Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy Cases Research Articles

A predicted three-dimensional dose sequence based treatment planning optimization method for gynecologic IMRT.

In knowledge-based treatment planning (KBTP) for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), the quality of the plan is dependent on the sophistication of the predicted dosimetric information and its application. In this paper, we propose a KBTP method that based on the effective and reasonable utilization of a three-dimensional (3D) dose prediction on planning optimization. We used an organs-at-risk (OARs) dose distribution prediction model to create a voxel-based dose sequence based optimization objective for OARs doses. This objective was used to reformulate a traditional fluence map optimization model, which involves a tolerable spatial re-assignment of the predicted dose distribution to the OAR voxels based on their current doses' positions at a sorted dose sequencing. The feasibility of this method was evaluated with ten gynecology (GYN) cancer IMRT cases by comparing its generated plan quality with the original clinical plan. Results showed feasible plan by proposed method, with comparable planning target volume (PTV) dose coverage and greater dose sparing of the OARs. Among ten GYN cases, the average V30 and V45 of rectum were decreased by 4%±4% (p=0.02) and 4%±3% (p<0.01), respectively. V30 and V45 of bladder were decreased by 8%±2% (p<0.01) and 3%±2% (p<0.01), respectively. Our predicted dose sequence-based planning optimization method for GYN IMRT offered a flexible use of predicted 3D doses while ensuring the output plan consistency.

IMRT QA and gamma comparisons: The impact of detector geometry, spatial sampling, and delivery technique on gamma comparison sensitivity.

To separately quantify sensitivity differences in patient-specific quality assurance comparisons analyzed with the gamma comparison for different measurement geometries, spatial samplings, and delivery techniques [intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)]. Error-free calculations for 20 IMRT and 20 VMAT cases were compared to calculations with known induced errors of varying magnitudes, using gamma comparisons. Five error types (MU scaling, three different MLC errors, and collimator errors) were induced in plan calculations on three different detector geometries - ArcCHECK, MapCHECK, and Delta 4. To study detector geometry sensitivity effects alone, gamma comparisons were made with 1mm error-free calculations compared to 1mm error-induced calculations for each device. Effects of spatial sampling were studied by making the same gamma comparisons, but down-sampling the error-induced calculations to the real spatial sampling of each device. Additionally, 1mm vs 1mm comparisons between the IMRT and VMAT cases were compared to investigate sensitivity differences between IMRT and VMAT using IMRT and VMAT cohorts with similar ranges of plan complexity and average aperture size. For each case, induced error type, and device, five different gamma criteria were studied to ensure sensitivity differences between devices, spatial sampling scenarios, and delivery technique were not gamma criterion specific, resulting in over 36,000 gamma comparisons. For IMRT cases, Delta4 and MapCHECK devices had similar error sensitivities for lagging leaf, bank shift, and MU errors, while the ArcCHECK had considerably lower sensitivity than the planar-type devices. For collimator errors and perturbational leaf errors the ArcCHECK had higher error sensitivity than planar-type devices. This behavior was independent of gamma parameters (percent dose difference, distance-to-agreement, and low dose threshold), though use of local normalization resulted in error sensitivites that were markedly similar between all three devices. Differences between detector geometries were less pronounced for VMAT deliveries. Error sensitivity for a given gamma criterion when comparing IMRT and VMAT deliveries on the same devices showed that VMAT plans were more sensitive to some specific error types and less sensitive to others, when compared to IMRT plans. For the ArcCHECK device, the sensitivity of IMRT and VMAT cases was quite similar, whereas this was not the case for the planar-type devices. When comparing error sensitivity between 1mm vs 1mm calculations and 1mm vs the real spatial sampling for each device, results showed that increased spatial sampling did not systematically increase error sensitivity. Noticeable differences in error sensitivity were observed for different detector geometries, but differences were dependent on induced error type, and a particular device geometry did not offer universal improvements in error sensitivity across studied error types. This study demonstrates that the sensitivity of the gamma comparison does not largely hinge on detector spatial sampling. VMAT deliveries were generally less sensitive to errors when compared to IMRT plans for the planar-type devices, while similar sensitivities were observed between delivery techniques for the ArcCHECK device. Results of this work suggest that a universal gamma criterion is inappropriate for IMRT QA and that the percent pixels passing is an insufficient metric for evaluating quality assurance checks in the clinic.

