9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evaluation of the sensitivity of two 3D diode array dosimetry systems to setup error for quality assurance (QA) of volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The purpose of this study is to evaluate the sensitivities of 3D diode arrays to setup error for patient‐specific quality assurance (QA) of volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Translational setup errors of ± 1 , ± 2 , and ± 3 mm in the RL, SI, and AP directions and rotational setup errors of ± 1 ° and ± 2 ° in the pitch, roll, and yaw directions were set up in two phantom systems, ArcCHECK and Delta 4 , with VMAT plans for 11 patients. Cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) followed by automatic correction using a HexaPOD 6D treatment couch ensured the position accuracy. Dose distributions of the two phantoms were compared in order to evaluate the agreement between calculated and measured values by using γ analysis with 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm criteria. To determine the impact on setup error for VMAT QA, we evaluated the sensitivity of results acquired by both 3D diode array systems to setup errors in translation and rotation. For the VMAT QA of all patients, the pass rate with the 3%/3 mm criteria exceeded 95% using either phantom. For setup errors of 3 mm and 2°, respectively, the pass rates with the 3%/3 mm criteria decreased by a maximum of 14.0% and 23.5% using ArcCHECK, and 14.4% and 5.0% using Delta 4 . Both systems are sensitive to setup error, and do not have mechanisms to account for setup errors in the software. The sensitivity of both VMAT QA systems was strongly dependent on the patient‐specific plan. The sensitivity of ArcCHECK to the rotational error was higher than that of Delta 4 . In order to achieve less than 3% mean pass rate reduction of VMAT plan QA with the 3%/3 mm criteria, a setup accuracy of 2 mm/1° and 2 mm/2° is required for ArcCheck and Delta 4 devices, respectively. The cumulative effect of the combined 2 mm translational and 1° rotational errors caused 3.8% and 2.4% mean pass rates reduction with 3%/3 mm criteria, respectively, for ArcCHECK and Delta 4 systems. For QA of VMAT plans for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) using the ArcCHECK system, the setup should be more accurate.

          PACS numbers: 87.55.ne, 87.55.Qr, 87.55.km

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators.

          The task group (TG) for quality assurance of medical accelerators was constituted by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine's Science Council under the direction of the Radiation Therapy Committee and the Quality Assurance and Outcome Improvement Subcommittee. The task group (TG-142) had two main charges. First to update, as needed, recommendations of Table II of the AAPM TG-40 report on quality assurance and second, to add recommendations for asymmetric jaws, multileaf collimation (MLC), and dynamic/virtual wedges. The TG accomplished the update to TG-40, specifying new test and tolerances, and has added recommendations for not only the new ancillary delivery technologies but also for imaging devices that are part of the linear accelerator. The imaging devices include x-ray imaging, photon portal imaging, and cone-beam CT. The TG report was designed to account for the types of treatments delivered with the particular machine. For example, machines that are used for radiosurgery treatments or intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) require different tests and/or tolerances. There are specific recommendations for MLC quality assurance for machines performing IMRT. The report also gives recommendations as to action levels for the physicists to implement particular actions, whether they are inspection, scheduled action, or immediate and corrective action. The report is geared to be flexible for the physicist to customize the QA program depending on clinical utility. There are specific tables according to daily, monthly, and annual reviews, along with unique tables for wedge systems, MLC, and imaging checks. The report also gives specific recommendations regarding setup of a QA program by the physicist in regards to building a QA team, establishing procedures, training of personnel, documentation, and end-to-end system checks. The tabulated items of this report have been considerably expanded as compared with the original TG-40 report and the recommended tolerances accommodate differences in the intended use of the machine functionality (non-IMRT, IMRT, and stereotactic delivery).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc.

