4D Dose Calculations Research Articles

4D cone beam CT-based dose assessment for SBRT lung cancer treatment

The purpose of this research is to develop a 4DCBCT-based dose assessment method for calculating actual delivered dose for patients with significant respiratory motion or anatomical changes during the course of SBRT. To address the limitation of 4DCT-based dose assessment, we propose to calculate the delivered dose using time-varying (‘fluoroscopic’) 3D patient images generated from a 4DCBCT-based motion model. The method includes four steps: (1) before each treatment, 4DCBCT data is acquired with the patient in treatment position, based on which a patient-specific motion model is created using a principal components analysis algorithm. (2) During treatment, 2D time-varying kV projection images are continuously acquired, from which time-varying ‘fluoroscopic’ 3D images of the patient are reconstructed using the motion model. (3) Lateral truncation artifacts are corrected using planning 4DCT images. (4) The 3D dose distribution is computed for each timepoint in the set of 3D fluoroscopic images, from which the total effective 3D delivered dose is calculated by accumulating deformed dose distributions. This approach is validated using six modified XCAT phantoms with lung tumors and different respiratory motions derived from patient data. The estimated doses are compared to that calculated using ground-truth XCAT phantoms. For each XCAT phantom, the calculated delivered tumor dose values generally follow the same trend as that of the ground truth and at most timepoints the difference is less than 5%. For the overall delivered dose, the normalized error of calculated 3D dose distribution is generally less than 3% and the tumor D95 error is less than 1.5%. XCAT phantom studies indicate the potential of the proposed method to accurately estimate 3D tumor dose distributions for SBRT lung treatment based on 4DCBCT imaging and motion modeling. Further research is necessary to investigate its performance for clinical patient data.

Experimental pencil beam kernels derivation for 3D dose calculation in flattening filter free modulated fields

This paper presents a method to obtain the pencil-beam kernels that characterize a megavoltage photon beam generated in a flattening filter free (FFF) linear accelerator (linac) by deconvolution from experimental measurements at different depths. The formalism is applied to perform independent dose calculations in modulated fields.In our previous work a formalism was developed for ideal flat fluences exiting the linac’s head. That framework could not deal with spatially varying energy fluences, so any deviation from the ideal flat fluence was treated as a perturbation. The present work addresses the necessity of implementing an exact analysis where any spatially varying fluence can be used such as those encountered in FFF beams. A major improvement introduced here is to handle the actual fluence in the deconvolution procedure. We studied the uncertainties associated to the kernel derivation with this method. Several Kodak EDR2 radiographic films were irradiated with a 10 MV FFF photon beam from two linacs from different vendors, at the depths of 5, 10, 15, and 20cm in polystyrene (RW3 water-equivalent phantom, PTW Freiburg, Germany). The irradiation field was a 50mm diameter circular field, collimated with a lead block.The 3D kernel for a FFF beam was obtained by deconvolution using the Hankel transform. A correction on the low dose part of the kernel was performed to reproduce accurately the experimental output factors. Error uncertainty in the kernel derivation procedure was estimated to be within 0.2%. Eighteen modulated fields used clinically in different treatment localizations were irradiated at four measurement depths (total of fifty-four film measurements). Comparison through the gamma-index to their corresponding calculated absolute dose distributions showed a number of passing points (3%, 3mm) mostly above 99%. This new procedure is more reliable and robust than the previous one. Its ability to perform accurate independent dose calculations was demonstrated.

