Abstract

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 119 instructed institutions to use a low‐dose threshold of 10% or a region of interest determined by the jaw setting when they collected gamma analysis quality assurance (QA) data for the planar dose distribution. However, there are no clinical data to quantitatively demonstrate the impact of the low‐dose threshold on the gamma index. Therefore, we performed a gamma analysis with various low‐dose thresholds in the range of 0% to 15% according to both global and local normalization and different acceptance criteria (3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, and 1%/1 mm). A total of 30 treatment plans — 10 head and neck, 10 brain, and 10 prostate cancer cases — were randomly selected from the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS). For the gamma analysis, a calculated portal image was acquired through a portal dose calculation algorithm in the Eclipse TPS, and a measured portal image was obtained using an electronic portal‐imaging device. Then, the gamma analysis was performed using the Portal Dosimetry software (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA). The gamma passing rate (%GP) for the global normalization decreased as the low‐dose threshold increased, and all low‐dose thresholds led to %GP values above 95% for both the 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm criteria. However, for the local normalization, %GP for a low‐dose threshold of 10% was 7.47%, 10.23%, and 6.71% greater than the low‐dose threshold of 0% for head and neck, brain, and prostate for the 3%/3 mm criteria, respectively. The results indicate that applying the low‐dose threshold to global normalization does not have a critical impact on patient‐specific QA results. However, in the local normalization, the low‐dose threshold level should be carefully selected because the excluded low‐dose points could cause the average %GP to increase rapidly.PACS number: 87.55.Qr

Highlights

  • 264 Song et al.: Gamma analysis dependence on specified low-dose thresholds of the disagreement between the planned and actual movements of the machine

  • In order to evaluate patient-specific Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) quality assurance (QA), which is a fundamental process to confirm accurate dose delivery to the patient, VMAT studies have commonly employed gamma analysis to detect possible beam delivery errors.[7,8,9] Gamma analysis was first introduced by Low et al[10] to quantitatively compare calculated and measured dose distributions, and this technique uses the physical distance and dose difference, which are normalized by the acceptance criteria: the distance to agreement (DTA) and the dose differences (DD).(11) Gamma analysis has been discussed extensively in many papers in terms of various criteria, the searching range, and a comparison between two-dimensional (2D) and 3D gamma analysis

  • The objective of our study was to quantitatively investigate the effect of the low-dose threshold on gamma analysis according to three acceptance criteria, four different low-dose thresholds, and two normalization methods based on electronic portal image device (EPID) dosimetry of VMAT plans

Read more

Summary

Introduction

264 Song et al.: Gamma analysis dependence on specified low-dose thresholds of the disagreement between the planned and actual movements of the machine. In order to evaluate patient-specific VMAT QA, which is a fundamental process to confirm accurate dose delivery to the patient, VMAT studies have commonly employed gamma analysis to detect possible beam delivery errors.[7,8,9] Gamma analysis was first introduced by Low et al[10] to quantitatively compare calculated and measured dose distributions, and this technique uses the physical distance and dose difference, which are normalized by the acceptance criteria: the distance to agreement (DTA) and the dose differences (DD).(11) Gamma analysis has been discussed extensively in many papers in terms of various criteria, the searching range, and a comparison between two-dimensional (2D) and 3D gamma analysis These studies compared various gamma analyses and suggested adequate levels of gamma parameters.[2,3,12,13]. Even TG-119 has no clinical data to quantitatively demonstrate the impact of the low-dose threshold on the gamma index

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call