Literature DB >> 33373394

Correlation of the gamma passing rates with the differences in the dose-volumetric parameters between the original VMAT plans and actual deliveries of the VMAT plans.

Jong Min Park1,2,3,4, Chang Heon Choi1,2,3, Hong-Gyun Wu1,2,3,4, Jung-In Kim1,2,3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the correlations of the gamma passing rates (GPR) with the dose-volumetric parameter changes between the original volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans and the actual deliveries of the VMAT plans (DV errors). We compared the correlations of the TrueBeam STx system to those of a C-series linac.
METHODS: A total of 20 patients with head and neck (H&N) cancer were retrospectively selected for this study. For each patient, two VMAT plans with the TrueBeam STx and Trilogy (C-series linac) systems were generated under similar modulation degrees. Both the global and local GPRs with various gamma criteria (3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, 2%/1 mm, 1%/2 mm, and 1%/1 mm) were acquired with the 2D dose distributions measured using the MapCHECK2 detector array. During VMAT deliveries, the linac log files of the multi-leaf collimator positions, gantry angles, and delivered monitor units were acquired. The DV errors were calculated with the 3D dose distributions reconstructed using the log files. Subsequently, Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (rs) and the corresponding p values were calculated between the GPRs and the DV errors.
RESULTS: For the Trilogy system, the rs values with p < 0.05 showed weak correlations between the GPRs and the DV errors (rs<0.4) whereas for the TrueBeam STx system, moderate or strong correlations were observed (rs≥0.4). The DV errors in the V20Gy of the left parotid gland and those in the mean dose of the right parotid gland showed strong correlations (always with rs > 0.6) with the GPRs with gamma criteria except 3%/3 mm. As the GPRs increased, the DV errors decreased.
CONCLUSION: The GPRs showed strong correlations with some of the DV errors for the VMAT plans for H&N cancer with the TrueBeam STx system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33373394      PMCID: PMC7771856          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244690

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  24 in total

1.  Quantitative Analyses of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic (QUANTEC): an introduction to the scientific issues.

Authors:  Søren M Bentzen; Louis S Constine; Joseph O Deasy; Avi Eisbruch; Andrew Jackson; Lawrence B Marks; Randall K Ten Haken; Ellen D Yorke
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Impact of plan parameters on the dosimetric accuracy of volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Authors:  Laura Masi; Raffaela Doro; Virginia Favuzza; Samantha Cipressi; Lorenzo Livi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Monte Carlo based, patient-specific RapidArc QA using Linac log files.

Authors:  Tony Teke; Alanah M Bergman; William Kwa; Bradford Gill; Cheryl Duzenli; I Antoniu Popescu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  On the impact of dose rate variation upon RapidArc implementation of volumetric modulated are therapy.

Authors:  Giorgia Nicolini; Alessandro Clivio; Luca Cozzi; Antonella Fogliata; Eugenio Vanetti
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119.

Authors:  Gary A Ezzell; Jay W Burmeister; Nesrin Dogan; Thomas J LoSasso; James G Mechalakos; Dimitris Mihailidis; Andrea Molineu; Jatinder R Palta; Chester R Ramsey; Bill J Salter; Jie Shi; Ping Xia; Ning J Yue; Ying Xiao
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  The effect of MLC speed and acceleration on the plan delivery accuracy of VMAT.

Authors:  J M Park; H-G Wu; J H Kim; J N K Carlson; K Kim
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Pretreatment patient-specific IMRT quality assurance: a correlation study between gamma index and patient clinical dose volume histogram.

Authors:  M Stasi; S Bresciani; A Miranti; A Maggio; V Sapino; P Gabriele
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 8.  Tolerance limits and methodologies for IMRT measurement-based verification QA: Recommendations of AAPM Task Group No. 218.

Authors:  Moyed Miften; Arthur Olch; Dimitris Mihailidis; Jean Moran; Todd Pawlicki; Andrea Molineu; Harold Li; Krishni Wijesooriya; Jie Shi; Ping Xia; Nikos Papanikolaou; Daniel A Low
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-03-23       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Texture analysis on the edge-enhanced fluence of VMAT.

Authors:  So-Yeon Park; Jong Min Park; Wonmo Sung; Il Han Kim; Sung-Joon Ye
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.481

10.  The sensitivity of gamma-index method to the positioning errors of high-definition MLC in patient-specific VMAT QA for SBRT.

Authors:  Jung-In Kim; So-Yeon Park; Hak Jae Kim; Jin Ho Kim; Sung-Joon Ye; Jong Min Park
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2014-07-28       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.