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

Title: SU-D-BRC-03: Development and Validation of an Online 2D Dose Verification System for Daily Patient Plan Delivery Accuracy Check

Abstract

Purpose: All plan verification systems for particle therapy are designed to do plan verification before treatment. However, the actual dose distributions during patient treatment are not known. This study develops an online 2D dose verification tool to check the daily dose delivery accuracy. Methods: A Siemens particle treatment system with a modulated scanning spot beam is used in our center. In order to do online dose verification, we made a program to reconstruct the delivered 2D dose distributions based on the daily treatment log files and depth dose distributions. In the log files we can get the focus size, position and particle number for each spot. A gamma analysis is used to compare the reconstructed dose distributions with the dose distributions from the TPS to assess the daily dose delivery accuracy. To verify the dose reconstruction algorithm, we compared the reconstructed dose distributions to dose distributions measured using PTW 729XDR ion chamber matrix for 13 real patient plans. Then we analyzed 100 treatment beams (58 carbon and 42 proton) for prostate, lung, ACC, NPC and chordoma patients. Results: For algorithm verification, the gamma passing rate was 97.95% for the 3%/3mm and 92.36% for the 2%/2mm criteria. For patient treatment analysis,themore » results were 97.7%±1.1% and 91.7%±2.5% for carbon and 89.9%±4.8% and 79.7%±7.7% for proton using 3%/3mm and 2%/2mm criteria, respectively. The reason for the lower passing rate for the proton beam is that the focus size deviations were larger than for the carbon beam. The average focus size deviations were −14.27% and −6.73% for proton and −5.26% and −0.93% for carbon in the x and y direction respectively. Conclusion: The verification software meets our requirements to check for daily dose delivery discrepancies. Such tools can enhance the current treatment plan and delivery verification processes and improve safety of clinical treatments.« less

Authors:
;  [1];  [2];  [3];  [4]
  1. Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, Shanghai (China)
  2. Fudan univercity shanghai proton and heavy ion center, Shanghai (China)
  3. Fudan university shanghai proton and heavy ion center, Shanghai, shagnhai (China)
  4. Department of Medical physics at Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Shanghai, Shanghai (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22624374
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 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; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ACCURACY; ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER CODES; DEPTH DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; IONIZATION CHAMBERS; LUNGS; PATIENTS; PROSTATE; PROTON BEAMS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; VALIDATION; VERIFICATION