Impact of temporal probability in 4D dose calculation for lung tumors.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric uncertainty in 4D dose calculation using three temporal probability distributions: uniform distribution, sinusoidal distribution, and patient‐specific distribution derived from the patient respiratory trace. Temporal probability, defined as the fraction of time a patient spends in each respiratory amplitude, was evaluated in nine lung cancer patients. Four‐dimensional computed tomography (4D CT), along with deformable image registration, was used to compute 4D dose incorporating the patient's respiratory motion. First, the dose of each of 10 phase CTs was computed using the same planning parameters as those used in 3D treatment planning based on the breath‐hold CT. Next, deformable image registration was used to deform the dose of each phase CT to the breath‐hold CT using the deformation map between the phase CT and the breath‐hold CT. Finally, the 4D dose was computed by summing the deformed phase doses using their corresponding temporal probabilities. In this study, 4D dose calculated from the patient‐specific temporal probability distribution was used as the ground truth. The dosimetric evaluation matrix included: 1) 3D gamma analysis, 2) mean tumor dose (MTD), 3) mean lung dose (MLD), and 4) lung V20. For seven out of nine patients, both uniform and sinusoidal temporal probability dose distributions were found to have an average gamma passing rate >95% for both the lung and PTV regions. Compared with 4D dose calculated using the patient respiratory trace, doses using uniform and sinusoidal distribution showed a percentage difference on average of −0.1%±0.6% and −0.2%±0.4% in MTD, −0.2%±1.9% and −0.2%±1.3% in MLD, 0.09%±2.8% and −0.07%±1.8% in lung V20, −0.1%±2.0% and 0.08%±1.34% in lung V10, 0.47%±1.8% and 0.19%±1.3% in lung V5, respectively. We concluded that four‐dimensional dose computed using either a uniform or sinusoidal temporal probability distribution can approximate four‐dimensional dose computed using the patient‐specific respiratory trace.PACS number: 87.55.D‐

Improving 4D plan quality for PBS-based liver tumour treatments by combining online image guided beam gating with rescanning

Pencil beam scanned (PBS) proton therapy has many advantages over conventional radiotherapy, but its effectiveness for treating mobile tumours remains questionable. Gating dose delivery to the breathing pattern is a well-developed method in conventional radiotherapy for mitigating tumour-motion, but its clinical efficiency for PBS proton therapy is not yet well documented. In this study, the dosimetric benefits and the treatment efficiency of beam gating for PBS proton therapy has been comprehensively evaluated. A series of dedicated 4D dose calculations (4DDC) have been performed on 9 different 4DCT(MRI) liver data sets, which give realistic 4DCT extracting motion information from 4DMRI. The value of 4DCT(MRI) is its capability of providing not only patient geometries and deformable breathing characteristics, but also includes variations in the breathing patterns between breathing cycles. In order to monitor target motion and derive a gating signal, we simulate time-resolved beams’ eye view (BEV) x-ray images as an online motion surrogate. 4DDCs have been performed using three amplitude-based gating window sizes (10/5/3 mm) with motion surrogates derived from either pre-implanted fiducial markers or the diaphragm. In addition, gating has also been simulated in combination with up to 19 times rescanning using either volumetric or layered approaches. The quality of the resulting 4DDC plans has been quantified in terms of the plan homogeneity index (HI), total treatment time and duty cycle. Results show that neither beam gating nor rescanning alone can fully retrieve the plan homogeneity of the static reference plan. Especially for variable breathing patterns, reductions of the effective duty cycle to as low as 10% have been observed with the smallest gating rescanning window (3 mm), implying that gating on its own for such cases would result in much longer treatment times. In addition, when rescanning is applied on its own, large differences between volumetric and layered rescanning have been observed as a function of increasing number of re-scans. However, once gating and rescanning is combined, HI to within 2% of the static plan could be achieved in the clinical target volume, with only moderately prolonged treatment times, irrespective of the rescanning strategy used. Moreover, these results are independent of the motion surrogate used. In conclusion, our results suggest image guided beam gating, combined with rescanning, is a feasible, effective and efficient motion mitigation approach for PBS-based liver tumour treatments.

Comparing cone-beam CT intensity correction methods for dose recalculation in adaptive intensity-modulated photon and proton therapy for head and neck cancer

ABSTRACTBackground. Adaptive intensity-modulated photon and proton radiotherapy (IMRT and IMPT) of head and neck (H&N) cancer requires frequent three-dimensional (3D) dose calculation. We compared two approaches for dose recalculation on the basis of intensity-corrected cone-beam (CB) x-ray computed tomography (CT) images.Material and methods. For nine H&N tumor patients, virtual CTs (vCT) were generated by deformable image registration of the planning CT (pCT) to the CBCT. The second intensity correction approach used population-based lookup tables for scaling CBCT intensities to the pCT HU range (CBCTLUT). IMRT and IMPT plans were generated with a commercial treatment planning system. Dose recalculations on vCT and CBCTLUT were analyzed using a (3%, 3 mm) gamma-index analysis and comparison of normal tissue and tumor dose/volume parameters. A replanning CT (rpCT) acquired within three days of the CBCT served as reference. Single field uniform dose (SFUD) proton plans were created and recalculated on vCT and CBCTLUT for proton range comparison.Results. Dose/volume parameters showed minor differences between rpCT, vCT and CBCTLUT in IMRT, but clinically relevant deviations between CBCTLUT and rpCT in the spinal cord for IMPT. Gamma-index pass-rates were found increased for vCT with respect to CBCTLUT in IMPT (by up to 21 percentage points) and IMRT (by up to 9 percentage points) for most cases. The SFUD-based proton range assessment showed improved agreement of vCT and rpCT, with 88–99% of the depth dose profiles in beam's eye view agreeing within 3 mm. For CBCTLUT, only 80–94% of the profiles fulfilled this criterion.Conclusion. vCT and CBCTLUT are suitable options for dose recalculation in adaptive IMRT. In the scope of IMPT, the vCT approach is preferable.

