PRIMO Monte Carlo software as a tool for commissioning of an external beam radiotherapy treatment planning system.

Background: The purpose was to validate the PRIMO Monte Carlo software to be used during the commissioning of a treatment planning system (TPS). Materials and methods: The Acuros XB v. 16.1 algorithm of the Eclipse was configured for 6 MV and 6 MV flattening-filter-free (FFF) photon beams, from a TrueBeam linac equipped with a high-definition 120-leaf multileaf collimator (MLC). PRIMO v. 0.3.64.1814 software was used with the phase space files provided by Varian and benchmarked against the reference dosimetry dataset published by the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core-Houston (IROC-H). Thirty Eclipse clinical intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were verified in three ways: 1) using the PTW Octavius 4D (O4D) system; 2) the Varian Portal Dosimetry system and 3) the PRIMO software. Clinical validation of PRIMO was completed by comparing the simulated dose distributions on the O4D phantom against dose measurements for these 30 clinical plans. Agreement evaluations were performed using a 3% global/2 mm gamma index analysis. Results: PRIMO simulations agreed with the benchmark IROC-H data within 2.0% for both energies. Gamma passing rates (GPRs) from the 30 clinical plan verifications were (6 MV/6MV FFF): 99.4% ± 0.5%/99.9% ± 0.1%, 99.8% ± 0.4%/98.9% ± 1.4%, 99.7% ± 0.4%/99.7% ± 0.4%, for the 1), 2) and 3) verification methods, respectively. Agreement between PRIMO simulations on the O4D phantom and 3D dose measurements resulted in GPRs of 97.9% ± 2.4%/99.7% ± 0.4%. Conclusion: The PRIMO software is a valuable tool for dosimetric verification of clinical plans during the commissioning of the primary TPS.

Verification of stereotactic radiosurgery plans for multiple brain metastases using a virtual phantom-based procedure.

Background: The purpose of this study was to describe the use of the VIPER software for patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) of single-isocenter multitarget (SIMT) stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plans. Materials and methods: Twenty clinical of intensity-modulated (IMRT) SIMT SRS plans were reviewed. A total of 88 brain metastases were included. Number of lesions per plan and their individual volumes ranged from 2 to 35 and from 0.03 to 32.8 cm3, respectively. Plans were designed with the Eclipse system, and delivered using a Varian CLINAC linac. SRS technique consisted of non-coplanar static-field sliding-window IMRT. Each plan was mapped onto a virtual cylindrical water phantom (VCP) in the Eclipse to calculate a 3D dose distribution (verification plan). The VIPER software reconstructed the 3D dose distribution inside the VCP from the acquired in-air electronic portal image device (EPID) images of the treatment fields. A 3D gamma analysis was used to compare the reconstructed doses to the Eclipse planned doses on the VCP. Gamma passing rates (GPRs) were calculated using 3% global/2 mm criteria and dose thresholds ranged from 10% to 90% of the maximum dose. Results: The averages (± 1 SD) of the 3D GPRs over the 20 SRS plans were: 99.9 ± 0.2%, 99.7 ± 0.3%, 99.6 ± 0.5%, 99.3 ± 0.9%,99.1 ± 1.6%, 99.0 ± 1.6%, and 98.5 ± 3.3%, for dose thresholds of 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%, 70%, 80% and 90% respectively. Conclusions: This work shows the feasibility of the VIPER software for PSQA of SIMT SRS plans, being a reliable alternative to commercially available 2D detector arrays.

Monte Carlo-based independent dose verification of radiosurgery HyperArc plans.