Citation Formats

Zhao, J, Hu, W, Xing, Y, Wu, X, and Li, Y. SU-D-BRC-03: Development and Validation of an Online 2D Dose Verification System for Daily Patient Plan Delivery Accuracy Check. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4955622.
Zhao, J, Hu, W, Xing, Y, Wu, X, & Li, Y. SU-D-BRC-03: Development and Validation of an Online 2D Dose Verification System for Daily Patient Plan Delivery Accuracy Check. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955622.
Zhao, J, Hu, W, Xing, Y, Wu, X, and Li, Y. 2016. "SU-D-BRC-03: Development and Validation of an Online 2D Dose Verification System for Daily Patient Plan Delivery Accuracy Check". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955622.
@article{osti_22624374,
title = {SU-D-BRC-03: Development and Validation of an Online 2D Dose Verification System for Daily Patient Plan Delivery Accuracy Check},
author = {Zhao, J and Hu, W and Xing, Y and Wu, X and Li, Y},
abstractNote = {Purpose: All plan verification systems for particle therapy are designed to do plan verification before treatment. However, the actual dose distributions during patient treatment are not known. This study develops an online 2D dose verification tool to check the daily dose delivery accuracy. Methods: A Siemens particle treatment system with a modulated scanning spot beam is used in our center. In order to do online dose verification, we made a program to reconstruct the delivered 2D dose distributions based on the daily treatment log files and depth dose distributions. In the log files we can get the focus size, position and particle number for each spot. A gamma analysis is used to compare the reconstructed dose distributions with the dose distributions from the TPS to assess the daily dose delivery accuracy. To verify the dose reconstruction algorithm, we compared the reconstructed dose distributions to dose distributions measured using PTW 729XDR ion chamber matrix for 13 real patient plans. Then we analyzed 100 treatment beams (58 carbon and 42 proton) for prostate, lung, ACC, NPC and chordoma patients. Results: For algorithm verification, the gamma passing rate was 97.95% for the 3%/3mm and 92.36% for the 2%/2mm criteria. For patient treatment analysis,the results were 97.7%±1.1% and 91.7%±2.5% for carbon and 89.9%±4.8% and 79.7%±7.7% for proton using 3%/3mm and 2%/2mm criteria, respectively. The reason for the lower passing rate for the proton beam is that the focus size deviations were larger than for the carbon beam. The average focus size deviations were −14.27% and −6.73% for proton and −5.26% and −0.93% for carbon in the x and y direction respectively. Conclusion: The verification software meets our requirements to check for daily dose delivery discrepancies. Such tools can enhance the current treatment plan and delivery verification processes and improve safety of clinical treatments.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4955622},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: To quantify the theoretical benefit, in terms of improvement in precision and accuracy of treatment delivery and in dose increase, of using online image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) performed with onboard cone-beam computed tomography (CT), in an ideal setting of no intrafraction motion/deformation, in the treatment of prostate cancer. Methods and materials: Twenty-two prostate cancer patients treated with conventional radiotherapy underwent multiple serial CT scans (median 18 scans per patient) during their treatment. We assumed that these data sets were equivalent to image sets obtainable by an onboard cone-beam CT. Each patient treatment was simulated with conventional IMRT and onlinemore » IG-IMRT separately. The conventional IMRT plan was generated on the basis of pretreatment CT, with a clinical target volume to planning target volume (CTV-to-PTV) margin of 1 cm, and the online IG-IMRT plan was created before each treatment fraction on the basis of the CT scan of the day, without CTV-to-PTV margin. The inverse planning process was similar for both conventional IMRT and online IG-IMRT. Treatment dose for each organ of interest was quantified, including patient daily setup error and internal organ motion/deformation. We used generalized equivalent uniform dose (EUD) to compare the two approaches. The generalized EUD (percentage) of each organ of interest was scaled relative to the prescription dose at treatment isocenter for evaluation and comparison. On the basis of bladder wall and rectal wall EUD, a dose-escalation coefficient was calculated, representing the potential increment of the treatment dose achievable with online IG-IMRT as compared with conventional IMRT. Results: With respect to radiosensitive tumor, the average EUD for the target (prostate plus seminal vesicles) was 96.8% for conventional IMRT and 98.9% for online IG-IMRT, with standard deviations (SDs) of 5.6% and 0.7%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The average EUDs of bladder wall and rectal wall for conventional IMRT vs. online IG-IMRT were 70.1% vs. 47.3%, and 79.4% vs. 72.2%, respectively. On average, a target dose increase of 13% (SD = 9.7%) can be achieved with online IG-IMRT based on rectal wall EUDs and 53.3% (SD = 15.3%) based on bladder wall EUDs. However, the variation (SD = 9.7%) is fairly large among patients; 27% of patients had only minimal benefit (<5% of dose increment) from online IG-IMRT, and 32% had significant benefit (>15%-41% of dose increment). Conclusions: The ideal maximum dose increment achievable with online IG-IMRT is, on average, 13% with respect to the dose-limiting organ of rectum. However, there is a large interpatient variation, ranging <5%-41%. The results can be applied to calibrate other practical online image-guided techniques for prostate cancer radiotherapy, when intratreatment organ motion/deformation and machine delivery accuracy are considered.« less
  • Purpose: Fast and reliable comprehensive quality assurance tools are required to validate the safety and accuracy of complex intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans for prostate treatment. In this study, we evaluated the performance of the COMPASS system for both off-line and potential online procedures for the verification of IMRT treatment plans. Methods and Materials: COMPASS has a dedicated beam model and dose engine, it can reconstruct three-dimensional dose distributions on the patient anatomy based on measured fluences using either the MatriXX two-dimensional (2D) array (offline) or a 2D transmission detector (T2D) (online). For benchmarking the COMPASS dose calculation, various dose-volume indicesmore » were compared against Monte Carlo-calculated dose distributions for five prostate patient treatment plans. Gamma index evaluation and absolute point dose measurements were also performed in an inhomogeneous pelvis phantom using extended dose range films and ion chamber for five additional treatment plans. Results: MatriXX-based dose reconstruction showed excellent agreement with the ion chamber (<0.5%, except for one treatment plan, which showed 1.5%), film ({approx}100% pixels passing gamma criteria 3%/3 mm) and mean dose-volume indices (<2%). The T2D based dose reconstruction showed good agreement as well with ion chamber (<2%), film ({approx}99% pixels passing gamma criteria 3%/3 mm), and mean dose-volume indices (<5.5%). Conclusion: The COMPASS system qualifies for routine prostate IMRT pretreatment verification with the MatriXX detector and has the potential for on-line verification of treatment delivery using T2D.« less