Three-dimensional versus four-dimensional dose calculation for volumetric modulated arc therapy of hypofractionated treatments

PurposeRespiratory motion is a non-negligible source of uncertainty in radiotherapy. A common approach is to delineate the target volume in all respiratory phases (ITV) and to calculate a treatment plan using the average reconstruction of the four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) scans. In this study the extent of the interplay effect caused by interaction between dynamic dose delivery and respiratory tumor motion, as well as other motion effects were investigated. These effects are often ignored when the ITV concept is used. Methods and MaterialsNine previously treated patients with in ten abdominal or thoracic cancer lesions (3 liver, 3 adrenal glands and 4 lung lesions) were selected for this planning study. For all patients, phase-sorted respiration-correlated 4DCT scans were taken, and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatments were planned using the ITV concept. Margins from ITV to planning target volume (PTV) of 3-10mm were used. Plans were optimized and dose distributions were calculated on the average reconstruction of the 4DCT. 4D dose distributions were calculated to evaluate motion effects, caused by the interference of dynamic treatment delivery with respiratory tumor motion and inhomogeneously planned target dose. These calculations were performed on the phase-sorted CT series with a respiration-correlated assignment of the treatment plan's monitor units (MU) to the respiration phases of the 4DCT. The 4D dose was accumulated with rigid as well as deformable registrations of the CT series and compared to the original 3D dose distribution. Maximum, minimum and mean doses to ITV and PTV, and maximum or mean doses to organs at risk (OAR), were compared after rigid accumulation. The dose variation in the gross tumor volume (GTV) was compared after deformable registration. ResultsUsing rigid registrations, variations in the investigated dose parameters between 3D and 4D dose calculations were found to be within -2.1% to 1.4% for all target volumes and within -0.8% to 1.7% in OAR. Using deformable registrations, dose differences in the GTV were below 3.8% for dose accumulation of lung and adrenal gland patients. For liver patients the used deformable registrations were not considered to be robust enough. It was also shown that a major part of the dose differences originates from the Hounsfield unit differences between 3D and 4D calculations, regardless of the interplay effect. ConclusionThe evaluated motion effects during VMAT treatments resulted in negligible dose variability. Therefore, the approximation of calculating the dose on the average reconstruction of the 4DCT (3D dose calculation), instead of calculating on the respiration-correlated phase CTs (4D dose calculation) with assignment of the corresponding MUs, gives acceptable results.

TU-EF-304-02: 4D Optimized Treatment Planning for Actively Scanned Proton Therapy Delivered to Moving Target Volume

Purpose: To develop a 4D treatment optimization approach for Pencil Beam Scanned (PBS) proton therapy that includes breathing variability. Method: PBS proton therapy delivers a pattern of proton pencil beams (PBs), distributed to cover the target volume and optimized such as to achieve a homogenous dose distribution across the target. In this work, this optimization step has been enhanced to include advanced 4D dose calculations of liver tumors based on motion extracted from either 4D-CT (representing a single and averaged respiratory cycle) or 4D-CT(MRI) (including breathing variability). The 4D dose calculation is performed per PB on deforming dose grid, and according to the timestamp of each PB, a displacement due to patient’s motion and a change in radiological depth.Three different treatment fields have been optimized in 3D on the end-exhale phase of a 4D-CT liver data set (3D-opt) and then in 4D using the motion extracted from either 4D-CT or 4D-CT(MRI) using deformable image registration. All plans were calculated directly on the PTV without the use of an ITV. The delivery characteristics of the PSI Gantry 2 have been assumed for all calculations. Results: Dose inhomogeneities (D5-D95) in the CTV for the 3D optimized plans recalculated under conditions of variable motion were increased by on average 19.8% compared to the static case. These differences could be reduced by 4D-CT based 4D optimization to 10.5% and by 4D-CT(MRI) based optimization to only 2.3% of the static value. Liver V25 increased by less than 1% using 4D optimization. Conclusion: 4D optimized PBS treatment plans taking into account breathing variability provide for significantly improved robustness against motion and motion variability than those based on 4D-CT alone, and may negate the need of motion specific target expansions. Swiss National Fund Grant (320030_1493942-1)