PURPOSE: To investigate the feasibility of using the free PRIMO Monte Carlo software for independent dose check of cranial SRS plans designed with the Varian HyperArc (HA) technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, the PRIMO Monte Carlo software v. 0.3.64.1800 was used with the phase-space files (v. 2, Feb. 27, 2013) provided by Varian for 6 MV flattening-filter-free (FFF) photon beams from a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator (linac), equipped with a Millennium 120 multileaf collimator (MLC). This configuration was validated by comparing the percentage depth doses (PDDs), lateral profiles and relative output factors (OFs) simulated in a water phantom against measurements for field sizes from 1 × 1 to 40 × 40 cm2. The agreement between simulated and experimental relative dose curves was evaluated using a global (G) gamma index analysis. In addition, the accuracy of PRIMO to model the MLC was investigated (dosimetric leaf gap, tongue and groove, leaf transmission and interleaf leakage). Thirty-five HA SRS plans computed in the Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) were simulated in PRIMO. The Acuros XB algorithm v. 16.10 (dose to medium) was used in Eclipse. Sixty targets with diameters ranging from 6 to 33 mm were included. Agreement between the dose distributions given by Eclipse and PRIMO was evaluated in terms of 3D global gamma passing rates (GPRs) for the 2 %/2 mm criteria. RESULTS: Average GPR greater than 95 % with the 2 %(G)/1 mm criteria were obtained over the PDD and profiles of each field size. Differences between PRIMO calculated and measured OFs were within 0.5 % in all fields, except for the 1 × 1 cm2 with a discrepancy of 1.5 %. Regarding the MLC modeling in PRIMO, an agreement within 3 % was achieved between calculated and experimental doses. Excellent agreement between PRIMO and Eclipse was found for the 35 HA plans. The 3D global GPRs (2 %/2 mm) for the targets and external patient contour were 99.6 % ± 1.1 % and 99.8 % ± 0.5 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results described in this study, the PRIMO Monte Carlo software, in conjunction with the 6X FFF Varian phase-space files, can be used as secondary dose calculation software to check stereotactic radiosurgery plans from Eclipse using the HyperArc technique.

Clinical Experience in Prostate Ultrahypofractionated Radiation Therapy With an Online Adaptive Method.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to describe the feasibility of the online adaptive radiation therapy (oART) method developed at the Hospital Quirónsalud Barcelona for prostate cancer, using a standard C-arm linear accelerator (linac) and without the support of artificial intelligence. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The first 18 patients treated at the Hospital Quirónsalud Barcelona with the developed oART method were included. An ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy scheme consisting of 7 × 6.1 Gy was used. Patients were treated on 2 conventional Varian C-arm linacs. For each patient, a reference plan based on a planning computed tomography (pCT) scan was generated using the Eclipse system. On each treatment session, the pCT scan was rigidly registered with the daily cone beam computed tomography (CT) scan. The pCT-based target (prostate) and organs at risk were mapped onto the cone beam CT images and manually adapted to take into account the anatomy of the day. The reference plan was then copied to the cone beam CT scan, and a full reoptimization was done for the current anatomy (adapted plan). For each treatment session, the unaltered reference plan was recomputed on the daily cone beam CT scan by mimicking the soft-tissue alignment performed per our standard procedure (nonadapted plan). Over the 126 adapted sessions from the 18 patients, a dosimetric comparison of adapted against nonadapted plans was done. RESULTS: A significant difference in the target coverage was found between the adapted and nonadapted plans (97.1 vs 90.4; P < .001) in favor of adapting. Without online adaptation, the optimal coverage of the prostate was not attained in 35% of fractions. Adapting allows for the improvement of the target coverage with compliance of all organ-at-risk dose constraints in all treatment fractions. CONCLUSIONS: The oART technique described in this study is technically feasible with a C-arm linac. To our knowledge, this is the first clinical experience with oART for prostate cancer including full replanning and delivered with a C-arm linac without artificial intelligence capability.

Validation of virtual water phantom software for pre-treatment verification of single-isocenter multiple-target stereotactic radiosurgery.