Dosimetric impact of contrast medium on different photon energies using conformal & IMRT techniques in the treatment of carcinoma cervix and its validation with indigenous phantom

Introduction Considering the unwanted exposure to organs in path of the beam, 4-field (4F) and subsequently, Intensity-modulated-radiation-therapy (IMRT), is known as standard mode of treatment of carcinoma cervix. It is routine practice to inject intravenous contrast during simulation scan which elopes after that from patient body. Therefore, the impact of contrast media should be investigated for radiation dose calculations.Material & MethodsAn indigenously made phantom, named as ‘original contrast (OC)’, was used with dimensions 15 x 15 x 30 cm3. A sleeve was given to place the ionization chamber at the isocentre of the planning target volume (PTV) inside the cylindrical vial of iodinized contrast. Similarly, a virtual phantom was created with similar dimensions in presence and absence of contrast media, called as ‘virtual contrast (VC)’ and ‘virtual without contrast (VWC)’ phantom. Plans were generated with photon energies (6MV/10MV/15MV/6FFF/10FFF) using 4F and IMRT technique. Plans were evaluated for PTV (D99%, D10%, Dmean) and Bladder & Rectum (V30Gy, V10Gy). Normal-tissue-integral-dose (NTID) and total-monitor-units (TMU) were also evaluated.Results D99% of the PTV was comparable in VC and VWC phantoms but was decreased for OC phantom. Similarly, D10% was reportedly higher as 54.03 Gy (4F, 6 MV), 54.71 Gy (4F, 15 MV), 55.78 Gy (4F, 6 FFF) and 57.64 Gy (4F, 10 FFF) for OC phantom. D30% of the bladder and also the NTID was lesser for IMRT cases in all the selected phantoms. Additionally, 4F has shown lesser spillage with 6MV/15 MV photon beam energies in OC phantom. The ‘total monitor units (TMU)’ required for IMRT plans were significantly higher.ConclusionThe contrast material under-estimate the planned dose yet has insignificant influence on the dose calculation. Therefore, unnecessary exposure of dual scans should be avoided and use of 6MV and IMRT technique should be continued in the clinics.

Estimation of Dynamic MLC Parameters Using Dynamic MLC Position Accuracy Analysis Software in Prostate IMRT

It is necessary to verify an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plan and to confirm dose error within the tolerance, in order to perform it securely and precisely. IMRT with dynamic multi-leaf collimator (DMLC) requires high DMLC position accuracy. The DMLC position accuracy analysis software DynaLog File Viewer (DFV; Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA) is used to analyze position errors of DMLC for IMRT plans. We analyzed correlation between DMLC parameters and position error of DMLC obtained from DFV in prostate IMRT. A regression analysis of the position error and the DMLC parameters was performed. As a result, a strong correlation was found between MLC position error and each of the DMLC parameters: leaf speed, gap width, and segment monitor unit (MU). We found the factors for the DMLC position error in this study. DMLC position error could be estimated from leaf speed, gap width, and segment MU when we analyze IMRT cases in the further study.

OAR Dose Distribution Prediction and gEUD Based Automatic Treatment Planning Optimization for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy

In current knowledge-based treatment planning for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), 3-dimensional dosimetric goals are predicted to provide abundant and appropriate starting points for planning optimization, but considering there're uncertainties with those dose distribution predictions, how to tailor the objective function and constraints accordingly is quite a concern. Here, we represent a novel automatic treatment optimization method that is capable of making the most of dose distribution prediction meanwhile achieving its optimum as much as possible. On the foundation of an in-house organs-at-risk (OARs) dose distribution prediction model, we reformulate a traditional fluence map optimization (FMO) model by a predicted dose distribution-based objective, an equivalent uniform dose sparing for OARs and hard dose constraints for planning target volume (PTV). Feasibility and performance of the method is evaluated with 10 gynecology (GYN) cancer IMRT cases by comparing the plan quality of the generated to the original clinical ones, in the term of dose-volume-histogram (DVH) curves, dose distribution and detailed dosimetric endpoints. Results show plan quality improvement by our proposed method, with comparable PTV dose coverage but further dose sparing for OARs. Among 6 investigated OAR dosimetric endpoints, 4 of them are observed with significant improvement (P<; 0.05), V30, V45 of rectum is decreased by (8.42±7.88) %, (15.49±7.48) %, respectively and V30, V45 of bladder is decreased by (14.47±5.08) %, (14.24±4.71) %, respectively. We have successfully developed a novel automatic optimization method which is able to make good use of 3D dose prediction and ensure the output plan quality for IMRT.

Voxel-based automatic multi-criteria optimization for intensity modulated radiation therapy

BackgroundAutomatic multi-criteria optimization is necessary for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) because of low planning efficiency and large plan quality uncertainty in current clinical practice. Most studies focused on imitating dosimetrists’ planning procedures to automate this process and ignored the fact that organ-based objective functions typically used in commercial treatment planning systems (such as dose-volume function) usually lead to sub-optimal plans. To guarantee the optimum results and to automate this process, we incorporate an improved automation strategy and a voxel-based optimization algorithm to generate a novel automatic multi-criteria optimization framework. We then evaluate it in clinical cases.MethodsThis novel automatic multi-criteria optimization framework incorporates a ranked priority-list based automatic constraints adjustment strategy and an in-house developed voxel-based optimization algorithm. Constraints are sequentially adjusted following a pre-defined priority list. Afterward, a voxel-based fluence map optimization (FMO) with an orientation to the newly updated constraints is launched to find a Pareto optimal solution. Loops of constraints adjustment are repeated until each of them could not be relaxed or tightened. The feasibility of the framework is evaluated with 10 automatic generated gynecology (GYN) cancer IMRT cases by comparing the dosimetric performance with the original.ResultsPlan quality improvement is observed for our automatic multi-criteria optimization method. Comparable DVHs are found for the planning target volume (PTV), but with better organs-at-risk (OAR) dose sparing. Among 13 evaluated dosimetric endpoints, 5 of them show significant improvements in automatically generated plans compared with the original plans. Investigation of improvement tendency during optimization exhibits gradual change as the optimization stage proceeds. An initial voxel-based optimization stage and in-low-priority dosimetric criteria tighten can significantly contribute to the optimization procedure.ConclusionsWe have successfully developed an automatic multi-criteria optimization framework that can dramatically reduce the current trial-and-error patterned planning workload while affording an efficient method to assure high plan quality consistency. This optimization framework is expected to greatly facilitate precise radiation therapy because of its advantages of planning efficiency and plan quality improvement.

An Ensemble Approach to Knowledge-Based Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Planning.

Knowledge-based planning (KBP) utilizes experienced planners’ knowledge embedded in prior plans to estimate optimal achievable dose volume histogram (DVH) of new cases. In the regression-based KBP framework, previously planned patients’ anatomical features and DVHs are extracted, and prior knowledge is summarized as the regression coefficients that transform features to organ-at-risk DVH predictions. In our study, we find that in different settings, different regression methods work better. To improve the robustness of KBP models, we propose an ensemble method that combines the strengths of various linear regression models, including stepwise, lasso, elastic net, and ridge regression. In the ensemble approach, we first obtain individual model prediction metadata using in-training-set leave-one-out cross validation. A constrained optimization is subsequently performed to decide individual model weights. The metadata is also used to filter out impactful training set outliers. We evaluate our method on a fresh set of retrospectively retrieved anonymized prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) cases and head and neck IMRT cases. The proposed approach is more robust against small training set size, wrongly labeled cases, and dosimetric inferior plans, compared with other individual models. In summary, we believe the improved robustness makes the proposed method more suitable for clinical settings than individual models.