SU-E-J-110: Dosimetric Analysis of Respiratory Motion Based On Four-Dimensional Dose Accumulation in Liver Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

Purpose: Respiratory motion in thoracic and abdominal region could lead to significant underdosing of target and increased dose to healthy tissues. The aim of this study is to evaluate the dosimetric effect of respiratory motion in conventional 3D dose by comparing 4D deformable dose in liver stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Methods: Five patients who had previously treated liver SBRT were included in this study. Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) images with 10 phases for all patients were acquired on multi-slice CT scanner (Siemens, Somatom definition). Conventional 3D planning was performed using the average intensity projection (AIP) images. 4D dose accumulation was calculated by summation of dose distribution for all phase images of 4DCT using deformable image registration (DIR) . The target volume and normal organs dose were evaluated with the 4D dose and compared with those from 3D dose. And also, Index of achievement (IOA) which assesses the consistency between planned dose and prescription dose was used to compare target dose distribution between 3D and 4D dose. Results: Although the 3D dose calculation considered the moving target coverage, significant differences of various dosimetric parameters between 4D and 3D dose were observed in normal organs and PTV. The conventional 3D dose overestimatedmore » dose to PTV, however, there was no significant difference for GTV. The average difference of IOA which become ‘1’ in an ideal case was 3.2% in PTV. The average difference of liver and duodenum was 5% and 16% respectively. Conclusion: 4D dose accumulation which can provide dosimetric effect of respiratory motion has a possibility to predict the more accurate delivered dose to target and normal organs and improve treatment accuracy. This work was supported by the Radiation Technology R&D program (No. 2013M2A2A7043498) and the Mid-career Researcher Program (2014R1A2A1A10050270) through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT&Future Planning (MSIP) of Korea.« less

SU‐E‐T‐04: 3D Dose Based Patient Compensator QA Procedure for Proton Radiotherapy

Purpose:In proton double‐scattering radiotherapy, compensators are the essential patient specific devices to contour the distal dose distribution to the tumor target. Traditional compensator QA is limited to checking the drilled surface profiles against the plan. In our work, a compensator QA process was established that assess the entire compensator including its internal structure for patient 3D dose verification.Methods:The fabricated patient compensators were CT scanned. Through mathematical image processing and geometric transformations, the CT images of the proton compensator were combined with the patient simulation CT images into a new series of CT images, in which the imaged compensator is placed at the planned location along the corresponding beam line. The new CT images were input into the Eclipse treatment planning system. The original plan was calculated to the combined CT image series without the plan compensator. The newly computed patient 3D dose from the combined patientcompensator images was verified against the original plan dose. Test plans include the compensators with defects intentionally created inside the fabricated compensators.Results:The calculated 3D dose with the combined compensator and patient CT images reflects the impact of the fabricated compensator to the patient. For the test cases in which no defects were created, the dose distributions were in agreement between our method and the corresponding original plans. For the compensator with the defects, the purposely changed material and a purposely created internal defect were successfully detected while not possible with just the traditional compensator profiles detection methods.Conclusion:We present here a 3D dose verification process to qualify the fabricated proton double‐scattering compensator. Such compensator detection process assesses the patient 3D impact of the fabricated compensator surface profile as well as the compensator internal material and structure changes.This research receives funding support from CURA Medical Technologies.