The aim of this study was to benchmark the accuracy of the VIrtual Phantom Epid dose Reconstruction (VIPER) software for pre-treatment dosimetric verification of multiple-target stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). VIPER is an EPID-based method to reconstruct a 3D dose distribution in a virtual phantom from in-air portal images. Validation of the VIPER dose calculation was assessed using several MLC-defined fields for a 6 MV photon beam. Central axis percent depth doses (PDDs) and output factors were measured with an ionization chamber in a water tank, while dose planes at a depth of 10 cm in a solid flat phantom were acquired with radiochromic films. The accuracy of VIPER for multiple-target SRS plan verification was benchmarked against Monte Carlo simulations. Eighteen multiple-target SRS plans designed with the Eclipse treatment planning system were mapped to a cylindrical water phantom. For each plan, the 3D dose distribution reconstructed by VIPER within the phantom was compared with the Monte Carlo simulation, using a 3D gamma analysis. Dose differences (VIPER vs. measurements) generally within 2% were found for the MLC-defined fields, while film dosimetry revealed gamma passing rates (GPRs) ≥95% for a 3%/1 mm criteria. For the 18 multiple-target SRS plans, average 3D GPRs greater than 93% and 98% for the 3%/2 mm and 5%/2 mm criteria, respectively. Our results validate the use of VIPER as a dosimetric verification tool for pre-treatment QA of single-isocenter multiple-target SRS plans. The method requires no setup time on the linac and results in an accurate 3D characterization of the delivered dose.

A closer look at the conventional Winston-Lutz test: Analysis in terms of dose.

AIM: To investigate whether the target-isocenter deviations reported by a conventional Winston-Lutz (WL) test actually reflect the shifts of the measured prescription isodose line with respect to the target. BACKGROUND: A conventional WL test uses a metallic ball as a target that aims at several fields. But this test does not report information on the accuracy of the delivery in terms of dose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A conventional WL test using a metallic pointer as a target (Pointer-WL test) has been recreated in the Eclipse treatment planning system over an acrylic phantom containing a radiochromic film (Dose-WL test). After Dose-WL test delivery, the shift of the 80% prescription isodose line with respect to the target center (d80%-center) was measured using film dosimetry. The Pointer-WL and Dose-WL tests were performed in 10 different sessions. The isocenter deviation reported by the Pointer-WL test was compared to the d80%-center vector, according to the three patient's directions (Left-Right or LR; Anterior-Posterior or AP; and Superior-Inferior or SI). RESULTS: The deviations (mean ± SD) found for the Dose-WL tests (LR: 0.5 ± 0.4 mm; AP: 0.5 ± 0.4 mm; SI: 0.6 ± 0.2 mm) were in most cases less than 1 mm, and they were significantly smaller (all p < 0.05) than the maximum deviations reported by the Pointer-WL tests (LR: 1.3 ± 0.3 mm; AP: 1.2 ± 0.4 mm; SI: 1.1 ± 0.3 mm). CONCLUSIONS: The Dose-WL test described in this study allows estimating the spatial accuracy of the prescription isodose line.

Evaluation of a novel software application for magnetic resonance distortion correction in cranial stereotactic radiosurgery.

This study aimed to validate a novel commercially available software for correcting spatial distortion in cranial magnetic resonance (MR) images. This software has been used to assess the dosimetric impact of MR distortion in stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatments of vestibular schwannomas (VSs). Five MR datasets were intentionally distorted. Each distorted MR dataset was corrected using the Cranial Distortion software, obtaining a new corrected MR dataset (MRcorr). The accuracy of the correction was quantified by calculating the target registration error (TRE) for 6 anatomical landmarks identified in the co-registered MRcorr and planning computed tomography (pCT) images. Nine VS cases were included to investigate the impact of the MR distortion in SRS plans. Each SRS plan was calculated on the pCT (1 × 1 × 1 mm3 voxel) with the target and organs at risk (OARs) delineated using the planning MR dataset. This MR dataset was then corrected (MRcorr) using the Cranial Distortion software. Geometrical agreement between the original target and the corresponding corrected target was assessed using several metrics: MacDonald criteria, mean distance to agreement (MDA), and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Target coverage (D99%) and maximum doses (D2%) to ipsilateral cochlea and brainstem resulting on the MRcorr dataset were compared with the original values. TRE values (0.6 mm ± 0.3 mm) and differences found in Macdonald criteria (0.3 mm ± 0.4 mm and 0.3 mm ± 0.3 mm) and MDA (0.8 mm ± 0.2 mm) were mostly within the voxel size dimension of the pCT scan (1 × 1 × 1 mm3). High similarity (DSC > 0.7) between the original and corrected targets was found. Small dose differences for the original and corrected structures were found: 0.1 Gy ± 0.1 Gy for target D99%, 0.2 Gy ± 0.3 Gy for cochlea D2%, and 0.1 Gy ± 0.1 Gy for brainstem D2%. Our study shows that Distortion Correction software can be a helpful tool to detect and adequately correct brain MR distortions. However, a negligible dosimetric impact of MR distortion has been detected in our clinical practice.

