Validation of an in vivo transit dosimetry algorithm using Monte Carlo simulations and ionization chamber measurements.

PURPOSE: Transit dosimetry is a safety tool based on the transit images acquired during treatment. Forward-projection transit dosimetry software, as PerFRACTION, compares the transit images acquired with an expected image calculated from the DICOM plan, the CT, and the structure set. This work aims to validate PerFRACTION expected transit dose using PRIMO Monte Carlo simulations and ionization chamber measurements, and propose a methodology based on MPPG5a report. METHODS: The validation process was divided into three groups of tests according to MPPG5a: basic dose validation, IMRT dose validation, and heterogeneity correction validation. For the basic dose validation, the fields used were the nine fields needed to calibrate PerFRACTION and three jaws-defined. For the IMRT dose validation, seven sweeping gaps fields, the MLC transmission and 29 IMRT fields from 10 breast treatment plans were measured. For the heterogeneity validation, the transit dose of these fields was studied using three phantoms: 10 , 30 , and a 3 cm cork slab placed between 10 cm of solid water. The PerFRACTION expected doses were compared with PRIMO Monte Carlo simulation results and ionization chamber measurements. RESULTS: Using the 10 cm solid water phantom, for the basic validation fields, the root mean square (RMS) of the difference between PerFRACTION and PRIMO simulations was 0.6%. In the IMRT fields, the RMS of the difference was 1.2%. When comparing respect ionization chamber measurements, the RMS of the difference was 1.0% both for the basic and the IMRT validation. The average passing rate with a γ(2%/2 mm, TH = 20%) criterion between PRIMO dose distribution and PerFRACTION expected dose was 96.0% ± 5.8%. CONCLUSION: We validated PerFRACTION calculated transit dose with PRIMO Monte Carlo and ionization chamber measurements adapting the methodology of the MMPG5a report. The methodology presented can be applied to validate other forward-projection transit dosimetry software.

Gamma passing rates of daily EPID transit images correlate to PTV coverage for breast cancer IMRT treatment plans.

PURPOSE: The use of the transit image obtained with the electronic portal-imaging device (EPID) is becoming an extended method to perform in-vivo dosimetry. The transit images acquired during each fraction can be compared with a predicted image, if available, or with a baseline image, usually the obtained in the first fraction. This work aims to study the dosimetric impact of the failing fractions and to evaluate the appropriateness of using a baseline image in breast plans. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty breast patients treated in a Halcyon were retrospectively selected. For each patient and fraction, the treatment plan was calculated over the daily CBCT image. For each fraction, the differences respect to the treatment plan values of OARs and PTV dosimetric parameters were analyzed: ΔDmean , ΔD95%, ΔD98%, ΔD2%, ΔV36Gy, ΔV38.5Gy, and ΔV43.5Gy. Daily fractions were ranked according to the differences found in the dosimetric parameters between the treatment plan and the daily CBCT to establish the best fraction. The daily transit images acquired in every fraction were compared to the first fraction using the global gamma index with the Portal Dosimetry tool. The comparison was repeated using the best fraction image as a baseline. We assessed the correlation of the dosimetric differences obtained from the CBCT images-based treatment plans with the gamma index passing rates obtained using first fraction and best fraction as baseline. RESULTS: Average values of -11.6% [-21.4%, -3.3%] and -3.2% [-1.0%, -10.3%] for the ∆PTVD98% and ∆PTVD95% per every 10% decrease in the passing rate were found, respectively. When using the best fraction as baseline patients were detected with failing fractions that were not detected with the first fraction as baseline. CONCLUSION: The gamma passing rates of daily transit images correlate with the coverage loss parameters in breast IMRT plans. Using first fraction image as baseline can lead to the non-detectability of failing fractions.

Monte Carlo simulation of conical collimators for stereotactic radiosurgery with a 6 MV flattening-filter-free photon beam.

