to arc discretization by the TPS that produces low passing rates for the peripheral detectors of the ArcCHECK, but high passing rates for the Delta⁴. Similar, although less pronounced, effects are seen for the test VMAT plans modeled after the AAPM TG119 report. The very different 3D detector locations of the two devices, along with the knock‐on effect of different percent normalization strategies, prove that the analysis results from the devices are distinct and noninterchangeable; they are truly measuring different things. The value of what each device measures, namely their correlation with – or ability to predict – clinically relevant errors in calculation and/or delivery of dose is the subject of future Phase III work.

PACS number: 87.55Qr

Practical guidelines for routine intensity-modulated radiotherapy verification: pre-treatment verification with portal dosimetry and treatment verification with in vivo dosimetry

The purpose of this work is to provide guidelines for the routine use of portal dosimetry and in vivo diode measurements to verify intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatments. To achieve tolerance levels that are sensitive enough to intercept problems, both the portal dosimetry and the in vivo procedure must be optimised. Portal dosimetry was improved by the introduction of an optimised two-dimensional (2D) profile correction, which also accounted for the effect of backscatter from the R-arm. The scaled score, indicating the fraction of points not meeting the desired gamma evaluation criteria within the field opening, was determined as the parameter of interest. Using gamma criteria of a 3% dose difference and 3 mm distance to agreement, a "scaled score" threshold value of 1.5% was chosen to indicate excessive tongue and groove and other problems. The pre-treatment portal dosimetry quality assurance (QA) does not encompass verification of the patient dose calculation or position, and so it is complemented by in vivo diode measurements. Diode positioning is crucial in IMRT, and so we describe a method for diode positioning at any suitable point. We achieved 95% of IMRT field measurements within ±5% and 99% within ±8%, with improved accuracy being achieved over time owing to better positioning. Although the careful preparation and setup of the diode measurements can be time-consuming, this is compensated for by the time efficiency of the optimised procedure. Both methods are now easily absorbed into the routine work of the department.

Portal dosimetry for pretreatment verification of IMRT plan: a comparison with 2D ion chamber array

Portal dosimetry (PD) was performed for 181 fields from 14 IMRT plans of various clinical sites at gantry zero and source‐to‐detector distance (SDD) of 100 cm. PD was realized using aSi1000 electronic portal imaging device (EPID) and portal dose prediction (PDP) algorithm implemented in Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS). Agreement of PDP predicted and EPID measured photon fluence/dose distribution were evaluated using gamma (γ) index set at 3% at 3 mm distance to point agreement (DTA). Three gamma scaling parameters, maximum γ(γ)max, average γ(γ)avg and percentage of points with γ≤1(γ%≤1) were estimated for each field. An independent measurement was carried out using MatriXX 2D ion chamber array with detector plane at 100 cm and γmax,γavg and γ%≤1 were estimated using OmniPro IMRT analyzing software. Effect of extended SDD and gantry rotation on portal dosimetry outcome was also investigated for another 45 IMRT fields. PDP predicted and EPID measured photon fluence agrees well with overall mean values of γmax,γavg and γ%≤1 1 at 2.02, 0.24 and 99.43%, respectively. γ(γ)max value was lower in 15 MV compared to 6 MV IMRT plan. Independent verification using MatriXX showed comparable overall mean values of γ(γ)avg and γ%≤1 at 0.25 and 99.80%. However, in all plans, MatriXX showed significantly lower γmax(p<0.05) with an overall mean value of 1.35. In portal dosimetry, compared to gamma values at 100 cm SDD, γmax,γavg and γ%≤1 values improve from a mean of 0.16, 0.03 and 0.26 at 110 cm SDD to 0.35, 0.05 and 0.29 at 140 cm SDD. PD outcome was independent of gantry rotation. In conclusion, both MatriXX 2D ion chamber array and portal dosimetry showed comparable results and can be use as an alternative to each other for relative photon fluence verification.

PACS number (s): 87.55.D‐, 87.55.de, 87.55.kd,87.55.km,87.55.Qr,87.56Fc:

Hybrid plan verification for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using the 2D ionization chamber array I'mRT MatriXX--a feasibility study

The 2D ionization chamber array I'mRT MatriXX (IBA, Schwarzenbruck, Germany) has been developed for absolute 2D dosimetry and verification of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for perpendicular beam incidence. The aim of this study is to evaluate the applicability of I'mRT MatriXX for oblique beam incidence and hybrid plan verification of IMRT with original gantry angles. For the assessment of angular dependence, open fields with gantry angles in steps of 10 degrees were calculated on a CT scan of I'mRT MatriXX. For hybrid plan verification, 17 clinical IMRT plans and one rotational plan were used. Calculations were performed with pencil beam (PB), collapsed cone (CC) and Monte Carlo (MC) methods, which had been previously validated. Measurements were conducted on an Elekta SynergyS linear accelerator. To assess the potential and limitations of the system, gamma evaluation was performed with different dose tolerances and distances to agreement. Hybrid plan verification passed the gamma test with 4% dose tolerance and 3 mm distance to agreement in all cases, in 82-88% of the cases for tolerances of 3%/3 mm, and in 59-76% of the cases if 3%/2 mm were used. Separate evaluation of the low dose and high dose regions showed that I'mRT MatriXX can be used for hybrid plan verification of IMRT plans within 3% dose tolerance and 3 mm distance to agreement with a relaxed dose tolerance of 4% in the low dose region outside the multileaf collimator (MLC).