SU‐E‐T‐464: Implementation and Validation of 4D Acuros XB Dose Calculations

Purpose:In this abstract we implement and validate a 4D VMAT Acuros XB dose calculation using Gafchromic film. Special attention is paid to the physical material assignment in the CT dataset and to reported dose to water and dose to medium.Methods:A QUASAR phantom with a 3 cm sinusoidal tumor motion and 5 second period was scanned using 4D computed tomography. A CT was also obtained of the static QUASAR phantom with the tumor at the central position. A VMAT plan was created on the average CT dataset and was delivered on a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator. The trajectory log file from this treatment was acquired and used to create 10 VMAT subplans (one for each portion of the breathing cycle). Motion for each subplan was simulated by moving the beam isocentre in the superior/inferior direction in the Treatment Planning System on the static CT scan. The 10 plans were calculated (both dose to medium and dose to water) and summed for 1) the original HU values from the static CT scan and 2) the correct physical material assignment in the CT dataset. To acquire a breathing phase synchronized film measurements the trajectory log was used to create a VMAT delivery plan which includes dynamic couch motion using the Developer Mode. Three different treatment start phases were investigated (mid inhalation, full inhalation and full exhalation).Results:For each scenario the coronal dose distributions were measured using Gafchromic film and compared to the corresponding calculation with Film QA Pro Software using a Gamma test with a 3%/3mm distance to agreement criteria. Good agreement was found between calculation and measurement. No statistically significant difference in agreement was found between calculations to original HU values vs calculations to over‐written (material‐assigned) HU values.Conclusion:The investigated 4D dose calculation method agrees well with measurement.

WE‐EF‐303‐02: BEST IN PHYSICS (JOINT IMAGING‐ THERAPY): A Comprehensive Simulation of Image Guided Beam Gating for Liver Tumor Treatments Using Scanned Proton Therapy

Purpose:To evaluate the effectiveness of image guided beam gating for PBS liver treatments under realistic breathing conditions.Methods:We have previously proposed a Beams’ Eye View (BEV) X‐ray image system as an online motion monitoring device for deriving a gating signal for PBS proton therapy. Using dedicated 4D dose calculations (4DDC), in this work we have simulated gated liver treatments using three amplitude‐based gating windows (10/5/3mm) based on motion extracted from BEV imaging of fiducial markers or the diaphragm. In order to improve motion mitigation, BEV guided gating has also been combined with either volumetric (VS) or layered (LS) rescanning. Nine 4DCT(MRI) liver data‐sets have been used for the investigation, which not only consider realistic patient geometries but also motion variations between different breathing cycles. All 4D plans have been quantified in terms of plan homogeneity in the PTV (D5‐D95), the total estimated treatment time and the beam‐on duty cycle.Results:Neither gating nor rescanning can fully retrieve a comparable plan homogeneity to the static case, and considerable reductions of the duty cycle (<10%) were observed as a Result motion variations when small gating windows are used. However, once combined with rescanning, dose homogeneity within 1% of the static plan could be achieved with reasonable prolongation of the treatment time for all 9 subjects. No differences were observed between the efficacy of layered or volumetric re‐scanning, or of gating signals extracted from fiducial or diaphragm motions. However, layered rescanning may be preferred over volumetric rescanning when performed in combination with gating as it is generally more time‐efficient and dosimetrically robust to patient and motion variationsConclusionCombining BEV beam gating with rescanning is an efficient and effective approach to treating mobile liver tumours, and is equally effective if either the diaphragm or fiducial markers are used as motion surrogates.

SU‐E‐T‐480: IMRT/VMAT QA Employing a High Resolution Measurement Array: Initial Experience and Limitations

Purpose:Patient specific QA for IMRT/VMAT is time‐consuming. A high resolution ionization chamber array was employed which rotates synchronously with the gantry. Commissioning, initial experience and limitations of this measurement technique will be discussed.Methods:A high resolution ionization chamber array, Octavius1500 (PTW‐Freiburg, Germany), was employed with the Octavius4D rotating cylindrical phantom. Measured plans are reconstructed into a 3D dose distribution using measured depth dose curves (Verisoft 6.0 PTW‐Freiburg). Plans of varying complexity were selected from our patient collective treated at a TrueBeam 1.5 linac (Varian Medical Systems) with HD120 MLC (VMS). Cross‐calibration was performed using a thimble chamber (30016, PTW‐Freiburg) placed within the cylindrical phantom (SSD 840mm, SCD 1000mm). All dose distributions were recalculated using a 1.5mm dose grid (Eclipse, AAA10.0.28/Acuros10.0.28, VMS) using a virtual homogeneous cylindrical phantom provided by the array manufacturer (density 1.016 gcm‐3). All analyses were performed using Verisoft and compared to routine QA analysis (Octavius729 with octagonal phantom) results.Results:Depth dose curves from 1cm × 1cm to 26cm × 26cm were measured for 3D dose calculation commissioning in Verisoft 6.0. Excellent agreement was observed between TPS PDD and PDD derived from the Octavius1500 array measurement. For highly modulated plans the overall 3D gamma (2.0mm, 3.0%) ranged between 91.3% to 96.9%. The Octavius729 (2D) array results ranged from 97.9 to 100.0% for PTVs.Conclusion:The Octavius1500 and 4D cylindrical phantom provides an integrated QA solution. Complex VMAT plans, comprising multiple PTVs, can be verified with a single (rotating) measurement of all arcs. Hitherto two measurements (horizontal and vertical) had to be performed per PTV. Overall the results are good. However, some refinement may need to be made to the reconstruction. Further work needs to be done to determine appropriate action levels for routine analysis.

