SU-E-T-601: Patient Specific QA Check for Radiotherapy with Carbon Beam at SAGA HIMAT

Himukai, T; Tsunashima, Y; Kanazawa, M; Mizota, M; Shioyama, Y; Endo, M

doi:10.1118/1.4924964

Title: SU-E-T-601: Patient Specific QA Check for Radiotherapy with Carbon Beam at SAGA HIMAT

Full Record
Other Related Research

Abstract

Purpose: To verify a patient specific QA for a prescribed dose per monitor unit (MU) and range check of carbon ion radiotherapy with a beam wobbling method at SAGA HIMAT. Methods: The dose distribution in a water phantom was recalculated with a treatment plan made by XiO-N (Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Tokyo). The depth dose distributions at central axis were compared with measurements using pinpoint ionization chamber (PTW31014). Measured data were analyzed for dose and distance difference with criteria of 3% and 2mm. To check for the MU and range, analysis data were used at center and distal end of a spread out bragg peak (SOBP) depth, respectively. Results: Treatment plan of 1400 beams in 500 patients were used for analysis. The pass rate of the MU and range was about 98% and 74%, respectively. The rate of both was 73%. The plan data passed only the MU check were verified depth dose profile. The data passed only the range and failed of both were compared depth dose distributions at off axis. If it was failed, we discussed with physicians. Conclusion: Most of patient specific QA check for a prescribed MU and range check at SAGA HIMAT were passed.

Authors:

Himukai, T; Tsunashima, Y; Kanazawa, M; Mizota, M; Shioyama, Y; Endo, M ^[1]

Ion Beam Therapy Center, SAGA HIMAT Foundation, Tosu, Saga (Japan)

Publication Date:: Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015

OSTI Identifier:: 22496314

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:: 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; 62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; BEAMS; BRAGG CURVE; CARBON IONS; DEPTH DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; IONIZATION CHAMBERS; PATIENTS; RADIOTHERAPY

Citation Formats


                    Himukai, T, Tsunashima, Y, Kanazawa, M, Mizota, M, Shioyama, Y, and Endo, M. SU-E-T-601: Patient Specific QA Check for Radiotherapy with Carbon Beam at SAGA HIMAT.  United States: N. p., 2015. 
        Web.  doi:10.1118/1.4924964.

Copy to clipboard


                    Himukai, T, Tsunashima, Y, Kanazawa, M, Mizota, M, Shioyama, Y, & Endo, M. SU-E-T-601: Patient Specific QA Check for Radiotherapy with Carbon Beam at SAGA HIMAT.  United States.  https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4924964

Copy to clipboard


                    Himukai, T, Tsunashima, Y, Kanazawa, M, Mizota, M, Shioyama, Y, and Endo, M. 2015.  
        "SU-E-T-601: Patient Specific QA Check for Radiotherapy with Carbon Beam at SAGA HIMAT".  United States.  https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4924964.

Copy to clipboard


                    
@article{osti_22496314,

  title        = {SU-E-T-601: Patient Specific QA Check for Radiotherapy with Carbon Beam at SAGA HIMAT},

  author       = {Himukai, T and Tsunashima, Y and Kanazawa, M and Mizota, M and Shioyama, Y and Endo, M},

  abstractNote = {Purpose: To verify a patient specific QA for a prescribed dose per monitor unit (MU) and range check of carbon ion radiotherapy with a beam wobbling method at SAGA HIMAT. Methods: The dose distribution in a water phantom was recalculated with a treatment plan made by XiO-N (Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Tokyo). The depth dose distributions at central axis were compared with measurements using pinpoint ionization chamber (PTW31014). Measured data were analyzed for dose and distance difference with criteria of 3% and 2mm. To check for the MU and range, analysis data were used at center and distal end of a spread out bragg peak (SOBP) depth, respectively. Results: Treatment plan of 1400 beams in 500 patients were used for analysis. The pass rate of the MU and range was about 98% and 74%, respectively. The rate of both was 73%. The plan data passed only the MU check were verified depth dose profile. The data passed only the range and failed of both were compared depth dose distributions at off axis. If it was failed, we discussed with physicians. Conclusion: Most of patient specific QA check for a prescribed MU and range check at SAGA HIMAT were passed.},

  doi          = {10.1118/1.4924964},

  url          = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/22496314},
  journal      = {Medical Physics},

  issn         = {0094-2405},

  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}

}

Copy to clipboard

Journal Article:

https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4924964

Other availability

Find in Google Scholar

Search WorldCat to find libraries that may hold this journal

Save / Share:

Export Metadata

Save to My Library

Similar records in OSTI.GOV collections:

SU-F-T-587: Quality Assurance of Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Patient Specific Plans: A Comparison Between MATRIXX and Delta4 QA Devices

Journal Article Tsai, YC; Lu, SH; Chen, LH; ... - Medical Physics

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 »« less
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4956772
Patient-specific QA and delivery verification of scanned ion beam at NIRS-HIMAC

Journal Article Furukawa, Takuji; Inaniwa, Taku; Hara, Yousuke; ... - Medical Physics

Purpose: To evaluate a patient-specific QA program and system for constancy checking of a scanning delivery system developed at the National Institute of Radiological Sciences.Methods: For the patient-specific QA, all the planned beams are recalculated on a water phantom with treatment planning software (TPS). The recalculated dose distributions are compared with the measured distributions using a 2D ionization chamber array at several depths, and evaluated using gamma index analysis with criteria of 3% and 3 mm and a pass rate of 90%. For the constancy check, the authors developed the multiwire proportional chamber (MWPC), which can record the delivered 2Dmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4828845
SU-G-TeP4-11: Implementation of a Non-Measurement-Based Patient-Specific IMRT QA Program

Journal Article Chen, S; Guerrero, M; Zhang, B; ... - Medical Physics

Purpose: To implement a comprehensive non-measurement-based verification program for patient-specific IMRT QA Methods: Based on published guidelines, a robust IMRT QA program should assess the following components: 1) accuracy of dose calculation, 2) accuracy of data transfer from the treatment planning system (TPS) to the record-and-verify (RV) system, 3) treatment plan deliverability, and 4) accuracy of plan delivery. Results: We have implemented an IMRT QA program that consist of four components: 1) an independent re-calculation of the dose distribution in the patient anatomy with a commercial secondary dose calculation program: Mobius3D (Mobius Medical Systems, Houston, TX), with dose accuracy evaluationmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4957136
SU-E-T-188: Commission of World 1st Commercial Compact PBS Proton System

Journal Article Ding, X; Patel, B; Song, X; ... - Medical Physics

Purpose: ProteusONE is the 1st commercial compact PBS proton system with an upstream scanning gantry and C230 cyclotron. We commissioned XiO and Raystation TPS simultaneously. This is a summary of beam data collection, modeling, and verification and comparison without range shiter for this unique system with both TPS. Methods: Both Raystation and XiO requires the same measurements data: (i) integral depth dose(IDDs) of single central spot measured in water tank; (ii) absolute dose calibration measured at 2cm depth of water with mono-energetic 10×10 cm2 field with spot spacing 4mm, 1MU per spot; and (iii) beam spot characteristics in air atmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4924549
SU-E-CAMPUS-T-06: Initial Experience of Patient-Specific QA Using a Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy System

Journal Article Piskulich, F; Zhang, Y; Perles, L; ... - Medical Physics

Purpose: To illustrate patient QA results for the first 10 patients treated at Scripps Proton Center by comparing point dose measurement using an ion chamber and in-house developed secondary MU program, and the measurement of 2D dose distribution using an ion chamber array. Methods: At the time of writing, 10 patient plans were approved for treatment using Varian ProBeam pencil beam scanning system and Eclipse treatment planning software. We used the IBA CC04 0.04 cm3 ion chamber and PTW Unidos E electrometer for point dose measurement in a small water tank (Sun Nuclear 1D scanner). We developed independent MU checkmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4889013

Similar Records