Dose distribution verifications of IMRT for NPC

In order to explore a dose distribution verification procedure of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and establish its evaluation criteria, we performed 35 two-dimensional (2D) patient-specific IMRT verifications over the year 2006. The percent of pixels passing gamma and the normalized agreement test (NAT) index were mainly used to represent the agreement between the measured and computed dose distributions with three criteria (2%/2 mm, 3%/3 mm and 5%/3 mm) as recommended in the literature. The results were that all cases passed through verifications with three criteria except that the NAT index of one case was beyond the limitation, and the three tolerance levels of 2%/2 mm, 3%/3 mm and 5%/3 mm produced similar clinical verification results but led to different percent of pixels passing gamma and NAT index. Our data showed that the percent of pixels passing gamma and the NAT index were complementary to evaluate future IMRT verifications as two significant metrics. Due to the influence of the noise and the trait of the software, we considered an IMRT plan as acceptable in case of the percent of pixels passing gamma >95% and the NAT index <5 with the 5%/3 mm criteria for IMRT patient-specific quality assurance (QA).

Dose calculation with respiration-averaged CT processed from cine CT without a respiratory surrogate

Dose calculation for thoracic radiotherapy is commonly performed on a free-breathing helical CT despite artifacts caused by respiratory motion. Four-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) is one method to incorporate motion information into the treatment planning process. Some centers now use the respiration-averaged CT (RACT), the pixel-by-pixel average of the ten phases of 4D-CT, for dose calculation. This method, while sparing the tedious task of 4D dose calculation, still requires 4D-CT technology. The authors have recently developed a means to reconstruct RACT directly from unsorted cine CT data from which 4D-CT is formed, bypassing the need for a respiratory surrogate. Using RACT from cine CT for dose calculation may be a means to incorporate motion information into dose calculation without performing 4D-CT. The purpose of this study was to determine if RACT from cine CT can be substituted for RACT from 4D-CT for the purposes of dose calculation, and if increasing the cine duration can decrease differences between the dose distributions. Cine CT data and corresponding 4D-CT simulations for 23 patients with at least two breathing cycles per cine duration were retrieved. RACT was generated four ways: First from ten phases of 4D-CT, second, from 1 breathing cycle of images, third, from 1.5 breathing cycles of images, and fourth, from 2 breathing cycles of images. The clinical treatment plan was transferred to each RACT and dose was recalculated. Dose planes were exported at orthogonal planes through the isocenter (coronal, sagittal, and transverse orientations). The resulting dose distributions were compared using the gamma index within the planning target volume (PTV). Failure criteria were set to 2%/1 mm. A follow-up study with 50 additional lung cancer patients was performed to increase sample size. The same dose recalculation and analysis was performed. In the primary patient group, 22 of 23 patients had 100% of points within the PTV pass y criteria. The average maximum and mean y indices were very low (well below 1), indicating good agreement between dose distributions. Increasing the cine duration generally increased the dose agreement. In the follow-up study, 49 of 50 patients had 100% of points within the PTV pass the y criteria. The average maximum and mean y indices were again well below 1, indicating good agreement. Dose calculation on RACT from cine CT is negligibly different from dose calculation on RACT from 4D-CT. Differences can be decreased further by increasing the cine duration of the cine CT scan.

Process control analysis of IMRT QA: implications for clinical trials

The purpose of this study is two-fold: first is to investigate the process of IMRT QA using control charts and second is to compare control chart limits to limits calculated using the standard deviation (sigma). Head and neck and prostate IMRT QA cases from seven institutions in both academic and community settings are considered. The percent difference between the point dose measurement in phantom and the corresponding result from the treatment planning system (TPS) is used for analysis. The average of the percent difference calculations defines the accuracy of the process and is called the process target. This represents the degree to which the process meets the clinical goal of 0% difference between the measurements and TPS. IMRT QA process ability defines the ability of the process to meet clinical specifications (e.g. 5% difference between the measurement and TPS). The process ability is defined in two ways: (1) the half-width of the control chart limits, and (2) the half-width of +/-3sigma limits. Process performance is characterized as being in one of four possible states that describes the stability of the process and its ability to meet clinical specifications. For the head and neck cases, the average process target across institutions was 0.3% (range: -1.5% to 2.9%). The average process ability using control chart limits was 7.2% (range: 5.3% to 9.8%) compared to 6.7% (range: 5.3% to 8.2%) using standard deviation limits. For the prostate cases, the average process target across the institutions was 0.2% (range: -1.8% to 1.4%). The average process ability using control chart limits was 4.4% (range: 1.3% to 9.4%) compared to 5.3% (range: 2.3% to 9.8%) using standard deviation limits. Using the standard deviation to characterize IMRT QA process performance resulted in processes being preferentially placed in one of the four states. This is in contrast to using control charts for process characterization where the IMRT QA processes were spread over three of the four states with none of the processes in the ideal state. Control charts may be used for IMRT QA in clinical trials to categorize process performance, minimize protocol variation and guide process improvements. For the duration of an institution's participation in a protocol, updated control charts can be periodically sent to the protocol QA center to document continued process performance to protocol specifications.