Monaco and film dosimetry of 3D CRT, IMRT and VMAT cases in a realistic pelvic prosthetic phantom

The dosimetry of patients with metallic hip implants during irradiation of pelvic lesions is challenging due to dose distortions caused by implants. This work presents a dosimetric comparison of various multi-field photon-beam dose distributions in the presence of unilateral hip titanium prosthesis (UHTiP) embedded in a unique pelvic phantom made out of water-equivalent nylon slices. The impact of the UHTiP on the accuracy of dose calculations from a Monaco TPS (treatment planning system) using the X-ray voxel Monte Carlo (XVMC) algorithm was benchmarked against measured dose data using Gafchromic EBT3 film. Multi-field beam arrangements including a 4-field box, 5-field 3DCRT (three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy), 6-field IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy) and a single-arc VMAT (volumetric modulated arc therapy) plan were set up for 6MV and 15MV beams. These plans were generated for the pelvic phantom that contains the prosthesis with film inserted. Compared to Monaco TPS dose calculations, film measurements showed enhanced dose in the prosthesis which was not predicted by Monaco due to its limitation in relative density assignment. The enhanced prosthesis dose increased with increase in beam energy and decreased with the complexity of the treatment plans, with VMAT giving the least escalated dose. The dose increased between 5% and 19% for 6MV and between 6% and 21% for 15MV. A gamma index analysis showed that 70–92% of dose points (excluding the prosthesis) were within 3% discrepancy. Increasing the number of treatment fields increases target dose coverage and improves the agreement between film and Monaco. When the relative electron density (RED) in the prosthesis was varied between 3.72 and 15 the dose discrepancy between film and Monaco increased from 30% to 57% for 6MV and from 30% to 50% for 15MV. The study indicates that beam weights for fields that pass through the prosthesis should be minimised and its RED must be correct for accurate dose calculation on Monaco.

A new sparse optimization scheme for simultaneous beam angle and fluence map optimization in radiotherapy planning

-minimization-based sparse optimization was employed to solve the beam angle optimization (BAO) in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning. The technique approximates the exact BAO formulation with efficiently computable convex surrogates, leading to plans that are inferior to those attainable with recently proposed gradient-based greedy schemes. In this paper, we alleviate/reduce the nontrivial inconsistencies between the -based formulations and the exact BAO model by proposing a new sparse optimization framework based on the most recent developments in group variable selection.We propose the incorporation of the group-folded concave penalty (gFCP) as a substitution to the -minimization framework. The new formulation is then solved by a variation of an existing gradient method. The performance of the proposed scheme is evaluated by both plan quality and the computational efficiency using three IMRT cases: a coplanar prostate case, a coplanar head-and-neck case, and a noncoplanar liver case. Involved in the evaluation are two alternative schemes: the -minimization approach and the gradient norm method (GNM).The gFCP-based scheme outperforms both counterpart approaches. In particular, gFCP generates better plans than those obtained using the -minimization for all three cases with a comparable computation time. As compared to the GNM, the gFCP improves both the plan quality and computational efficiency.The proposed gFCP-based scheme provides a promising framework for BAO and promises to improve both planning time and plan quality.

Application programming in C# environment with recorded user software interactions and its application in autopilot of VMAT/IMRT treatment planning.

An autopilot scheme of volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT)/intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning with the guidance of prior knowledge is established with recorded interactions between a planner and a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). Microsoft (MS) Visual Studio Coded UI is applied to record some common planner‐TPS interactions as subroutines. The TPS used in this study is a Windows‐based Eclipse system. The interactions of our application program with Eclipse TPS are realized through a series of subroutines obtained by prerecording the mouse clicks or keyboard strokes of a planner in operating the TPS. A strategy to autopilot Eclipse VMAT/IMRT plan selection process is developed as a specific example of the proposed “scripting” method. The autopiloted planning is navigated by a decision function constructed with a reference plan that has the same prescription and similar anatomy with the case at hand. The calculation proceeds by alternating between the Eclipse optimization and the outer‐loop optimization independent of the Eclipse. In the C# program, the dosimetric characteristics of a reference treatment plan are used to assess and modify the Eclipse planning parameters and to guide the search for a clinically sensible treatment plan. The approach is applied to plan a head and neck (HN) VMAT case and a prostate IMRT case. Our study demonstrated the feasibility of application programming method in C# environment with recorded interactions of planner‐TPS. The process mimics a planner's planning process and automatically provides clinically sensible treatment plans that would otherwise require a large amount of manual trial and error of a planner. The proposed technique enables us to harness a commercial TPS by application programming via the use of recorded human computer interactions and provides an effective tool to greatly facilitate the treatment planning process.PACS number(s): 87.55.D‐, 87.55.kd, 87.55.de

