Literature DB >> 19944590

IMRT quality assurance using a second treatment planning system.

Muhammad Naeem Anjum1, William Parker, Russell Ruo, Ismail Aldahlawi, Muhammad Afzal.   

Abstract

We used a second treatment planning system (TPS) for independent verification of the dose calculated by our primary TPS in the context of patient-specific quality assurance (QA) for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). QA plans for 24 patients treated with inverse planned dynamic IMRT were generated using the Nomos Corvus TPS. The plans were calculated on a computed tomography scan of our QA phantom that consists of three Solid Water slabs sandwiching radiochromic films, and an ion chamber that is inserted into the center slab of the phantom. For the independent verification, the dose was recalculated using the Varian Eclipse TPS using the multileaf collimator files and beam geometry from the original plan. The data was then compared in terms of absolute dose to the ion chamber volume as well as relative dose on isodoses calculated at the film plane. The calculation results were also compared with measurements performed for each case. When comparing ion chamber doses, the mean ratio was 0.999 (SD 0.010) for Eclipse vs. Corvus, 0.988 (SD 0.020) for the ionization chamber measurements vs. Corvus, and 0.989 (SD 0.017) for the ionization chamber measurements vs. Eclipse. For 2D doses with gamma histogram, the mean value of the percentage of pixels passing the criteria of 3%, 3 mm was 94.4 (SD 5.3) for Eclipse vs. Corvus, 85.1 (SD 10.6) for Corvus vs. film, and 93.7 (SD 4.1) for Eclipse vs. film; and for the criteria of 5%, 3 mm, 98.7 (SD 1.5) for Eclipse vs. Corvus, 93.0 (SD 7.8) for Corvus vs. film, and 98.0 (SD 1.9) for Eclipse vs. film. We feel that the use of the Eclipse TPS as an independent, accurate, robust, and time-efficient method for patient-specific IMRT QA is feasible in clinic.
Copyright © 2010 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19944590     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2009.09.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  5 in total

Review 1.  Towards effective and efficient patient-specific quality assurance for spot scanning proton therapy.

Authors:  X Ronald Zhu; Yupeng Li; Dennis Mackin; Heng Li; Falk Poenisch; Andrew K Lee; Anita Mahajan; Steven J Frank; Michael T Gillin; Narayan Sahoo; Xiaodong Zhang
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2015-04-10       Impact factor: 6.639

2.  Individual volume-based 3D gamma indices for pretreatment VMAT QA.

Authors:  Jinling Yi; Ce Han; Xiaomin Zheng; Yongqiang Zhou; Zhenxiang Deng; Congying Xie; Xiance Jin; Fu Jin
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Validation of a GPU-Based 3D dose calculator for modulated beams.

Authors:  Saeed Ahmed; Dylan Hunt; Jeff Kapatoes; Robert Hayward; Geoffrey Zhang; Eduardo G Moros; Vladimir Feygelman
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Automatic 3D Monte-Carlo-based secondary dose calculation for online verification of 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging guided radiotherapy.

Authors:  Marcel Nachbar; David Mönnich; Oliver Dohm; Melissa Friedlein; Daniel Zips; Daniela Thorwarth
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-06-21

5.  Independent calculation-based verification of volumetric-modulated arc therapy-stereotactic body radiotherapy plans for lung cancer.

Authors:  Tomohiro Ono; Takamasa Mitsuyoshi; Takashi Shintani; Yusuke Tsuruta; Hiraku Iramina; Hideaki Hirashima; Yuki Miyabe; Mitsuhiro Nakamura; Yukinori Matsuo; Takashi Mizowaki
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 2.102

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.