INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to investigate the systematic localization accuracy, treatment planning capability, and delivery accuracy of an integrated magnetic resonance imaging guided Linear Accelerator (MR-Linac) platform for stereotactic radiosurgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The phantom for the end-to-end test comprises three different compartments: a rectangular MR/CT target phantom, a Winston-Lutz cube, and a rectangular MR/CT isocenter phantom. Hidden target tests were performed at gantry angles of 0, 90, 180, and 270 degrees to quantify the systematic accuracy. Five patient plans with a total of eleven lesions were used to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy. Single-isocenter IMRT treatment plans using 10-15 coplanar beams were generated to treat the multiple metastases. RESULTS: The end-to-end localization accuracy of the system was 1.0 ± 0.1 mm. The conformity index, homogeneity index and gradient index of the plans were 1.26 ± 0.22, 1.22 ± 0.10, and 5.38 ± 1.44, respectively. The average absolute point dose difference between measured and calculated dose was 1.64 ± 1.90%, and the mean percentage of points passing the 3%/1 mm gamma criteria was 96.87%. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience demonstrates that excellent plan quality and delivery accuracy was achievable on the MR-Linac for treating multiple brain metastases with a single isocenter.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to investigate the systematic localization accuracy, treatment planning capability, and delivery accuracy of an integrated magnetic resonance imaging guided Linear Accelerator (MR-Linac) platform for stereotactic radiosurgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The phantom for the end-to-end test comprises three different compartments: a rectangular MR/CT target phantom, a Winston-Lutz cube, and a rectangular MR/CT isocenter phantom. Hidden target tests were performed at gantry angles of 0, 90, 180, and 270 degrees to quantify the systematic accuracy. Five patient plans with a total of eleven lesions were used to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy. Single-isocenter IMRT treatment plans using 10-15 coplanar beams were generated to treat the multiple metastases. RESULTS: The end-to-end localization accuracy of the system was 1.0 ± 0.1 mm. The conformity index, homogeneity index and gradient index of the plans were 1.26 ± 0.22, 1.22 ± 0.10, and 5.38 ± 1.44, respectively. The average absolute point dose difference between measured and calculated dose was 1.64 ± 1.90%, and the mean percentage of points passing the 3%/1 mm gamma criteria was 96.87%. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience demonstrates that excellent plan quality and delivery accuracy was achievable on the MR-Linac for treating multiple brain metastases with a single isocenter.
Authors: O Bohoudi; A M E Bruynzeel; S Senan; J P Cuijpers; B J Slotman; F J Lagerwaard; M A Palacios Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2017-08-12 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Ruud G J Wiggenraad; Anna L Petoukhova; Lia Versluis; Jan P C van Santvoort Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-02-11 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Wilko F A R Verbakel; Johan P Cuijpers; Daan Hoffmans; Michael Bieker; Ben J Slotman; Suresh Senan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Valerie Panet-Raymond; Will Ansbacher; Sergei Zavgorodni; Bill Bendorffe; Alan Nichol; Pauline T Truong; Wayne Beckham; Maria Vlachaki Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2012-07-05 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Ning Wen; Haisen Li; Kwang Song; Karen Chin-Snyder; Yujiao Qin; Jinkoo Kim; Maria Bellon; Misbah Gulam; Stephen Gardner; Anthony Doemer; Suneetha Devpura; James Gordon; Indrin Chetty; Farzan Siddiqui; Munther Ajlouni; Robert Pompa; Zane Hammoud; Michael Simoff; Steven Kalkanis; Benjamin Movsas; M Salim Siddiqui Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2015-07-08 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Benjamin Lewis; Anamaria Guta; Stacie Mackey; H Michael Gach; Sasa Mutic; Olga Green; Taeho Kim Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2021-01-15 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Kristen L Zakian; Andreas Wibmer; Hebert A Vargas; Eveline Alberts; Mo Kadbi; Borys Mychalczak; Marisa Kollmeier; Daniel Gorovets; Sean McBride; Margie Hunt; Michael J Zelefsky; Neelam Tyagi Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-06-25
Authors: B Yudhistiara; K J Weber; P E Huber; A Ruehle; S Brons; P Haering; J Debus; H Hauswald Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2019-09-12 Impact factor: 3.989
Authors: Nels C Knutson; William R Kennedy; Francisco J Reynoso; Jiayuan Peng; Lauren E Henke; Eric Laugeman; Michael Watts; Jessica Hillard; Ana Heermann; Geoffrey D Hugo; Sasa Mutic; Bin Cai Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-01-28
Authors: Christopher Kurz; Giulia Buizza; Guillaume Landry; Florian Kamp; Moritz Rabe; Chiara Paganelli; Guido Baroni; Michael Reiner; Paul J Keall; Cornelis A T van den Berg; Marco Riboldi Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-05-05 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: H Michael Gach; Austen N Curcuru; Erin J Wittland; Borna Maraghechi; Bin Cai; Sasa Mutic; Olga L Green Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2019-09-21 Impact factor: 2.102