skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-E-T-38: A Head to Head Comparison of Two Commercial Phantoms Used for SRS QA

Abstract

Purpose: To compare and contrast two commercial SRS QA phantoms. Methods: Both phantoms were evaluated in terms of their ease of setup as well as the time required to switch inserts for different tests. They were both used to evaluate the coincidence of the radiation and laser isocenters of a linear accelerator. End-to-end dosimetric tests were also performed using both ion chambers and films along two planes through the center of the phantoms. Since one phantom allows for multiple ion chamber orientations, a test was also performed to determine the effect of having the chamber oriented along the radiation beam axis’. Results: Changing inserts took 2 minutes on average for one phantom compared to 5 minutes for the other. The laser/radiation isocenter coincidence as determined from each phantom showed a maximum difference of 0.2mm. Ion chamber results were within 0.5% of the expected values when the chamber was perpendicular to the beams but measured a 3% underdose when the chamber was along the beam direction. Gamma (2%,2mm) pass rates of corresponding films were within 1% between phantoms. Conclusion: The results of the corresponding tests run on both phantoms were comparable, showing that the phantoms were equivalent for the subset ofmore » SRS QA tests run here. However, the under dose observed when the chamber was parallel to the beam direction suggests that this configuration should be avoided.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22545171
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; IONIZATION CHAMBERS; LASERS; LINEAR ACCELERATORS; PHANTOMS; RADIATION DOSES

Citation Formats

Sarkar, V, Huang, L, Huang, Y, Szegedi, M, Rassiah-Szegedi, P, Zhao, H, and Salter, B. SU-E-T-38: A Head to Head Comparison of Two Commercial Phantoms Used for SRS QA. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924399.
Sarkar, V, Huang, L, Huang, Y, Szegedi, M, Rassiah-Szegedi, P, Zhao, H, & Salter, B. SU-E-T-38: A Head to Head Comparison of Two Commercial Phantoms Used for SRS QA. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924399.
Sarkar, V, Huang, L, Huang, Y, Szegedi, M, Rassiah-Szegedi, P, Zhao, H, and Salter, B. Mon . "SU-E-T-38: A Head to Head Comparison of Two Commercial Phantoms Used for SRS QA". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924399.
@article{osti_22545171,
title = {SU-E-T-38: A Head to Head Comparison of Two Commercial Phantoms Used for SRS QA},
author = {Sarkar, V and Huang, L and Huang, Y and Szegedi, M and Rassiah-Szegedi, P and Zhao, H and Salter, B},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To compare and contrast two commercial SRS QA phantoms. Methods: Both phantoms were evaluated in terms of their ease of setup as well as the time required to switch inserts for different tests. They were both used to evaluate the coincidence of the radiation and laser isocenters of a linear accelerator. End-to-end dosimetric tests were also performed using both ion chambers and films along two planes through the center of the phantoms. Since one phantom allows for multiple ion chamber orientations, a test was also performed to determine the effect of having the chamber oriented along the radiation beam axis’. Results: Changing inserts took 2 minutes on average for one phantom compared to 5 minutes for the other. The laser/radiation isocenter coincidence as determined from each phantom showed a maximum difference of 0.2mm. Ion chamber results were within 0.5% of the expected values when the chamber was perpendicular to the beams but measured a 3% underdose when the chamber was along the beam direction. Gamma (2%,2mm) pass rates of corresponding films were within 1% between phantoms. Conclusion: The results of the corresponding tests run on both phantoms were comparable, showing that the phantoms were equivalent for the subset of SRS QA tests run here. However, the under dose observed when the chamber was parallel to the beam direction suggests that this configuration should be avoided.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924399},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}