PRIMO Monte Carlo software benchmarked against a reference dosimetry dataset for 6 MV photon beams from Varian linacs.

BACKGROUND: The software PRIMO for the Monte Carlo simulation of radiotherapy linacs could potentially act as a independent calculation system to verify the calculations of treatment planning systems. We investigated the suitability of the PRIMO default beam parameters to produce accurate dosimetric results for 6 MV photon beams from Varian Clinac 2100 linacs and 6 MV flattening-filter-free photon beams from Varian TrueBeam linacs. METHODS: Simulation results with the DPM algorithm were benchmarked against a published reference dosimetry dataset based on point measurements of 25 dosimetric parameters on a large series of linacs. Studied parameters (for several field sizes and depths) were: PDD, off-axis ratios, and output factors for open fields and IMRT/SBRT-style fields. For the latter, the output factors were also determined with radiochromic film and with a small-sized ionization chamber. Benchmark data, PRIMO simulation results and our experimental results were compared. RESULTS: PDD, off-axis ratios, and open-field output factors obtained from the simulations with the PRIMO default beam parameters agreed with the benchmark data within 2.4% for Clinac 2100, and within 1.3% for TrueBeam. Higher differences were found for IMRT/SBRT-style output factors: up to 2.8% for Clinac 2100, and up to 3.3% for TrueBeam. Experimental output factors agreed with benchmark data within 1.0% (ionization chamber) and within 1.9% (radiochromic film). CONCLUSIONS: PRIMO default initial beam parameters for 6 MV photon beams from Varian Clinac 2100 linacs and 6 MV FFF photon beams from Varian TrueBeam linacs allowed agreement within 3.3% with a dosimetry database based on measurements of a high number of linacs. This finding represents a first step in the validation of PRIMO for the independent verification of radiotherapy plans.

Fast protocol for radiochromic film dosimetry using a cloud computing web application.

PURPOSE: To investigate the feasibility of a fast protocol for radiochromic film dosimetry to verify intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans. METHOD AND MATERIALS: EBT3 film dosimetry was conducted in this study using the triple-channel method implemented in the cloud computing application (Radiochromic.com). We described a fast protocol for radiochromic film dosimetry to obtain measurement results within 1h. Ten IMRT plans were delivered to evaluate the feasibility of the fast protocol. The dose distribution of the verification film was derived at 15, 30, 45min using the fast protocol and also at 24h after completing the irradiation. The four dose maps obtained per plan were compared using global and local gamma index (5%/3mm) with the calculated one by the treatment planning system. Gamma passing rates obtained for 15, 30 and 45min post-exposure were compared with those obtained after 24h. RESULTS: Small differences respect to the 24h protocol were found in the gamma passing rates obtained for films digitized at 15min (global: 99.6%±0.9% vs. 99.7%±0.5%; local: 96.3%±3.4% vs. 96.3%±3.8%), at 30min (global: 99.5%±0.9% vs. 99.7%±0.5%; local: 96.5%±3.2% vs. 96.3±3.8%) and at 45min (global: 99.2%±1.5% vs. 99.7%±0.5%; local: 96.1%±3.8% vs. 96.3±3.8%). CONCLUSIONS: The fast protocol permits dosimetric results within 1h when IMRT plans are verified, with similar results as those reported by the standard 24h protocol.