Acceptance testing of photon beam model in Axesse accelerator in two intensity-modulated treatment planning systems

Objective To investigate the acceptance testing the photon beam model in Axesse accelerator in Monaco Oncentra treatment planning systems (TPS), in order to establish an integral method for the acceptance both systems at the same time. Methods The conflicting parameters the two TPSs were determined before acceptance, the corresponding parameters in the accelerator were adjusted to the overlapping values. The acceptance test was performed from the aspects point dose, surface dose, characteristic simulation multi-leaf collimator (MLC). The test case for point dose was designed based on TRS430, TG53, practical situations. The test case for surface dose included conventional radiation field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) cases. The test the characteristics MLC included concave-convex groove, leakage, values of and Gain . Results The error most point doses were within 4%, only some measuring points in the penumbra region outside the radiation field had an error of>4%. The γ pass rate the surface dose tests IMRT cases was>90% at a value 3 mm/3% except three test cases. Oncentra could only simulate the situation with a positive offset value MLC, but Monaco could simulate the situation with both positive negative offset values MLC. Conclusions The results show that this method can accurately validate all the parameters the two systems realize the accurate acceptance Monaco Oncentra systems with Axesse accelerator. Both Monaco Oncentra models can meet the needs for clinical calculation. Key words: Threatment planning system commission; Multi-leaf collimator test; Dose verification; Error analysis

Dosimetric impact of dental metallic crown on intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for head and neck cancer.

Metal dental restoration materials cause dose enhancement upstream and dose disturbance downstream of the high‐density inhomogeneous regions in which these materials are used. In this study, we evaluated the impact of a dental metallic crown (DMC) on intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for head and neck cancer. Additionally, the possibility of sparing the oral mucosa from dose enhancement using an individual intraoral mouthpiece was evaluated. An experimental oral phantom was designed to verify the dosimetric impact of a DMC. We evaluated the effect on single beam, parallel opposing beam, arc beam, IMRT, and VMAT treatment plans. To evaluate the utility of a 3‐mm‐thick intraoral mouthpiece, the doses across the mouthpiece were measured. For single beam irradiation, the measured doses at the entrance and exit planes of the DMC were 51% higher and 21% lower than the calculated dose by the treatment planning system, respectively. The maximum dose enhancements were 22% and 46% for parallel opposing beams and the 90° arc rotation beam, respectively. For IMRT and VMAT, the measured doses adjacent to the DMC were 12.2%±6.3% (mean±1.96 SD) and 12.7%±2.5% higher than the calculated doses, respectively. With regard to the performance of the intraoral mouthpiece for the IMRT and VMAT cases, the disagreement between measured and calculated doses at the outermost surface of the mouthpieces were −2.0%, and 2.0%, respectively. Dose enhancements caused by DMC‐mediated radiation scattering occurred during IMRT and VMAT. Because it is difficult to accurately estimate the dose perturbations, careful consideration is necessary when planning head and neck cancer treatments in patients with DMCs. To spare the oral mucosa from dose enhancement, the use of an individual intraoral mouthpiece should be considered.PACS numbers: 87.55.km, 87.55.N‐, 87.55.Qr

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy dose verification using fluence and portal imaging device.