  • Purpose: To assess dose calculated by the 3DVH software (Sun Nuclear Systems, Melbourne, FL) against TLD measurements and treatment planning system calculations in anthropomorphic phantoms. Methods: The IROC Houston (RPC) head and neck (HN) and lung phantoms were scanned and plans were generated using Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems, Milpitas, CA) following IROC Houston procedures. For the H and N phantom, 6 MV VMAT and 9-field dynamic MLC (DMLC) plans were created. For the lung phantom 6 MV VMAT and 15 MV 9-field dynamic MLC (DMLC) plans were created. The plans were delivered to the phantoms and to an ArcCHECK (Sunmore » Nuclear Systems, Melbourne, FL). The head and neck phantom contained 8 TLDs located at PTV1 (4), PTV2 (2), and OAR Cord (2). The lung phantom contained 4 TLDs, 2 in the PTV, 1 in the cord, and 1 in the heart. Daily outputs were recorded before each measurement for correction. 3DVH dose reconstruction software was used to project the calculated dose to patient anatomy. Results: For the HN phantom, the maximum difference between 3DVH and TLDs was -3.4% and between 3DVH and Eclipse was 1.2%. For the lung plan the maximum difference between 3DVH and TLDs was 4.3%, except for the spinal cord for which 3DVH overestimated the TLD dose by 12%. The maximum difference between 3DVH and Eclipse was 0.3%. 3DVH agreed well with Eclipse because the dose reconstruction algorithm uses the diode measurements to perturb the dose calculated by the treatment planning system; therefore, if there is a problem in the modeling or heterogeneity correction, it will be carried through to 3DVH. Conclusion: 3DVH agreed well with Eclipse and TLD measurements. Comparison of 3DVH with film measurements is ongoing. Work supported by PHS grant CA10953 and CA81647 (NCI, DHHS)« less
  • Purpose: To develop a practical device having sufficient accuracy for daily QA tests of accelerators used for SRS and SBRT. Methods: The UAB (Universal Alignment Ball) consists of a 6.35 mm (1/4 inch) diameter tungsten sphere located concentrically within a 25.4 mm (1 inch) diameter acrylic plastic (PMMA) sphere. The spheres are embedded in polystyrene foam, which, in turn, is surrounded by a cylindrical PMMA shell. The UAB is placed on the couch and aligned with wall lasers according to marks that have known positions in relation to the center of the spheres. Using planar and cone beam images themore » couch is shifted till the surface of the PMMA sphere matches Eclipse-generated circular contours. Anterior and lateral MV images taken with small MLC openings allow measurement of distance between kV and MV isocenter, laser and MLC alignment. Measurements were taken over a one-month period. Results: Artifacts from the tungsten sphere were confined within the PMMA sphere and did not affect cone beam localization of the sphere boundary, allowing 0.1 mm precise alignment with a computer-generated circle centered at kV isocenter. In tests extending over a one-month period, the distance between kV and MV isocenters along the vertical, longitudinal and lateral directions was 0.125 +/−0.06, 0.19 +/−0.08, and 0.02 +/−0.08 mm, respectively. Laser misalignment along these directions was 0.34 +/- 0.15, 0.74 +/−0.29, and 0.49 +/−0.22 mm. Automated couch shifts moved the spheres to within 0.1 mm of the selected position. The center of a 1cmx1cm MLC-defined field remained within +/−0.2 mm of the tungsten sphere center as the gantry was rotated. Conclusion: The UAB is practical for daily end-to-end QA tests of accelerator alignment. It provides tenths-mm accuracy for measuring agreement of kV and MV isocenters, couch motions, gantry flex and laser alignment.« less
  • Purpose: SRS/SBRT combines hypofractionation with excellent dose distributions. However, extremely steep gradients across the target along with dose escalation, if not administered accurately, may lead to serious complications, recurrences, or even fatalities. Existing commercial QA products either lack adequate spatial resolution or the 3D aspect. By contrast, the new CrystalBall™ mailed high-resolution 3D dosimetry service removes the above limitations while reducing the overall workload on medical physics staff. The exposed dosimeters, which change optical density in proportion to local dose, are sent back to the manufacturer (MGS Research Inc., Madison, CT) for sub-millimeter-resolution laser-CT scanning and QA data analysis. QAmore » report is returned electronically within 24 hours. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dose calibration accuracy in this system. Methods: Two spherical CrystalBall™ polymer gel dosimeters from the same batch, 166 mm diameter, with embedded 3D image registration markers, were mounted in a special phantom designed for reproducible positioning. For full end to end testing, the optical guidance array was mounted onto the phantom and a CT was taken. Two separate Rapid Arc SRS plans were designed. Varian Medical Systems optical guidance system was used to position the phantom and the SRS treatment plans were delivered to the two spheres on Varian's Trilogy Accelerator. Exposed dosimeters were mailed back to the manufacturer for laser CT scanning and analysis. Results: For each plan, 3D gamma passing rate was 100% for 2%/2mm distance-to-agreement criteria above 50% isodose level. The two calibration curves, generated using volumetric dose and optical density data, showed excellent mutual agreement (max difference 2.2%, median difference 0.75%). Conclusion: The clinical utility of new CrystalBall™ mailed QA service for SRS/SBRT and high accuracy of dose calibration have been validated. The workflow associated with the use of the CrystalBall™ in clinical setting was found to be minimal. The presenting author is the founder of and has an ownership in MGS Research Inc which manufactures the CrystalBall system for 3D dosimetry.« less
  • Purpose: To assess the plan robustness and safety margin in SRS from 4DMGDR in E2E QA based on clinical objectives. Methods: OCTAVIUS SRS 1000 detector array and 4D phantom (PTW, Freiburg, Germany) were used to measure 5 coplanar SRS plans with 1 and 2 mm planning target volume (PTV). 3 targets were clinical, and 2 were virtual simulated to be 1mm from the brainstem (BS), and between chiasm (CS) and optic nerve (ON). Planning was done on Monaco v5.0 (Elekta, Maryland Heights, MO) to achieve 95–99% PTV and 100% gross tumor volume (GTV) prescription dose coverage. CBCT setup of themore » 4D phantom by 6D robotic couch was performed as for real patient. 4D-MGDR in patient CT and dosimetric analysis were performed in PTW Verisoft v6.1. The safety margin that achieved 100% GTV coverage was determined, and doses to 2% (D2%) of BS, ON and CS were assessed from E2E QA. Results: 100% GTV coverage was achieved with 1mm margin for 2 plans and 2mm margin for all plans. 98.3% and 99.4% GTV coverage were found in E2E QA for 1mm PTVs that either had sharp changing contour, or was nearby CS and ON or BS, and had either low planned minimum GTV dose (∼101% of the prescribed dose vs.∼106%) or compromised PTV coverage (95% vs. 99%). D2% to CS obtained with 4D-MGDR for one virtual target were 18.8Gy for 1mm PTV and 19.2Gy for 2mm PTV, exceeding the planned tolerance of 18Gy/3 fractions for prescription dose of 24Gy. Conclusion: 1mm margin is generally sufficient for dose planning and machine delivery errors. Irregular GTV with just enough dose coverage to spare critical organs may need 2mm margin at the costs of possible higher organ doses. 4D MGDR in an E2E QA approach can put the treatment plan evaluation in clinical perspectives.« less
  • Purpose: Patient-specific quality assurance (QA) is necessary to accurately deliver high dose radiation to the target, especially for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Unlike previous 2 dimensional (D) array QA devices, Delta{sup 4} can verify the dose delivery in 3D. In this study, the difference between calculated and measured dose distribution was compared with two QA devices (MATRIXX and Delta{sup 4}) to evaluate the delivery accuracy. Methods: Twenty-seven SRS/SBRT plans with VMAT were verified with point-dose and dose-map analysis. We use an ion chamber (A1SL, 0.053cc) for point-dose measurement. For verification of the dose map, themore » differences between the calculated and measured doses were analyzed with a gamma index using MATRIXX and Delta{sup 4} devices. The passing criteria for gamma evaluation were set at 3 mm for distance-to-agreement (DTA) and 3% for dose-difference. A gamma index less than 1 was defined as the verification passing the criteria and satisfying at least 95% of the points. Results: The mean prescribed dose and fraction was 40 ± 14.41 Gy (range: 16–60) and 10 ± 2.35 fractions (range: 1–8), respectively. In point dose analysis, the differences between the calculated and measured doses were all less than 5% (mean: 2.12 ± 1.13%; range: −0.55% to 4.45%). In dose-map analysis, the average passing rates were 99.38 ± 0.96% (range: 95.31–100%) and 100 ± 0.12% (range: 99.5%–100%) for MATRIXX and Delta{sup 4}, respectively. Even using criteria of 2%/2 mm, the passing rate of Delta{sup 4} was still more than 95% (mean: 99 ± 1.08%; range: 95.6%–100%). Conclusion: Both MATRIXX and Delta{sup 4} offer accurate and efficient verification for SRS/SBRT plans. The results measured by MATRIXX and Delta{sup 4} dosimetry systems are similar for SRS/SBRT performed with the VMAT technique.« less