PURPOSE: Conical collimators, or cones, are tertiary collimators that attach to a radiotherapy linac and are suited for the stereotactic radiosurgery treatment of small brain lesions. The small diameter of the most used cones makes difficult the acquisition of the dosimetry data needed for the commissioning of treatment planning systems. Although many publications report dosimetric data of conical collimators for stereotactic radiosurgery, most of the works use different setups, which complicates comparisons. In other cases, the cone output factors reported do not take into account the effect of the small cone diameter on the detector response. Finally, few data exist on the dosimetry of cones with flattening-filter-free (FFF) beams from modern linac models. This work aims at obtaining a dosimetric characterization of the conical collimators manufactured by Brainlab AG (Munich, Germany) in a 6 MV FFF beam from a TrueBeam STx linac (Varian Medical Systems). METHODS: Percentage depth dose curves, lateral dose profiles and cone output factors were obtained using Monte Carlo simulations for the cones with diameters of 4, 5, 6, 7.5, 8, 10, 12.5, 15, 17.5, 20, 25, and 30 mm. The simulation of the linac head was carried out with the PRIMO Monte Carlo software, and the simulations of the cones and the water phantom were run with the general-purpose Monte Carlo code PENELOPE. The Monte Carlo model was validated by comparing the simulation results with measurements performed for the cones of 4, 5, and 7.5 mm of diameter using a stereotactic field diode, a microDiamond detector and EBT3 radiochromic film. In addition, for those cones, simulations and measurements were done for comparison purposes, by reproducing the experimental setups from the available publications. RESULTS: The experimental data acquired for the cones of 4, 5, and 7.5 mm validated the developed Monte Carlo model. The simulations accurately reproduced the experimental depths of maximum dose and the dose ratio at 20- and 10-cm depth (PDD20/10 ). A good agreement was obtained between simulated and experimental lateral dose profiles: The differences in the full-width at half-maximum were smaller than 0.2 mm, and the differences in the penumbra 80%-20% were smaller than 0.25 mm. The difference between the simulated and the average of the experimental output factors for the cones of 4, 5, and 7.5 mm of diameter was 0.0%, 0.0%, and 3.0%, respectively, well within the statistical uncertainty of the simulations (4.4% with coverage factor k = 2). It was also found that the simulated cone output factors agreed within 2% with the average of output factors reported in the literature for a variety of setup conditions, detectors, beam qualities, and cone manufacturers. CONCLUSION: A Monte Carlo model of cones for stereotactic radiosurgery has been developed and validated. The cone dosimetry dataset obtained in this work, consisting of percentage depth doses, lateral dose profiles and output factors, is useful to benchmark data acquired for the commissioning of cone-based radiosurgery treatment planning systems.

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.

Assessment of the Monitor Unit Objective tool for VMAT in the Eclipse treatment planning system.

AIM: This work aims to achieve the highest possible monitor units (MU) reduction using the MU Objective tool included in the Eclipse treatment planning system, while preserving the plan quality. BACKGROUND: The treatment planning system Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) includes a control mechanism for the number of monitor units of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans, named the MU Objective tool. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty prostate plans, 20 gynecological plans and 20 head and neck plans designed with VMAT were retrospectively studied. Each plan (base plan) was optimized without using the MU Objective tool, and it was re-optimized with different values of the Maximum MU (MaxMU) parameter of the MU Objective tool. MU differences were analyzed with a paired samples t-test and changes in plan quality were assessed with a set of parameters for OARs and PTVs. RESULTS: The average relative MU difference [Formula: see text] considering all treatment sites, was the highest when MaxMU = 400 (-4.2%, p < 0.001). For prostate plans, the lowest [Formula: see text] was obtained (-3.7%, p < 0.001). For head and neck plans [Formula: see text] was -7.3% (p < 0.001) and for gynecological plans [Formula: see text] was 7.0% (p = 0.002). Although similar MU reductions were observed for both sites, for some gynecological plans maximum differences were greater than 10%. All the assessed parameters for PTVs and OARs sparing showed average differences below 2%. CONCLUSION: For the three studied clinical sites, establishing MaxMU = 400 led to the optimum MU reduction, maintaining the original dose distribution and dosimetric parameters practically unaltered.