Patient‐specific quality assurance for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dose verification is essential. The aim of this study is to provide a new method based on the relative error distribution by comparing the fluence map from the treatment planning system (TPS) and the incident fluence deconvolved from the electronic portal imaging device (EPID) images. This method is validated for 10 head and neck IMRT cases. The fluence map of each beam was exported from the TPS and EPID images of the treatment beams were acquired. Measured EPID images were deconvolved to the incident fluence with proper corrections. The relative error distribution between the TPS fluence map and the incident fluence from the EPID was created. This was also created for a 2D diode array detector. The absolute point dose was measured with an ionization chamber, and the dose distribution was measured by a radiochromic film. In three cases, MLC leaf positions were intentionally changed to create the dose error as much as 5% against the planned dose and our fluence‐based method was tested using gamma index. Absolute errors between the predicted dose of 2D diode detector and of our method and measurements were 1.26%±0.65% and 0.78%±0.81% respectively. The gamma passing rate (3% global / 3 mm) of the TPS was higher than that of the 2D diode detector (p<0.02), and lower than that of the EPID (p<0.04). The gamma passing rate (2% global / 2 mm) of the TPS was higher than that of the 2D diode detector, while the gamma passing rate of the TPS was lower than that of EPID (p<0.02). For three modified plans, the predicted dose errors against the measured dose were 1.10%, 2.14%, and −0.87%. The predicted dose distributions from the EPID were well matched to the measurements. Our fluence‐based method provides very accurate dosimetry for IMRT patients. The method is simple and can be adapted to any clinic for complex cases.PACS numbers: 87.55.D‐, 87.55.km, 87.55.Qr, 87.57.uq

Comparative study of old and new versions of treatment planning system using dose volume histogram indices of clinical plans.

Recently, Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) version 8.8 was upgraded to the latest version 13.6. It is customary that the vendor gives training on how to upgrade the existing software to the new version. However, the customer is provided less inner details about changes in the new software version. According to manufacturer, accuracy of point dose calculations and irregular treatment planning is better in the new version (13.6) compared to the old version (8.8). Furthermore, the new version uses voxel-based calculations while the earlier version used point dose calculations. Major difference in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans was observed between the two versions after re-optimization and re-calculations. However, minor difference was observed for IMRT cases after performing only re-calculations. It is recommended TPS quality assurance to be performed after any major upgrade of software. This can be done by performing dose calculation comparisons in TPS. To assess the difference between the versions, 25 clinical cases from the old version were compared keeping all the patient data intact including the monitor units and comparing the differences in dose calculations using dose volume histogram (DVH) analysis. Along with DVH analysis, uniformity index, conformity index, homogeneity index, and dose spillage index were also compared for both versions. The results of comparative study are presented in this paper.

Estimating and reducing dose received by cardiac devices for patients undergoing radiotherapy.

The objectives of this project are to quantify the dose reduction effect provided by a lead shield for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) during a clinically realistic radiation treatment on phantom and to provide a simple model of dose estimation to predict dose received by CIED in a wide range of situations. The shield used in this project is composed of a lead sheet wrapped in thermoplastic. Dose measurements were made with a plastic scintillation detector (PSD). The phantom was treated with ten different plans. Three of these cases were treated with intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and the others received standard 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT). Lateral dose measurement for photon fields was made to establish a dose prediction model. On average, the use of the lead shield reduced the dose to CIEDs by 19%±13%. Dose reduction was most important for breast cases, with a mean reduction of 31%±15%. In three cases, the total dose reduction was more than 25 cGy over the complete treatment. For the three IMRT cases, the mean dose reduction was 11%±9%. On average, the difference between the TPS prediction and the measurement was 71%, while it was only 14% for the dose prediction model. It was demonstrated that a lead shield can be efficiently used for reducing doses to CIED with a wide range of clinical plans. In patients treated with IMRT modality treatment, the shielding should be used only for those with more than two anterior fields over seven fields. In the case of 3D CRT patients, the shielding should be used for those with a dose on the CIED higher than 50 cGy and with a reduction of dose higher than 10 cGy. The dose prediction model developed in this study can be an easy way to have a better estimation of the out‐of‐field dose than the TPS.PACS number(s): 87.55.N, 87.55.km

A Monte Carlo model for independent dose verification in IMRT and VMAT for the Varian Novalis TX with high definition MLC

