Literature DB >> 15895566

Retrospective analysis of 2D patient-specific IMRT verifications.

Nathan L Childress1, R Allen White, Charles Bloch, Mohammad Salehpour, Lei Dong, Isaac I Rosen.   

Abstract

We performed 858 two-dimensional (2D) patient-specific intensity modulated radiotherapy verifications over a period of 18 months. Multifield, composite treatment plans were measured in phantom using calibrated Kodak EDR2 film and compared with the calculated dose extracted from two treatment planning systems. This research summarizes our findings using the normalized agreement test (NAT) index and the percent of pixels failing the gamma index as metrics to represent the agreement between measured and computed dose distributions. An in-house dose comparison software package was used to register and compare all verifications. We found it was important to use an automatic positioning algorithm to achieve maximum registration accuracy, and that our automatic algorithm agreed well with anticipated results from known phantom geometries. We also measured absolute dose for each case using an ion chamber. Because the computed distributions agreed with ion chamber measurements better than the EDR2 film doses, we normalized EDR2 data to the computed distributions. The distributions of both the NAT indices and the percentage of pixels failing the gamma index were found to be exponential distributions. We continue to use both the NAT index and percent of pixels failing gamma with 5%/3 mm criteria to evaluate future verifications, as these two metrics were found to be complementary. Our data showed that using 2%/2 mm or 3%/3 mm criteria produces results similar to those using 5%/3 mm criteria. Normalized comparisons that have a NAT index greater than 45 and/or more than 20% of the pixels failing gamma for 5%/3 mm criteria represent outliers from our clinical data set and require further analysis. Because our QA verification results were exponentially distributed, rather than a tight grouping of similar results, we continue to perform patient-specific QA in order to identify and correct outliers in our verifications. The data from this work could be useful as a reference for other clinics to indicate anticipated trends in 2D verifications under various conditions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15895566     DOI: 10.1118/1.1879272

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  8 in total

1.  Practical guidelines for routine intensity-modulated radiotherapy verification: pre-treatment verification with portal dosimetry and treatment verification with in vivo dosimetry.

Authors:  A J Vinall; A J Williams; V E Currie; A Van Esch; D Huyskens
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Dose calculation with respiration-averaged CT processed from cine CT without a respiratory surrogate.

Authors:  Adam C Riegel; Moiz Ahmad; Xiaojun Sun; Tinsu Pan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Dose distribution verifications of IMRT for NPC.

Authors:  Qin Li; Liang Li; Jun Han; Zhiwen Liang
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2009-10-11

4.  Isodose feature-preserving voxelization (IFPV) for radiation therapy treatment planning.

Authors:  Hongcheng Liu; Lei Xing
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Implementation and validation of a commercial portal dosimetry software for intensity-modulated radiation therapy pre-treatment verification.

Authors:  C Varatharaj; Eugenia Moretti; M Ravikumar; Maria Rosa Malisan; Sanjay S Supe; Renato Padovani
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2010-10

6.  Portal dosimetry for pretreatment verification of IMRT plan: a comparison with 2D ion chamber array.

Authors:  Dayananda Shamurailatpam Sharma; Vaibav Mhatre; Malhotra Heigrujam; Kaustav Talapatra; Suman Mallik
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Evaluation of a new VMAT QA device, or the "X" and "O" array geometries.

Authors:  Vladimir Feygelman; Geoffrey Zhang; Craig Stevens; Benjamin E Nelms
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2011-01-31       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  A Monte Carlo study on electron and neutron contamination caused by the presence of hip prosthesis in photon mode of a 15 MV Siemens PRIMUS linac.

Authors:  Mohammad Taghi Bahreyni Toossi; Marziyeh Behmadi; Mahdi Ghorbani; Hamid Gholamhosseinian
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 2.102

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.