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

Title: SU-E-T-455: Impact of Different Independent Dose Verification Software Programs for Secondary Check

Abstract

Purpose: There have been many reports for different dose calculation algorithms for treatment planning system (TPS). Independent dose verification program (IndpPro) is essential to verify clinical plans from the TPS. However, the accuracy of different independent dose verification programs was not evident. We conducted a multi-institutional study to reveal the impact of different IndpPros using different TPSs. Methods: Three institutes participated in this study. They used two different IndpPros (RADCALC and Simple MU Analysis (SMU), which implemented the Clarkson algorithm. RADCALC needed the input of radiological path length (RPL) computed by the TPSs (Eclipse or Pinnacle3). SMU used CT images to compute the RPL independently from TPS). An ion-chamber measurement in water-equivalent phantom was performed to evaluate the accuracy of two IndpPros and the TPS in each institute. Next, the accuracy of dose calculation using the two IndpPros compared to TPS was assessed in clinical plan. Results: The accuracy of IndpPros and the TPSs in the homogenous phantom was +/−1% variation to the measurement. 1543 treatment fields were collected from the patients treated in the institutes. The RADCALC showed better accuracy (0.9 ± 2.2 %) than the SMU (1.7 ± 2.1 %). However, the accuracy was dependent on the TPSmore » (Eclipse: 0.5%, Pinnacle3: 1.0%). The accuracy of RADCALC with Eclipse was similar to that of SMU in one of the institute. Conclusion: Depending on independent dose verification program, the accuracy shows systematic dose accuracy variation even though the measurement comparison showed a similar variation. The variation was affected by radiological path length calculation. IndpPro with Pinnacle3 has different variation because Pinnacle3 computed the RPL using physical density. Eclipse and SMU uses electron density, though.« less

Authors:
; ; ;  [1];  [2]; ;  [3];  [4]
  1. Inagi Municipal Hospital, Inagi, Tokyo (Japan)
  2. Kobe City Medical Center General Hospital, Kobe, Hyogo (Japan)
  3. Sasebo City General Hospital, Sasebo, Nagasaki (Japan)
  4. National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Chiba (Japan)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22548498
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Journal Name:
Medical Physics
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Journal ID: ISSN 0094-2405
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ACCURACY; ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER CODES; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; IMAGE PROCESSING; IONIZATION CHAMBERS; PATIENTS; PHANTOMS; PLANNING; RADIATION DOSES; VERIFICATION

Citation Formats

Itano, M, Yamazaki, T, Kosaka, M, Kobayashi, N, Yamashita, M, Ishibashi, S, Higuchi, Y, and Tachibana, H. SU-E-T-455: Impact of Different Independent Dose Verification Software Programs for Secondary Check. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924817.
Itano, M, Yamazaki, T, Kosaka, M, Kobayashi, N, Yamashita, M, Ishibashi, S, Higuchi, Y, & Tachibana, H. SU-E-T-455: Impact of Different Independent Dose Verification Software Programs for Secondary Check. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924817.
Itano, M, Yamazaki, T, Kosaka, M, Kobayashi, N, Yamashita, M, Ishibashi, S, Higuchi, Y, and Tachibana, H. Mon . "SU-E-T-455: Impact of Different Independent Dose Verification Software Programs for Secondary Check". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924817.
@article{osti_22548498,
title = {SU-E-T-455: Impact of Different Independent Dose Verification Software Programs for Secondary Check},
author = {Itano, M and Yamazaki, T and Kosaka, M and Kobayashi, N and Yamashita, M and Ishibashi, S and Higuchi, Y and Tachibana, H},
abstractNote = {Purpose: There have been many reports for different dose calculation algorithms for treatment planning system (TPS). Independent dose verification program (IndpPro) is essential to verify clinical plans from the TPS. However, the accuracy of different independent dose verification programs was not evident. We conducted a multi-institutional study to reveal the impact of different IndpPros using different TPSs. Methods: Three institutes participated in this study. They used two different IndpPros (RADCALC and Simple MU Analysis (SMU), which implemented the Clarkson algorithm. RADCALC needed the input of radiological path length (RPL) computed by the TPSs (Eclipse or Pinnacle3). SMU used CT images to compute the RPL independently from TPS). An ion-chamber measurement in water-equivalent phantom was performed to evaluate the accuracy of two IndpPros and the TPS in each institute. Next, the accuracy of dose calculation using the two IndpPros compared to TPS was assessed in clinical plan. Results: The accuracy of IndpPros and the TPSs in the homogenous phantom was +/−1% variation to the measurement. 1543 treatment fields were collected from the patients treated in the institutes. The RADCALC showed better accuracy (0.9 ± 2.2 %) than the SMU (1.7 ± 2.1 %). However, the accuracy was dependent on the TPS (Eclipse: 0.5%, Pinnacle3: 1.0%). The accuracy of RADCALC with Eclipse was similar to that of SMU in one of the institute. Conclusion: Depending on independent dose verification program, the accuracy shows systematic dose accuracy variation even though the measurement comparison showed a similar variation. The variation was affected by radiological path length calculation. IndpPro with Pinnacle3 has different variation because Pinnacle3 computed the RPL using physical density. Eclipse and SMU uses electron density, though.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924817},
journal = {Medical Physics},
issn = {0094-2405},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = {2015},
month = {6}
}