Literature DB >> 24958705

A retrospective analysis for patient-specific quality assurance of volumetric-modulated arc therapy plans.

Guangjun Li1, Kui Wu2, Guang Peng1, Yingjie Zhang1, Sen Bai3.   

Abstract

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is now widely used clinically, as it is capable of delivering a highly conformal dose distribution in a short time interval. We retrospectively analyzed patient-specific quality assurance (QA) of VMAT and examined the relationships between the planning parameters and the QA results. A total of 118 clinical VMAT cases underwent pretreatment QA. All plans had 3-dimensional diode array measurements, and 69 also had ion chamber measurements. Dose distribution and isocenter point dose were evaluated by comparing the measurements and the treatment planning system (TPS) calculations. In addition, the relationship between QA results and several planning parameters, such as dose level, control points (CPs), monitor units (MUs), average field width, and average leaf travel, were also analyzed. For delivered dose distribution, a gamma analysis passing rate greater than 90% was obtained for all plans and greater than 95% for 100 of 118 plans with the 3%/3-mm criteria. The difference (mean ± standard deviation) between the point doses measured by the ion chamber and those calculated by TPS was 0.9% ± 2.0% for all plans. For all cancer sites, nasopharyngeal carcinoma and gastric cancer have the lowest and highest average passing rates, respectively. From multivariate linear regression analysis, the dose level (p = 0.001) and the average leaf travel (p < 0.001) showed negative correlations with the passing rate, and the average field width (p = 0.003) showed a positive correlation with the passing rate, all indicating a correlation between the passing rate and the plan complexity. No statistically significant correlation was found between MU or CP and the passing rate. Analysis of the results of dosimetric pretreatment measurements as a function of VMAT plan parameters can provide important information to guide the plan parameter setting and optimization in TPS.
Copyright © 2014 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gamma analysis; Leaf travel; Quality assurance; Volumetric-modulated arc therapy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24958705     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2014.05.003

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


  4 in total

1.  Dynamic positioning accuracy of a novel multileaf collimator for volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Authors:  Yuji Nakaguchi; Takeshi Ono; Ryota Onizuka; Masato Maruyama; Yoshinobu Shimohigashi; Yudai Kai
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2015-11-26

2.  A remote EPID-based dosimetric TPS-planned audit of centers for clinical trials: outcomes and analysis of contributing factors.

Authors:  Narges Miri; Kimberley Legge; Kim Colyvas; Joerg Lehmann; Philip Vial; Alisha Moore; Monica Harris; Peter B Greer
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-09-17       Impact factor: 3.481

3.  Beam complexity and monitor unit efficiency comparison in two different volumetric modulated arc therapy delivery systems using automated planning.

Authors:  Chengqiang Li; Cheng Tao; Tong Bai; Zhenjiang Li; Ying Tong; Jian Zhu; Yong Yin; Jie Lu
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 4.430

4.  Quantified VMAT plan complexity in relation to measurement-based quality assurance results.

Authors:  Michael Nguyen; Gordon H Chan
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 2.243

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.