SU‐E‐T‐192: Commissioning of a Commercial 3D Dose Calculation Program

Purpose:To commission a commercial software package (CSP) that is used as secondary dose calculation check. The CSP uses an independent golden data beam model. However, some parameters can be modified to generate a customer specific model. Plan comparisons and point dose measurements were performed to test if and to what extent the beam model needed adjustment to optimize results.Methods:Beam parameter configurations were compared between the CSP and both TPS. Twelve phantom test plans ranging from simple to complex were generated in two treatment planning systems (TPS). Tests included small field, off axis, EDW, IMRT and VMAT plans. For each plan a point dose was measured to establish ground truth. Lastly, patient plans were compared for both TPS systems and the CSP.Results:Beam parameters agreed within 2%. The output factors for small fields were changed for the 15 MV beam by 2 and 1.5 % for the 1 cm and 2 cm field sizes, respectively. For the 6 MV beam output factors were adjusted by 3−0.8% for field sizes ranging from 1 to 5 cm. The MLC dynamic leaf gap was adjusted by 1.5 mm for 18 MV beam. Differences between the CSP and the TPS were noted in the built‐up region. These differences affected the gamma pass rate in the surface region, however this effect is reduced with increasing number of beam angles and does not affect point dose calculations at depth. All IMRT and VMAT plans agreed with the CSP using a gamma pass rate of 95% (3%, 3mm).Conclusion:The CSP is used to verify point doses for all 3D plans generated in our clinic for the last 6 months. No point dose mismatches were encountered since the CSP was implemented. Next, the CSP will be adapted for secondary checks of all IMRT plans.KL had a beta tester agreement with Mobius Medical for an in‐kind equipment and software loan.

SU‐E‐I‐06: A Dose Calculation Algorithm for KV Diagnostic Imaging Beams by Empirical Modeling

Purpose:To develop accurate three‐dimensional (3D) empirical dose calculation model for kV diagnostic beams for different radiographic and CT imaging techniques.Methods:Dose was modeled using photon attenuation measured using depth dose (DD), scatter radiation of the source and medium, and off‐axis ratio (OAR) profiles. Measurements were performed using single‐diode in water and a diode‐array detector (MapCHECK2) with kV on‐board imagers (OBI) integrated with Varian TrueBeam and Trilogy linacs. The dose parameters were measured for three energies: 80, 100, and 125 kVp with and without bowtie filters using field sizes 1×1–40×40 cm2 and depths 0–20 cm in water tank.Results:The measured DD decreased with depth in water because of photon attenuation, while it increased with field size due to increased scatter radiation from medium. DD curves varied with energy and filters where they increased with higher energies and beam hardening from half‐fan and full‐fan bowtie filters. Scatter radiation factors increased with field sizes and higher energies. The OAR was with 3% for beam profiles within the flat dose regions. The heal effect of this kV OBI system was within 6% from the central axis value at different depths. The presence of bowtie filters attenuated measured dose off‐axis by as much as 80% at the edges of large beams. The model dose predictions were verified with measured doses using single point diode and ionization chamber or two‐dimensional diode‐array detectors inserted in solid water phantoms.Conclusion:This empirical model enables fast and accurate 3D dose calculation in water within 5% in regions with near charge‐particle equilibrium conditions outside buildup region and penumbra. It considers accurately scatter radiation contribution in water which is superior to air‐kerma or CTDI dose measurements used usually in dose calculation for diagnostic imaging beams. Considering heterogeneity corrections in this model will enable patient specific dose calculation.

