Study on the sensitivity of a volumetric modulated arc therapy plan verification equipment on multi-leaf collimator opening and closing errors and its gamma pass rate limit / 生物医学工程学杂志

To investigate the γ pass rate limit of plan verification equipment for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan verification and its sensitivity on the opening and closing errors of multi-leaf collimator (MLC), 50 cases of nasopharyngeal carcinoma VMAT plan with clockwise and counterclockwise full arcs were randomly selected. Eight kinds of MLC opening and closing errors were introduced in 10 cases of them, and 80 plans with errors were generated. Firstly, the plan verification was conducted in the form of field-by-field measurement and true composite measurement. The γ analysis with the criteria of 3% dose difference, distance to agreement of 2 mm, 10% dose threshold, and absolute dose global normalized conditions were performed for these fields. Then gradient analysis was used to investigate the sensitivity of field-by-field measurement and true composite measurement on MLC opening and closing errors, and the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was used to investigate the optimal threshold of γ pass rate for identifying errors. Tolerance limits and action limits for γ pass rates were calculated using statistical process control (SPC) method for another 40 cases. The error identification ability using the tolerance limit calculated by SPC method and the universal tolerance limit (95%) were compared with using the optimal threshold of ROC. The results show that for the true composite measurement, the clockwise arc and the counterclockwise arc, the descent gradients of the γ passing rate with per millimeter MLC opening error are 10.61%, 7.62% and 6.66%, respectively, and the descent gradients with per millimeter MLC closing error are 9.75%, 7.36% and 6.37%, respectively. The optimal thresholds obtained by the ROC method are 99.35%, 97.95% and 98.25%, respectively, and the tolerance limits obtained by the SPC method are 98.98%, 97.74% and 98.62%, respectively. The tolerance limit calculated by SPC method is close to the optimal threshold of ROC, both of which could identify all errors of ±2 mm, while the universal tolerance limit can only partially identify them, indicating that the universal tolerance limit is not sensitive on some large errors. Therefore, considering the factors such as ease of use and accuracy, it is suggested to use the true composite measurement in clinical practice, and to formulate tolerance limits and action limits suitable for the actual process of the institution based on the SPC method. In conclusion, it is expected that the results of this study can provide some references for institutions to optimize the radiotherapy plan verification process, set appropriate pass rate limit, and promote the standardization of plan verification.

Analysis of 2 010 patient-specific intensity-modulated radiation therapy dosimetric verification results / 中华放射医学与防护杂志

Objective To analyze the patient-specific dosimetric verification results of 2010 intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans from different treatment sites,and provide a reference for improving the patient-specific dosimetric verification program.Methods A total of 2 010 (965 IMRT and 1 045 VMAT) patient-specific dosimetric verification results were reviewed for isocenter dose difference and percentage of pixels passing planar dose γ analysis.All plans were designed with Eclipse planning system and delivered with Trilogy linear accelerator from February 2012 to February 2016.The dosimetric verification was performed with MatriXX array together with Muhicube phantom.Point dose difference larger than ± 3％ and/or γ pass rate (3％/ 3 mm) less than 90％ was defined as plan failure.Additional analysis was conducted for trends in difference of pass rates with treatment site and delivery technique (IMRT vs.VMAT).Results The mean isocenter difference between measured and calculated doses was-0.3％ ± 2.4％ for 2 010 plans.The mean percentage of pixels passing the γ criteria was 97.9％ ± 3.4％.88.2％ and 96.7％ of plans passed the point and planar dose verification,respectively.The γ pass rate was different among the treatment sites (F =3.09,P ＜ 0.05).The pass rate of point and planar dose difference was different among the treatment sites(x2 =40.93,39.15,P ＜0.05).There was no difference between IMRT and VMAT plans for both point dose and planar dose evaluation (P ＞ 0.05).Conclusions Most of IMRT and VMAT plans passed the tolerance criteria of ±3％ and 90％ for point and planar dose verification with MatriXX together with Multicube phantom,respectively.Both point and planar dose verification results varied among treatment sites,whereas no significant difference was found between IMRT and VMAT.

Deviation analysis of plan verification results of 260 volumetric modulated arc therapy plans / 中华放射肿瘤学杂志

Objective To investigate the γ pass rate and contributing factors by summarizing the plan verification results of 260 volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans.Methods From 2010 to 2012,two different detector arrays (MapCheck2,Sun,Nuclear,USA ; Delta4 ScandiDos,Swenden) were used for plan verification in 260 patients.The measured dose distributions were compared with the calculation results of treatment planning system using γ pass rate (Pγ ≤ 1 for 2％/2 mm,3％/3 mm and 5％/3 mm,threshold 10％).And the results were put under independent-samples t test.The impact of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) on the γ pass rate (3％/3 mm) was analyzed.Results The average γ pass rates of 2％/2 mm,3％/3 mm and 5％/3 mm of 260 VMAT plans were 91.7％,98.5％ and 99.7％,respectively.Among 260 VMAT plans,3 VMAT plans (1.2％ of the total) failed to meet the clinical acceptable pass rate and needed to be redesigned or re-optimized.The γ pass rate of 2％/2 mm was slightly different between two measurement devices (90.0％ vs 93.5％,P =0.000),while the γ pass rate of 3％/3 mm showed no significant difference between two measurement devices and two accelerators (98.5％ vs 98.5％,P =0.926 and 98.5％ vs 98.6％,P =0.670).The γ pass rate (3％/3 mm) of the treatment plan before MLC calibration was 61.1％,compared to 94.1％ after calibration.Conclusions Most dose verification results of treatment plans can meet the clinical requirement.Gantry rotation may influence the γ pass rate of VMAT dose verification under stricter pass rate standard (2％/2 mm).MLC calibration is essential for VMAT.

The feasibility study of independent check for intensity-modulated radiotherapy / 中华放射肿瘤学杂志

Objective To investigate of the accuracy and feasibility of independent check for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).Methods Inputing the linear accelerator Varian 600C/D physical data to IMsure ( a independent checking software) and constructing a calculation model.Use of IMsure to calculate the point dose and fluence of 25 cases IMRT treatment plans which have been calculated by Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS),and do a actual measurement of these plans by Matrixx at the same time.IMsure,TPS calculation results and measurement results of Matrixx were compared.Results Select Matrixx's center probe as a reference point,to TPS calculated results as the standard,then the average difference of the IMsure calculation and Matrixx measurement were ( -0.13 + 1.24)％ (t =0.20,P =0.840 ) and ( - 0.18 ± 1.45 ) ％ ( t =0.86,P =0.400 ),respectively.Compared IMsure with 3 mm/3 ％and 2 mm/2％ standard respectively,the average γ rate of TPS were (98.7 ±2.8)％ and (94.9 ±7.2)％ ;compared matrixx measurement results,the average γ rate of TPS were ( 99.0 + 2.0 ) ％ and ( 93.2 ±6.9) ％.The results show that the difference of the point dose and the γ rate of dose distribution by Matrixx measurement and IMsure calculation was no statistically significant difference ( t =1.54,P =0.126 ).Conclusions Independent checking software can be used in the treatment planning system to acceptance and initial clinical tests.In routine,a independent checking software as IMsure may do a pre-verificaton of IMRT treatment plan,or even partially replace of the actual measurement if the adequate conventional quality assurance do well,thus reducing the daily measurements.