Investigating the spatial accuracy of CBCT-guided cranial radiosurgery: A phantom end-to-end test study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the spatial accuracy of a frameless cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-guided cranial radiosurgery (SRS) using an end-to-end (E2E) phantom test methodology. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Five clinical SRS plans were mapped to an acrylic phantom containing a radiochromic film. The resulting phantom-based plans (E2E plans) were delivered four times. The phantom was setup on the treatment table with intentional misalignments, and CBCT-imaging was used to align it prior to E2E plan delivery. Comparisons (global gamma analysis) of the planned and delivered dose to the film were performed using a commercial triple-channel film dosimetry software. The necessary distance-to-agreement to achieve a 95% (DTA95) gamma passing rate for a fixed 3% dose difference provided an estimate of the spatial accuracy of CBCT-guided SRS. Systematic (∑) and random (σ) error components, as well as 95% confidence levels were derived for the DTA95 metric. RESULTS: The overall systematic spatial accuracy averaged over all tests was 1.4mm (SD: 0.2mm), with a corresponding 95% confidence level of 1.8mm. The systematic (Σ) and random (σ) spatial components of the accuracy derived from the E2E tests were 0.2mm and 0.8mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The E2E methodology used in this study allowed an estimation of the spatial accuracy of our CBCT-guided SRS procedure. Subsequently, a PTV margin of 2.0mm is currently used in our department.

Dosimetric feasibility of an "off-breast isocenter" technique for whole-breast cancer radiotherapy.

AIM: To investigate the viability of placing the treatment isocenter at the patient midline for breast cancer radiotherapy in order to avoid the risk of collisions during image-guided setup and treatment delivery. BACKGROUND: The use of kilovoltage orthogonal setup images has spread in last years in breast radiotherapy. There is a potential risk of an imaging system-patient collision when the isocenter is laterally placed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty IMRT plans designed by placing the isocenter within the breast volume ("plan_ref"), were retrospectively replanned by shifting the isocenter at the patient's midline ("plan_off-breast"). An integrated simultaneous boost (SIB) technique was used. Multiple metrics for the planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OARs) were compared for both approaches using a paired t test. RESULTS: Comparing plan_ref vs. plan_off-breast, no significant differences in PTV coverage (V95%) were found (96.5% vs. 96.2%; p = 0.361 to PTVbreast; 97.0% vs. 97.0%; p = 0.977 to PTVtumor_bed). With regard to OARs, no substantial differences were observed in any analyzed metric: V5Gy (30.3% vs. 31.4%; p = 0.486), V20Gy (10.3% vs. 10.3%; p = 0.903) and mean dose (7.1 Gy vs. 7.1 Gy; p = 0.924) to the ipsilateral lung; V5Gy (11.2% vs. 10.0%; p = 0.459), V30Gy (0.7% vs. 0.6%; p = 0.251) and mean dose (2.3 Gy vs. 2.2 Gy; p = 0.400) to the heart; and average dose to the contralateral breast (0.4 Gy vs. 0.5 Gy; p = 0.107). CONCLUSIONS: The off-breast isocenter solution resulted in dosimetrically comparable plans as the reference technique, avoiding the collision risk during the treatment session.

Evaluation of the setup margins for cone beam computed tomography-guided cranial radiosurgery: A phantom study.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the setup margins from the clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) for cranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatments guided by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). We designed an end-to-end (E2E) test using a skull phantom with an embedded 6mm tungsten ball (target). A noncoplanar plan was computed (E2E plan) to irradiate the target. The CBCT-guided positioning of the skull phantom on the linac was performed. Megavoltage portal images were acquired after 15 independent deliveries of the E2E plan. The displacement 2-dimensional (2D) vector between the centers of the square field and the ball target on each portal image was used to quantify the isocenter accuracy. Geometrical margins on each patient׳s direction (left-right or LR, anterior-posterior or AP, superior-inferior or SI) were calculated. Dosimetric validation of the margins was performed in 5 real SRS cases: 3-dimesional (3D) isocenter deviations were mimicked, and changes in CTV dose coverage and organs-at-risk (OARs) dosage were analyzed. The CTV-PTV margins of 1.1mm in LR direction, and 0.7mm in AP and SI directions were derived from the E2E tests. The dosimetric analysis revealed that a 1-mm uniform margin was sufficient to ensure the CTV dose coverage, without compromising the OAR dose tolerances. The effect of isocenter uncertainty has been estimated to be 1mm in our CBCT-guided SRS approach.