SU‐E‐T‐738: The Limit of Detectability and Resolution of a Cylindrical Diode Array Phantom for VMAT and SRS Quality Assurance

Purpose:To determine the limit of detectability and resolution of a cylindrical QA phantom for quality assurance of VMAT and SRS procedures in small field sizes.Methods:Eight different square field sizes were delivered onto a cylindrical QA phantom with 1386 diodes at gantry angles of 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees, using a 6 MV beam at a maximum dose rate of 600 MU/min on a dedicated stereotactic linear accelerator with 2.5mm and 5mm leaves. After verifying pass rates of normal square field sizes, errors were introduced into the quality‐assurance analysis, including an expansion of the field size by 1 mm for all jaws on all sides, an expansion of the field size by 1 mm on one side of the X and Y jaws,MLC errors, and a table shift by 1 mm vertically and longitudinally at 270 and 90 degrees and a table shift of 1mm laterally and longitudinally for angles of 0 and 180 degrees. Treatment planning system calculated dose distributions for measured square field size dose data was imported into the QA phantom software and compared against a treatment planning system calculated 3D dose distribution. Percent pass rates were computed using gamma analysis with 2mm/2% analysis criteria with a background threshold value of 30%.Results:QA software comparison between measured fields and treatment planning system calculations indicate that the passing rate of square fields decreases significantly when errors are induced in the quality assurance analysis. Adding two opposing MLC leaves on opposing sides of each square field in the treatment planning system produced a 31.2% average difference from normally measured square field sizes compared between the treatment planning system and what was measured by the QA software.Conclusion:This work indicates the potential for detecting errors in VMAT quality assurance in small field sizes using a cylindrical QA phantom.

WE-D-303-04: 4DCBCT-Based Dose Assessment for SBRT Lung Cancer Treatment

Purpose: To develop a 4DCBCT-based dose assessment method for calculating actual delivered dose for patients with significant respiratory motion during the course of SBRT or anatomical changes between treatment days. Methods: To address the limitation of 4DCT-based dose assessment, we propose to calculate the delivered dose using time varying (‘fluoroscopic’) 3D patient images generated from a 4DCBCT-based motion model. The method includes four steps: (1) before each treatment, 4DCBCT data is acquired with the patient in treatment position, based on which a patient-specific motion model is created using a principal components analysis (PCA) algorithm. (2) During treatment, 2D time-varying kV projection images are continuously acquired, from which time-varying ‘fluoroscopic’ 3D images of the patient are reconstructed using the motion model. (3) Lateral truncation artifacts are corrected using planning 4DCT images. (4) the 3D dose distribution is computed for each timepoint in the set of 3D fluoroscopic images, from which the total effective 3D delivered dose is calculated by accumulating deformed dose distributions. This approach is validated using six modified XCAT phantoms with lung tumors and different respiratory motions derived from patient data. The estimated doses are compared to that calculated using ground-truth XCAT phantoms. Results: For each XCAT phantom, the delivered tumor dose values generally follow the same trend as that of the ground truth and at most timepoints the difference is less than 5%. For the overall delivered dose, the normalized error of calculated 3D dose distribution is generally less than 3% and the tumor D95 error is less than 1.5%. Conclusions: XCAT phantom studies indicate the potential of the proposed method to accurately estimate 3D tumor dose distributions for SBRT lung treatment based on 4DCBCT imaging and motion modeling. Further research is necessary to investigate its performance for clinical patients data.

Fast 3D dosimetric verifications based on an electronic portal imaging device using a GPU calculation engine.

PurposeTo use a graphic processing unit (GPU) calculation engine to implement a fast 3D pre-treatment dosimetric verification procedure based on an electronic portal imaging device (EPID).MethodsThe GPU algorithm includes the deconvolution and convolution method for the fluence-map calculations, the collapsed-cone convolution/superposition (CCCS) algorithm for the 3D dose calculations and the 3D gamma evaluation calculations. The results of the GPU-based CCCS algorithm were compared to those of Monte Carlo simulations. The planned and EPID-based reconstructed dose distributions in overridden-to-water phantoms and the original patients were compared for 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plans based on dose differences and gamma analysis.ResultsThe total single-field dose computation time was less than 8 s, and the gamma evaluation for a 0.1-cm grid resolution was completed in approximately 1 s. The results of the GPU-based CCCS algorithm exhibited good agreement with those of the Monte Carlo simulations. The gamma analysis indicated good agreement between the planned and reconstructed dose distributions for the treatment plans. For the target volume, the differences in the mean dose were less than 1.8%, and the differences in the maximum dose were less than 2.5%. For the critical organs, minor differences were observed between the reconstructed and planned doses.ConclusionsThe GPU calculation engine was used to boost the speed of 3D dose and gamma evaluation calculations, thus offering the possibility of true real-time 3D dosimetric verification.

