ABSTRACT
Clinically, beam matching can greatly improve the flexibility and efficiency of treating patients between different medical electron linacs. However, in addition to the regular quality assurance (QA) test of the machine performance of linacs, there is still a lack of comprehensive evaluation of the clinical radiotherapy performance of beam-matched linacs. In this paper, the performance of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) between three closely matched linacs was evaluated by statistical process control (SPC) technology. It was found that the average and median γ passing rates of the VMAT QA processes of the three linacs had little difference, but the process capability levels were at three different levels. The results show that SPC technology can effectively evaluate the performance of beam matching for medical electron linacs, improve the patient-specific VMAT QA processes, and guide clinical decision-making.
Subject(s)
Electrons , Particle Accelerators , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Radiotherapy Dosage , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted , Radiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedABSTRACT
Virtual monochromatic images (VMI) that reconstructed on dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) have further application prospects in radiotherapy, and there is still a lack of clinical dose verification. In this study, GE Revolution CT scanner was used to perform conventional imaging and gemstone spectral imaging on the simulated head and body phantom. The CT images were imported to radiotherapy treatment planning system (TPS), and the same treatment plans were transplanted to compare the CT value and the dose distribution. The results show that the VMI can be imported into TPS for CT value-relative electron density conversion and dose calculation. Compared to conventional images, the VMI varies from 70 to 140 keV, has little difference in dose distribution of 6 MV photon treatment plan.
Subject(s)
Electrons , Phantoms, Imaging , Tomography Scanners, X-Ray Computed , Tomography, X-Ray ComputedABSTRACT
Dose-guided radiotherapy (DGRT) is a potentially useful adaptive radiotherapy method which dosimetrically compensates for interfractional non-rigid deformation. With the improvement of in-room imaging quality, development of the deformation registration algorithm and innovation of computer science, the wide application of DGRT might be realized. The purpose of this article is to briefly summarize the work flow, clinical application and prospect of DGRT.
ABSTRACT
Dose-guided radiotherapy (DGRT) is a potentially useful adaptive radiotherapy method which dosimetrically compensates for interfractional non-rigid deformation.With the improvement of in-room imaging quality,development of the deformation registration algorithm and innovation of computer science,the wide application of DGRT might be realized.The purpose of this article is to briefly summarize the work flow,clinical application and prospect of DGRT.
ABSTRACT
Patient-specific volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) quality assurance (QA) process is an important component of the implementation process of clinical radiotherapy. The tolerance limit and action limit of discrepancies between the calculated dose and the delivered radiation dose are the key parts of the VMAT QA processes as recognized by the AAPM TG-218 report, however, there is no unified standard for these two values among radiotherapy centers. In this study, based on the operational recommendations given in the AAPM TG-218 report, treatment site-specific tolerance limits and action limits of gamma pass rate in VMAT QA processes when using ArcCHECK for dose verification were established by statistical process control (SPC) methodology. The tolerance limit and action limit were calculated based on the first 25 in-control VMAT QA for each site. The individual control charts were drawn to continuously monitor the VMAT QA process with 287 VMAT plans and analyze the causes of VMAT QA out of control. The tolerance limits for brain, head and neck, abdomen and pelvic VMAT QA processes were 94.56%, 94.68%, 94.34%, and 92.97%, respectively, and the action limits were 93.82%, 92.54%, 93.23%, and 90.29%, respectively. Except for pelvic, the tolerance limits for the brain, head and neck, and abdomen were close to the universal tolerance limit of TG-218 (95%), and the action limits for all sites were higher than the universal action limit of TG-218 (90%). The out-of-control VMAT QAs were detected by the individual control chart, including one case of head and neck, two of the abdomen and two of the pelvic site. Four of them were affected by the setup error, and one was affected by the calibration of ArcCHECK. The results show that the SPC methodology can effectively monitor the IMRT/VMAT QA processes. Setting treatment site-specific tolerance limits is helpful to investigate the cause of out-of-control VMAT QA.