Purpose: With intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), the physician can prescribe, design and deliver optimized treatment plans that target the tumor and spare adjacent critical structures. The increased conformity of such plans often comes at the expenses of adding significant complexity to the delivery of the treatment. With volumetrically modulated arc therapy (VMAT), in addition to the modulation of the intensity of the radiation beam, other mechanical parameters such as gantry speed and dose rate are varied during treatment delivery. It is therefore imperative that we develop comprehensive and accurate methods to validate such complex delivery techniques prior to the commencement of the patient’s treatment. Methods : In this study, a Monte Carlo simulation was performed for the high definition multileaf collimator (HD-MLC) of a Varian Novalis TX linac. Our simulation is based on the MCSIM code and provides a comprehensive model of the linac head. After validating the model in reference geometries, treatment plans for different anatomical sites were simulated and compared against the treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculations. All simulations were performed in a cylindrical water phantom as opposed to the patient anatomy, to remove any complexities associated with density effects. Finally, a comparison through gamma analysis of dose plane between the simulation, the TPS and the measurements from the Matrixx array (IBA) was conducted to verify the accuracy of our model against both the measurements and the TPS. Results : Gamma analysis of ten IMRT and ten VMAT cases for different anatomical sites was performed, using a 3%/3 mm passing criterion. The average passing rates were 97.5% and 94.3% for the IMRT and the VMAT plans respectively when comparing the MCSIM and TPS dose calculations. Conclusion : In the present work a Monte Carlo model of a Novalis TX linac which has been tested and benchmarked to produce phase-space files for the treatment head of the linac was used to produce a input phase-space to calculated dose deposition phenomena in different geometries for IMRT and VMAT treatment modalities. The control points defined for the MLC were replaced by blocks with the same characteristics and materials of the linac MLC to speed up the simulation time. With this technique a simulation of a typical IMRT case can be performed with a 10 computer cluster in about 1.02 hours in average. If the number of computer used is increased the computing time can be reduced even more which make our model suitable for clinical use as a second check method to compare the TPS dose calculated. Our results showed that for IMRT and VMAT deliveries with a HD-MLC, there is an average of 95.9% of the points have a gamma index less than 1 with our chosen criterion between our Monte Carlo simulations and the corresponding measurements and TPS calculations in a cylindrical water equivalent phantom. This Monte Carlo code can be used as pre-treatment, independent dose calculation verification for IMRT and VMAT deliveries.

SU‐E‐T‐175: Clinical Evaluations of Monte Carlo‐Based Inverse Treatment Plan Optimization for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy

Purpose:Pencil‐beam or superposition‐convolution type dose calculation algorithms are routinely used in inverse plan optimization for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). However, due to their limited accuracy in some challenging cases, e.g. lung, the resulting dose may lose its optimality after being recomputed using an accurate algorithm, e.g. Monte Carlo (MC). It is the objective of this study to evaluate the feasibility and advantages of a new method to include MC in the treatment planning process.Methods:We developed a scheme to iteratively perform MC‐based beamlet dose calculations and plan optimization. In the MC stage, a GPU‐based dose engine was used and the particle number sampled from a beamlet was proportional to its optimized fluence from the previous step. We tested this scheme in four lung cancer IMRT cases. For each case, the original plan dose, plan dose re‐computed by MC, and dose optimized by our scheme were obtained. Clinically relevant dosimetric quantities in these three plans were compared.Results:Although the original plan achieved a satisfactory PDV dose coverage, after re‐computing doses using MC method, it was found that the PTV D95% were reduced by 4.60%–6.67%. After re‐optimizing these cases with our scheme, the PTV coverage was improved to the same level as in the original plan, while the critical OAR coverages were maintained to clinically acceptable levels. Regarding the computation time, it took on average 144 sec per case using only one GPU card, including both MC‐based beamlet dose calculation and treatment plan optimization.Conclusion:The achieved dosimetric gains and high computational efficiency indicate the feasibility and advantages of the proposed MC‐based IMRT optimization method. Comprehensive validations in more patient cases are in progress.