Dosimetric validation and clinical implementation of two 3D dose verification systems for quality assurance in volumetric-modulated arc therapy techniques.

A pretreatment quality assurance program for volumetric techniques should include redundant calculations and measurement‐based verifications. The patient‐specific quality assurance process must be based in clinically relevant metrics. The aim of this study was to show the commission, clinical implementation, and comparison of two systems that allow performing a 3D redundant dose calculation. In addition, one of them is capable of reconstructing the dose on patient anatomy from measurements taken with a 2D ion chamber array. Both systems were compared in terms of reference calibration data (absolute dose, output factors, percentage depth‐dose curves, and profiles). Results were in good agreement for absolute dose values (discrepancies were below 0.5%) and output factors (mean differences were below 1%). Maximum mean discrepancies were located between 10 and 20 cm of depth for PDDs (‐2.7%) and in the penumbra region for profiles (mean DTA of 1.5 mm). Validation of the systems was performed by comparing point‐dose measurements with values obtained by the two systems for static, dynamic fields from AAPM TG‐119 report, and 12 real VMAT plans for different anatomical sites (differences better than 1.2%). Comparisons between measurements taken with a 2D ion chamber array and results obtained by both systems for real VMAT plans were also performed (mean global gamma passing rates better than 87.0% and 97.9% for the 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm criteria). Clinical implementation of the systems was evaluated by comparing dose‐volume parameters for all TG‐119 tests and real VMAT plans with TPS values (mean differences were below 1%). In addition, comparisons between dose distributions calculated by TPS and those extracted by the two systems for real VMAT plans were also performed (mean global gamma passing rates better than 86.0% and 93.0% for the 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm criteria). The clinical use of both systems was successfully evaluated.PACS numbers: 87.56.Fc, 87.56.‐v, 87.55.dk, 87.55.Qr, 87.55.‐x, 07.57.Kp, 85.25.Pb

The importance of 3D dosimetry

Radiation therapy has been getting progressively more complex for the past 20 years. Early radiation therapy techniques needed only basic dosimetry equipment; motorized water phantoms, ionization chambers, and basic radiographic film techniques. As intensity modulated radiation therapy and image guided therapy came into widespread practice, medical physicists were challenged with developing effective and efficient dose measurement techniques. The complex 3-dimensional (3D) nature of the dose distributions that were being delivered demanded the development of more quantitative and more thorough methods for dose measurement. The quality assurance vendors developed a wide array of multidetector arrays that have been enormously useful for measuring and characterizing dose distributions, and these have been made especially useful with the advent of 3D dose calculation systems based on the array measurements, as well as measurements made using film and portal imagers. Other vendors have been providing 3D calculations based on data from the linear accelerator or the record and verify system, providing thorough evaluation of the dose but lacking quality assurance (QA) of the dose delivery process, including machine calibration. The current state of 3D dosimetry is one of a state of flux. The vendors and professional associations are trying to determine the optimal balance between thorough QA, labor efficiency, and quantitation. This balance will take some time to reach, but a necessary component will be the 3D measurement and independent calculation of delivered radiation therapy dose distributions.

Three dimensional dose verification of VMAT plans using the Octavius 4D dosimetric system

The Octavius 4D dosimetric system generates a 3D dose matrix based on a measured planar dose and user supplied Percentage Depth Dose (PDD) data. The accuracy of 3D dose matrices reconstructed by the Octavius 4D dosimetric system was systematically studied for an open static field, an open arc field and clinical VMAT plans. The Octavius reconstructed 3D dose matrices were compared with the Treatment Planning System (TPS) calculated 3D dose matrices using 3D gamma (γ) analysis with 2%/2mm and 3%/3mm tolerance criteria. The larger detector size in the 2D detector array of the Octavius system resulted in failed voxels in the high dose gradient regions. For the open arc fields mean (1σ) γ pass rates of 84.5(8.9) % and 94.2(4.5) % were observed with 2%/2mm and 3%/3mm tolerance criteria respectively and for clinical VMAT plans mean (1σ) γ pass rates of 86.8(3.5) % and 96.7(1.4) % were observed.