Dosimetric feasibility of an "off-target isocenter" technique for cranial intensity-modulated radiosurgery.

To evaluate the dosimetric effect of placing the isocenter away from the planning target volume (PTV) on intensity-modulated radiosurgery (IMRS) plans to treat brain lesions. A total of 15 patients who received cranial IMRS at our institution were randomly selected. Each patient was treated with an IMRS plan designed with the isocenter located at the target center (plan A). A second off-target isocenter plan (plan B) was generated for each case. In all the plans,100% of the prescription dose covered 99% of the target volume. The plans A and B were compared for the target dosage (conformity index [CI] and homogeneity index) and organs-at-risk (OAR) dose sparing. Peripheral dose falloff was compared by using the metrics volume of normal brain receiving more than 12-Gy dose (V12) and CI at the level of the 50% of the prescription dose (CI 50%). The values found for each metric (plan B vs plan A) were (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) as follows-CI: 1.28 ± 0.15 vs 1.28 ± 0.15, p = 0.978; homogeneity index (HI): 1.29 ± 0.14 vs 1.34 ± 0.17, p = 0.079; maximum dose to the brainstem: 2.95 ± 2.11 vs 2.89 ± 1.88Gy, p = 0.813; maximum dose to the optical pathway: 2.65 ± 4.18 vs 2.44 ± 4.03Gy, p = 0.195; and maximum dose to the eye lens: 0.33 ± 0.73 vs 0.33 ± 0.53Gy, p = 0.970. The values of the peripheral dose falloff were (plan B vs plan A) as follows-V12: 5.98 ± 4.95 vs 6.06 ± 4.92cm(3), p = 0.622, and CI 50%: 6.08 ± 2.77 vs 6.28 ± 3.01, p = 0.119. The off-target isocenter solution resulted in dosimetrically comparable plans as the center-target isocenter technique, by avoiding the risk of gantry-couch collision during the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition.

A dosimetric evaluation of the Eclipse AAA algorithm and Millennium 120 MLC for cranial intensity-modulated radiosurgery.

The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of a convolution-based algorithm (anisotropic analytical algorithm [AAA]) implemented in the Eclipse planning system for intensity-modulated radiosurgery (IMRS) planning of small cranial targets by using a 5-mm leaf-width multileaf collimator (MLC). Overall, 24 patient-based IMRS plans for cranial lesions of variable size (0.3 to 15.1cc) were planned (Eclipse, AAA, version 10.0.28) using fixed field-based IMRS produced by a Varian linear accelerator equipped with a 120 MLC (5-mm width on central leaves). Plan accuracy was evaluated according to phantom-based measurements performed with radiochromic film (EBT2, ISP, Wayne, NJ). Film 2D dose distributions were performed with the FilmQA Pro software (version 2011, Ashland, OH) by using the triple-channel dosimetry method. Comparison between computed and measured 2D dose distributions was performed using the gamma method (3%/1mm). Performance of the MLC was checked by inspection of the DynaLog files created by the linear accelerator during the delivery of each dynamic field. The absolute difference between the calculated and measured isocenter doses for all the IMRS plans was 2.5% ± 2.1%. The gamma evaluation method resulted in high average passing rates of 98.9% ± 1.4% (red channel) and 98.9% ± 1.5% (blue and green channels). DynaLog file analysis revealed a maximum root mean square error of 0.46mm. According to our results, we conclude that the Eclipse/AAA algorithm provides accurate cranial IMRS dose distributions that may be accurately delivered by a Varian linac equipped with a Millennium 120 MLC.