James L Bedford1, Ian M Hanson1, Vibeke Nordmark Hansen1. 1. Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Portal dosimetry provides an accurate and convenient means of verifying dose delivered to the patient. A simple method for carrying out portal dosimetry for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is described, together with phantom measurements demonstrating the validity of the approach. METHODS: Portal images were predicted by projecting dose in the isocentric plane through to the portal image plane, with exponential attenuation and convolution with a double-Gaussian scatter function. Appropriate parameters for the projection were selected by fitting the calculation model to portal images measured on an iViewGT portal imager (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden) for a variety of phantom thicknesses and field sizes. This model was then used to predict the portal image resulting from each control point of a VMAT arc. Finally, all these control point images were summed to predict the overall integrated portal image for the whole arc. The calculated and measured integrated portal images were compared for three lung and three esophagus plans delivered to a thorax phantom, and three prostate plans delivered to a homogeneous phantom, using a gamma index for 3% and 3 mm. A 0.6 cm(3) ionization chamber was used to verify the planned isocentric dose. The sensitivity of this method to errors in monitor units, field shaping, gantry angle, and phantom position was also evaluated by means of computer simulations. RESULTS: The calculation model for portal dose prediction was able to accurately compute the portal images due to simple square fields delivered to solid water phantoms. The integrated images of VMAT treatments delivered to phantoms were also correctly predicted by the method. The proportion of the images with a gamma index of less than unity was 93.7% ± 3.0% (1SD) and the difference between isocenter dose calculated by the planning system and measured by the ionization chamber was 0.8% ± 1.0%. The method was highly sensitive to errors in monitor units and field shape, but less sensitive to errors in gantry angle or phantom position. CONCLUSIONS: This method of predicting integrated portal images provides a convenient means of verifying dose delivered using VMAT, with minimal image acquisition and data processing requirements.
PURPOSE: Portal dosimetry provides an accurate and convenient means of verifying dose delivered to the patient. A simple method for carrying out portal dosimetry for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is described, together with phantom measurements demonstrating the validity of the approach. METHODS: Portal images were predicted by projecting dose in the isocentric plane through to the portal image plane, with exponential attenuation and convolution with a double-Gaussian scatter function. Appropriate parameters for the projection were selected by fitting the calculation model to portal images measured on an iViewGT portal imager (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden) for a variety of phantom thicknesses and field sizes. This model was then used to predict the portal image resulting from each control point of a VMAT arc. Finally, all these control point images were summed to predict the overall integrated portal image for the whole arc. The calculated and measured integrated portal images were compared for three lung and three esophagus plans delivered to a thorax phantom, and three prostate plans delivered to a homogeneous phantom, using a gamma index for 3% and 3 mm. A 0.6 cm(3) ionization chamber was used to verify the planned isocentric dose. The sensitivity of this method to errors in monitor units, field shaping, gantry angle, and phantom position was also evaluated by means of computer simulations. RESULTS: The calculation model for portal dose prediction was able to accurately compute the portal images due to simple square fields delivered to solid water phantoms. The integrated images of VMAT treatments delivered to phantoms were also correctly predicted by the method. The proportion of the images with a gamma index of less than unity was 93.7% ± 3.0% (1SD) and the difference between isocenter dose calculated by the planning system and measured by the ionization chamber was 0.8% ± 1.0%. The method was highly sensitive to errors in monitor units and field shape, but less sensitive to errors in gantry angle or phantom position. CONCLUSIONS: This method of predicting integrated portal images provides a convenient means of verifying dose delivered using VMAT, with minimal image acquisition and data processing requirements.
Authors: Maria D Falco; Stefano Giancaterino; Andrea De Nicola; Nico Adorante; Ramon Gimenez De Lorenzo; Monica Di Tommaso; Annamaria Vinciguerra; Marianna Trignani; Francesca Perrotti; Albina Allajbej; Andrea Fidanzio; Francesca Greco; Mattia Grusio; Domenico Genovesi; Angelo Piermattei Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-01-01
Authors: Igor Olaciregui-Ruiz; Sam Beddar; Peter Greer; Nuria Jornet; Boyd McCurdy; Gabriel Paiva-Fonseca; Ben Mijnheer; Frank Verhaegen Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-08-29