            In this work a novel plan optimization platform is presented where treatment is delivered efficiently and accurately in a single dynamically modulated arc. Improvements in patient care achieved through image-guided positioning and plan adaptation have resulted in an increase in overall treatment times. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has also increased treatment time by requiring a larger number of beam directions, increased monitor units (MU), and, in the case of tomotherapy, a slice-by-slice delivery. In order to maintain a similar level of patient throughput it will be necessary to increase the efficiency of treatment delivery. The solution proposed here is a novel aperture-based algorithm for treatment plan optimization where dose is delivered during a single gantry arc of up to 360 deg. The technique is similar to tomotherapy in that a full 360 deg of beam directions are available for optimization but is fundamentally different in that the entire dose volume is delivered in a single source rotation. The new technique is referred to as volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf motion and number of MU per degree of gantry rotation is restricted during the optimization so that gantry rotation speed, leaf translation speed, and dose rate maxima do not excessively limit the delivery efficiency. During planning, investigators model continuous gantry motion by a coarse sampling of static gantry positions and fluence maps or MLC aperture shapes. The technique presented here is unique in that gantry and MLC position sampling is progressively increased throughout the optimization. Using the full gantry range will theoretically provide increased flexibility in generating highly conformal treatment plans. In practice, the additional flexibility is somewhat negated by the additional constraints placed on the amount of MLC leaf motion between gantry samples. A series of studies are performed that characterize the relationship between gantry and MLC sampling, dose modeling accuracy, and optimization time. Results show that gantry angle and MLC sample spacing as low as 1 deg and 0.5 cm, respectively, is desirable for accurate dose modeling. It is also shown that reducing the sample spacing dramatically reduces the ability of the optimization to arrive at a solution. The competing benefits of having small and large sample spacing are mutually realized using the progressive sampling technique described here. Preliminary results show that plans generated with VMAT optimization exhibit dose distributions equivalent or superior to static gantry IMRT. Timing studies have shown that the VMAT technique is well suited for on-line verification and adaptation with delivery times that are reduced to approximately 1.5-3 min for a 200 cGy fraction.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Volumetric modulated arc therapy for delivery of prostate radiotherapy: comparison with intensity-modulated radiotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy.

              Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a novel form of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) optimization that allows the radiation dose to be delivered in a single gantry rotation of up to 360 degrees , using either a constant dose rate (cdr-VMAT) or variable dose rate (vdr-VMAT) during rotation. The goal of this study was to compare VMAT prostate RT plans with three-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT) and IMRT plans. The 3D-CRT, five-field IMRT, cdr-VMAT, and vdr-VMAT RT plans were created for 10 computed tomography data sets from patients undergoing RT for prostate cancer. The parameters evaluated included the doses to organs at risk, equivalent uniform doses, dose homogeneity and conformality, and monitor units required for delivery of a 2-Gy fraction. The IMRT and both VMAT techniques resulted in lower doses to normal critical structures than 3D-CRT plans for nearly all dosimetric endpoints analyzed. The lowest doses to organs at risk and most favorable equivalent uniform doses were achieved with vdr-VMAT, which was significantly better than IMRT for the rectal and femoral head dosimetric endpoints (p < 0.05) and significantly better than cdr-VMAT for most bladder and rectal endpoints (p < 0.05). The vdr-VMAT and cdr-VMAT plans required fewer monitor units than did the IMRT plans (relative reduction of 42% and 38%, respectively; p = 0.005) but more than for the 3D-CRT plans (p = 0.005). The IMRT and VMAT techniques achieved highly conformal treatment plans. The vdr-VMAT technique resulted in more favorable dose distributions than the IMRT or cdr-VMAT techniques, and reduced the monitor units required compared with IMRT.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                nchenyy@gmail.com
                Journal
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                10.1002/(ISSN)1526-9914
                ACM2
                Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1526-9914
                06 September 2013
                September 2013
                : 14
                : 5 ( doiID: 10.1002/acm2.2013.14.issue-5 )
                : 13-24
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China
                [ 2 ] Center for Radiation Physics and Technology, Cancer Center West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China
                [ 3 ] Department of Neuroscience University of Virginia Charlottesville VA USA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ]Corresponding author: Nianyong Chen, Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center, Sichuan University West China School of Medicine/West China Hospital, 37 Guoxuexiang, Wuhou District, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, P.R. China; phone: (86) 28 8542 2952; fax: (86) 28 8542 2952; email: nchenyy@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                ACM20013
                10.1120/jacmp.v14i5.3828
                5714579
                24036856
                151ab62a-d886-4555-bf55-9043d7236c1c
                © 2013 The Authors.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 28 November 2011
                : 08 April 2013
                Page count
                Figures: 6, Tables: 3, References: 37, Pages: 12, Words: 5363
                Funding
                Funded by: National Natural Science Foundation of China
                Award ID: 81101697
                Categories
                Radiation Oncology Physics
                Radiation Oncology Physics
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                acm20013
                September 2013
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:5.2.5 mode:remove_FC converted:16.11.2017

                vmat,setup error,patient‐specific qa,3d diode array
                vmat, setup error, patient‐specific qa, 3d diode array

                Comments

                Comment on this article