  • Purpose: Intensity modulated radiotherapy requires a comprehensive quality assurance program in general and ideally independent verification of dose delivery. Since conventional 2D detector arrays allow only pre-treatment verification, there is a debate concerning the need of online dose verification. This study presents the clinical performance, including dosimetric plan verification in 2D as well as in 3D and the error detection abilities of a new transmission detector (TD) for online dose verification of 6MV photon beam. Methods: To validate the dosimetric performance of the new device, dose reconstruction based on TD measurements were compared to a conventional pre-treatment verification method (reference)more » and treatment planning system (TPS) for 18 IMRT and VMAT treatment plans. Furthermore, dose reconstruction inside the patient based on TD read-out was evaluated by comparing various dose volume indices and 3D gamma evaluations against independent dose computation and TPS. To investigate the sensitivity of the new device, different types of systematic and random errors for leaf positions and linac output were introduced in IMRT treatment sequences. Results: The 2D gamma index evaluation of transmission detector based dose reconstruction showed an excellent agreement for all IMRT and VMAT plans compared to reference measurements (99.3±1.2)% and TPS (99.1±0.7)%. Good agreement was also obtained for 3D dose reconstruction based on TD read-out compared to dose computation (mean gamma value of PTV = 0.27±0.04). Only a minimal dose underestimation within the target volume was observed when analyzing DVH indices (<1%). Positional errors in leaf banks larger than 1mm and errors in linac output larger than 2% could clearly identified with the TD. Conclusion: Since 2D and 3D evaluations for all IMRT and VMAT treatment plans were in excellent agreement with reference measurements and dose computation, the new TD is suitable to qualify for routine treatment plan verification. Funding Support, Disclosures, and Conflict of Interest: COIs: Frank Lohr: Elekta: research grant, travel grants, teaching honoraria IBA: research grant, travel grants, teaching honoraria, advisory board C-Rad: board honoraria, travel grants Frederik Wenz: Elekta: research grant, teaching honoraria, consultant, advisory board Zeiss: research grant, teaching honoraria, patent Hansjoerg Wertz: Elekta: research grant, teaching honoraria IBA: research grant.« less
  • Purpose: To develop an online 3D dose verification tool based on EPID transit dosimetry to ensure optimum patient safety in radiotherapy treatments. Methods: A new software package was developed which processes EPID portal images online using a back-projection algorithm for the 3D dose reconstruction. The package processes portal images faster than the acquisition rate of the portal imager (∼ 2.5 fps). After a portal image is acquired, the software seeks for “hot spots” in the reconstructed 3D dose distribution. A hot spot is in this study defined as a 4 cm{sup 3} cube where the average cumulative reconstructed dose exceedsmore » the average total planned dose by at least 20% and 50 cGy. If a hot spot is detected, an alert is generated resulting in a linac halt. The software has been tested by irradiating an Alderson phantom after introducing various types of serious delivery errors. Results: In our first experiment the Alderson phantom was irradiated with two arcs from a 6 MV VMAT H&N treatment having a large leaf position error or a large monitor unit error. For both arcs and both errors the linac was halted before dose delivery was completed. When no error was introduced, the linac was not halted. The complete processing of a single portal frame, including hot spot detection, takes about 220 ms on a dual hexacore Intel Xeon 25 X5650 CPU at 2.66 GHz. Conclusion: A prototype online 3D dose verification tool using portal imaging has been developed and successfully tested for various kinds of gross delivery errors. The detection of hot spots was proven to be effective for the timely detection of these errors. Current work is focused on hot spot detection criteria for various treatment sites and the introduction of a clinical pilot program with online verification of hypo-fractionated (lung) treatments.« less
  • Purpose: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) delivered via volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) can strongly benefit from an in vivo patient dose verification due to the large doses per fraction. Electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) can be utilized as a patient dose dosimeter. In this work we present a physics-based model which utilizes on-treatment EPID images to reconstruct the dose delivered to an anthropomorphic phantom during SBRT-VMAT delivery. Methods: An SBRT linac beam was modeled using Monte Carlo methods and verified with measured data. Our dose reconstruction model back-projects EPID measured focal fluence upstream of the patient and adds amore » predicted extra-focal fluence component. This fluence is forward projected onto the patient's density matrix and convolved with dose kernels to calculate dose. The model was validated for two prostate, three lung, and two spine SBRT-VMAT treatments. Results were compared to the treatment planning system's calculation. Results: 2%/2 mm chi comparison calculations gave pass rates for the whole volume, infield, and high dose region respectively, and no lower than: 98%, 95%, 99% for the prostate plans, 99%, 92%, 85% for the lung plans, and 91%, 85%, 81% for the spine plans. A 3%/3mm calculation gave pass rates no lower than 99%, 94%, and 90% for all dose regions for the prostate, lung, and spine respectively. Conclusions: We have developed a physics-based model which calculates delivered dose to phantom (or patient) for SBRT-VMAT delivery using on treatment EPID images. The accuracy of the results has allowed us to test this model clinically.« less