Incorporation of gantry angle correction for 3D dose prediction in intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Pretreatment dose verification with beam-by-beam analysis for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is commonly performed with a gantry angle of 0° using a 2D diode detector array. Any changes in multileaf collimator (MLC) position between the actual treatment gantry angle and 0° may result in deviations from the planned dose. We evaluated the effects of MLC positioning errors between the actual treatment gantry angles and nominal gantry angles. A gantry angle correction (GAC) factor was generated by performing a non-gap test at various gantry angles using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID). To convert pixel intensity to dose at the MLC abutment positions, a non-gap test was performed using an EPID and a film at 0° gantry angle. We then assessed the correlations between pixel intensities and doses. Beam-by-beam analyses for 15 prostate IMRT cases as patient-specific quality assurance were performed with a 2D diode detector array at 0° gantry angle to determine the relative dose error for each beam. The resulting relative dose error with or without GAC was added back to the original dose grid for each beam. We compared the predicted dose distributions with or without GAC for film measurements to validate GAC effects. A gamma pass rate with a tolerance of 2%/2 mm was used to evaluate these dose distributions. The gamma pass rate with GAC was higher than that without GAC (P = 0.01). The predicted dose distribution improved with GAC, although the dosimetric effect to a patient was minimal.

A practical method of modeling a treatment couch using cone-beam computed tomography for intensity-modulated radiation therapy and RapidArc treatment delivery

The effect of a treatment couch on dose perturbation is not always fully considered in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). In the course of inverse planning radiotherapy techniques, beam parameter optimization may change in the absence of the couch, causing errors in the calculated dose distributions. Although modern treatment planning systems (TPS) include data for the treatment couch components, they are not manufactured identically. Thus, variations in their Hounsfield unit (HU) values may exist. Moreover, a radiotherapy facility may wish to have a third-party custom tabletop installed that is not included by the TPS vendor. This study demonstrates a practical and simple method of acquiring reliable computed tomography (CT) data for the treatment couch and shows how the absorbed dose calculated with the modeled treatment couch can differ from that with the default treatment couch found in the TPS. We also experimentally verified that neglecting to incorporate the treatment couch completely in the treatment planning process might result in dose differences of up to 9.5% and 7.3% for 4-MV and 10-MV photon beams, respectively. Furthermore, 20 RapidArc and IMRT cases were used to quantify the change in calculated dose distributions caused by using either the default or modeled couch. From 2-dimensional (2D) ionization chamber array measurements, we observed large dose distribution differences between the measurements and calculations when the couch was omitted that varied according to the planning technique and anatomic site. Thus, incorporating the treatment couch in the dose calculation phase of treatment planning significantly decreases dose calculation errors.

The quality assurance of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for early stage prostate cancer: a technical note.

As radiation therapy transitions from intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) it is important to consider the quality assurance (QA) of VMAT plans in light of what has previously been learned and developed in IMRT QA. This technical note assesses if IMRT based plan QA software, which has reduced the need in IMRT for phantom dose measurements on the linear accelerator, can be incorporated into VMAT QA processes. Twenty prostate cases were retrospectively planned using VMAT with one arc to deliver a prescription of 74 Gy in 37 fractions. A plan QA was performed using both IMSure (version 3.3), a software‐based IMRT QA program, and ArcCHECK (version 6.2.3.5713), a phantom‐based VMAT QA tool. Outcomes assessed included the time needed to perform the QA of both the IMSure and ArcCHECK QA methods, and agreement between planned dose and QA measured dose. On average per case, the ArcCHECK technique needed 31.5 min to perform the VMAT plan QA, while IMSure required 3.5 min to perform the same QA. All 20 cases passed dosimetric QA using ArcCHECK. However, using IMSure, three cases failed dosimetric QA using the departments existing IMRT QA criteria. This research has demonstrated that the IMRT QA software IMSure may be incorporated into the QA of VMAT plans, however the criteria to assess the dosimetry of the VMAT plans may need to be different to that for IMRT cases. The implication of this research for radiation therapists is to be critically aware of the differences between the plan QA requirements and methods for IMRT and those required for VMAT.