Literature DB >> 10070795

Dosimetric verification of a commercial inverse treatment planning system.

L Xing1, B Curran, R Hill, T Holmes, L Ma, K M Forster, A L Boyer.   

Abstract

A commercial three-dimensional (3D) inverse treatment planning system, Corvus (Nomos Corporation, Sewickley, PA), was recently made available. This paper reports our preliminary results and experience with commissioning this system for clinical implementation. This system uses a simulated annealing inverse planning algorithm to calculate intensity-modulated fields. The intensity-modulated fields are divided into beam profiles that can be delivered by means of a sequence of leaf settings by a multileaf collimator (MLC). The treatments are delivered using a computer-controlled MLC. To test the dose calculation algorithm used by the Corvus software, the dose distributions for single rectangularly shaped fields were compared with water phantom scan data. The dose distributions predicted to be delivered by multiple fields were measured using an ion chamber that could be positioned in a rotatable cylindrical water phantom. Integrated charge collected by the ion chamber was used to check the absolute dose of single- and multifield intensity modulated treatments at various spatial points. The measured and predicted doses were found to agree to within 4% at all measurement points. Another set of measurements used a cubic polystyrene phantom with radiographic film to record the radiation dose distribution. The films were calibrated and scanned to yield two-dimensional isodose distributions. Finally, a beam imaging system (BIS) was used to measure the intensity-modulated x-ray beam patterns in the beam's-eye view. The BIS-measured images were then compared with a theoretical calculation based on the MLC leaf sequence files to verify that the treatment would be executed accurately and without machine faults. Excellent correlation (correlation coefficients > or = 0.96) was found for all cases. Treatment plans generated using intensity-modulated beams appear to be suitable for treatment of irregularly shaped tumours adjacent to critical structures. The results indicated that the system has potential for clinical radiation treatment planning and delivery and may in the future reduce treatment complexity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10070795     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/44/2/013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  21 in total

1.  Dose verification of IMRT by use of a COMPASS transmission detector.

Authors:  Yuji Nakaguchi; Fujio Araki; Masato Maruyama; Shunji Saiga
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2011-10-26

2.  Independent calculation of monitor units for VMAT and SPORT.

Authors:  Xin Chen; Karl Bush; Aiping Ding; Lei Xing
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  The effect of influence quantities and detector orientation on small-field patient-specific IMRT QA: comparison of measurements with various ionization chambers.

Authors:  Henry Finlay Godson; Ravikumar Manickam; Sathiyan Saminathan; Kadirampatti Mani Ganesh; Retna Ponmalar
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2016-12-01

4.  A calibration method for patient specific IMRT QA using a single therapy verification film.

Authors:  Arvind Kumar Shukla; Arun S Oinam; Sanjeev Kumar; I S Sandhu; S C Sharma
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2013-05-24

5.  Determination of boundaries between ranges of high and low gradient of beam profile.

Authors:  Jacek Wendykier; Marcin Bieniasiewicz; Aleksandra Grządziel; Tadeusz Jedynak; Wiktor Kośniewski; Marta Reudelsdorf; Piotr Wendykier
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2016-02-13

6.  Comparison of target coverage and dose to organs at risk between simultaneous integrated-boost whole-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy and junctioned intensity-modulated radiation therapy with a conventional radiotherapy field in treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Jin-Beom Chung; Jeong-Woo Lee; Jae-Sung Kim; In-Ah Kim; Doo-Hyun Lee; Yon-Lae Kim; Kyoung-Sik Choi; Bo-Young Choe; Tae-Suk Suh
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2011-05-10

7.  Using beam profile inflection point in process of treatment planning system verification.

Authors:  Jacek Wendykier; Aleksandra Grządziel; Barbara Bekman; Marcin Bieniasiewicz; Adam Bekman; Piotr Wendykier; Bożena Woźniak; Marta Reudelsdorf; Krzysztof Ślosarek
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2021-08-12

8.  Statistical analysis of IMRT dosimetry quality assurance measurements for local delivery guideline.

Authors:  Jin Beom Chung; Jae Sung Kim; Sung Whan Ha; Sung-Joon Ye
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2011-03-28       Impact factor: 3.481

9.  Dosimetric and QA aspects of Konrad inverse planning system for commissioning intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Authors:  Shrikant Deshpande; V K Sathiyanarayanan; Janhavi Bhangle; Kumara Swamy; Sumit Basu
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2007-04

10.  Evaluation of PTW Seven29 for tomotherapy patient-specific quality assurance and comparison with ScandiDos Delta(4).

Authors:  Pamela Myers; Sotirios Stathakis; Alonso N Gutiérrez; Carlos Esquivel; Panayiotis Mavroidis; Niko Papanikolaou
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2012-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.