Dosimetric pre-treatment verification of IMRT using an EPID; clinical experience

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In our clinic a QA program for IMRT verification, fully based on dosimetric measurements with electronic portal imaging devices (EPID), has been running for over 3 years. The program includes a pre-treatment dosimetric check of all IMRT fields. During a complete treatment simulation at the linac, a portal dose image (PDI) is acquired with the EPID for each patient field and compared with a predicted PDI. In this paper, the results of this pre-treatment procedure are analysed, and intercepted errors are reported. An automated image analysis procedure is proposed to limit the number of fields that need human intervention in PDI comparison.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Most of our analyses are performed using the gamma index with 3% local dose difference and 3mm distance to agreement as reference values. Scalar parameters are derived from the gamma values to summarize the agreement between measured and predicted 2D PDIs. Areas with all pixels having gamma values larger than one are evaluated, making decisions based on clinically relevant criteria more straightforward.

RESULTS

In 270 patients, the pre-treatment checks revealed four clinically relevant errors. Calculation of statistics for a group of 75 patients showed that the patient-averaged mean gamma value inside the field was 0.43 +/- 0.13 (1SD) and only 6.1 +/- 6.8% of pixels had a gamma value larger than one. With the proposed automated image analysis scheme, visual inspection of images can be avoided in 2/3 of the cases.

CONCLUSION

EPIDs may be used for high accuracy and high resolution routine verification of IMRT fields to intercept clinically relevant dosimetric errors prior to the start of treatment. For the majority of fields, PDI comparison can fully rely on an automated procedure, avoiding excessive workload.

Dosimetric verification in participating institutions in a stereotactic body radiotherapy trial for stage I non-small cell lung cancer: Japan clinical oncology group trial (JCOG0403)

A multicentre phase II trial of stereotactic body radiotherapy for T1N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer was initiated in Japan as the Japan Clinical Oncology Group trial (JCOG0403). Before starting the trial, a decision was made to evaluate the treatment machine and treatment planning in participating institutions to minimize the variations of the prescription dose between the institutions. We visited the 16 participating institutions and examined the absolute dose at the centre of a simulated spherical tumour of 3.0 cm diameter in the lung using the radiation treatment planning systems in each institution. A lung phantom for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) was developed and used for the treatment planning and film dosimetry. In the JCOG radiotherapy study group, the no model-based calculation algorithm or the model-based calculation algorithm with a dose kernel unscaled for heterogeneities were selected for use in the initial SBRT trials started in 2004, and the model-based calculation algorithm with a dose kernel scaled for heterogeneities was selected for the coming trial. The findings of this study suggest that the clinical results of lung SBRT trials should be carefully evaluated in comparison with the actual dose given to patients.

Patient specific treatment verifications for helical tomotherapy treatment plans

We performed two-dimensional treatment verifications for ten patients planned and treated with helical tomotherapy. The treatment verification consisted of a film measurement as well as point dose measurements made with an ion chamber. The agreement between the calculated and the measured film dose distributions was evaluated with the gamma index calculated for three sets of criteria (2 mm and 2%, 4 mm and 3%, and 3 mm and 5%) as recommended in the literature. Good agreement was found between measured and calculated distributions without any need of normalization of the dose data but with dose map registration using reference marks. In this case, 69.8 +/- 17.2%, 92.6 +/- 9.0%, and 93.4 +/- 8.5% passed the 2 mm and 2%, 4 mm and 3%, and 3 mm and 5% criteria, respectively. Agreement was excellent when both normalization and manual registration of the dose maps was employed. In this case 91.2 +/- 5.6%, 99.0 +/- 1.4%, and 99.5 +/- 0.8% passed the 2 mm and 2%, 4 mm and 3%, and 3 mm and 5% criteria, respectively. The mean percent discrepancy for the point dose measurements was -0.5 +/- 1.1%, -2.4 +/- 3.7%, -1.1 +/- 7.3% for the high dose, low dose, and critical structure point, respectively. Three criteria for a satisfactory treatment verification in the high dose regions of a plan were established. For the un-normalized reference mark registered data 80% of pixels must pass the 3 mm and 5% criteria. For the normalized and manually registered data, 80% must pass the 2 mm and 2% criteria, and the point dose measurement must be within 2% of the calculated dose. All low dose region/critical structure point dose measurements were evaluated on a patient by patient basis. The criteria we recommend can be useful for the routine evaluation of treatment plans for tomotherapy systems.