Dataset Information

Quality assurance of non-coplanar, volumetric-modulated arc therapy employing a C-arm linear accelerator, featuring continuous patient couch rotation.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To perform quality assurance of non-coplanar, volumetric-modulated arc therapy featuring continuous couch rotation (CCR-VMAT) using a C-arm linear accelerator.

Methods

We planned and delivered CCR-VMAT using the TrueBeam Developer Mode. Treatment plans were created for both a C-shaped phantom and five prostate cancer patients using seven CCR trajectories that lacked collisions; we used RayStation software (ver. 4.7) to this end. Subsequently, verification plans were generated. The mean absolute error (MAE) between the center of an MV-imaged steel ball and the radiation field was calculated using the Winston-Lutz test. The MAEs between planned and actual irradiation values were also calculated from trajectory logs. In addition, correlation coefficients (r values) among the MAEs of gantry angle, couch angle, and multi-leaf collimator (MLC) position, and mechanical parameters including gantry speed, couch speed, MLC speed, and beam output, were estimated. The dosimetric accuracies of planned and measured values were also assessed using ArcCHECK.

Results

The MAEs ±2 standard deviations as revealed by the Winston-Lutz test for all trajectories were 0.3?±?0.3?mm in two dimensions. The MAEs of the gantry, couch, and MLC positions calculated from all trajectory logs were within 0.04°, 0.08°, and 0.02?mm, respectively. Deviations in the couch angle (r?=?0.98, p?ConclusionsCCR-VMAT delivered via the TrueBeam Developer Mode was associated with high-level geometric and mechanical accuracy, thus affording to high dosimetric accuracy. The CCR-VMAT performance was stable regardless of the trajectory chosen.

SUBMITTER: Hirashima H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6458733 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:This study evaluates the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) dosimetric comparison between Halcyon ring gantry and TrueBeam c-arm linear accelerators for craniospinal irradiation (CSI) of the neuro-axis. 25 patients, who received treatment for medulloblastoma and primitive neuro-ectodermal tumors between 2018 and 2021, were planned for VMAT in True Beam (TB), and Halcyon (HAL) linear accelerators using 6 MV unflattened (FFF) photon beams (HALFFF and TBFFF). Dose-volume statistics for the target and organs at risk (OARs) and the total number of monitoring units (MUs) in the treatment plans were compared which included dose received by 95% PTV volume (V95%), volume receiving ≥ 107% dose, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (PI), MU and dose spillage (D10%, D30%, D50%, D70%, D90%). In all 26 OARs were considered of which five were serial and the remaining were parallel structures. For the former, the dose received by 0.2 cm3, volume = D0.2 cm3) were evaluated and for the latter mean dose were evaluated. Both arms were statistically compared with paired sample t-test with a significant value of ≤ 0.05. 11 patients received treatment with the Halcyon and the rest 14 in the TrueBeam C-arm linear accelerator. Patients in the low- and intermediate-risk category (n = 13) received 23.4 Gy in 13 fractions. The remaining patients were in the high-risk category and received 35 Gy in 21 fractions or 36 Gy in 20 fractions. For HALFFF and TBFFF, PTVV95% were 97.5 ± 0.8% and 97.4 ± 0.9% respectively (p = 0.371) while the V107% were 0.6 ± 0.4% and 0.5 ± 0.5 respectively (p = 0.504). However, the number of monitoring units showed statistical significance (p < 0.001) with values of 1331.9 ± 243.4 MU and 1089 ± 206.7 MU respectively for the HAL and TB plans. The differences in spillage dose were also statistically significant, favouring HAL plans at D30% (p = 0.002), D50% (p < 0.001), D70% (p = 0.039), and D90% (p = 0.01) level except for D10% (p = 0.090). Conformity index also showed statistical significance with PI_HAL = 0.9 ± 0.02 and PI_TB = 0.89 ± 0.03 (p = 0.029). For 10 of the 21 parallel structures, the mean dose differences were statistically significant in favouring of HAL plans. Halcyon based VMAT CSI plans are dosimetrically superior in terms of organ dose, especially for the large organs, and offer lower spillage doses than the TrueBeam plans. Plans generated by both linear accelerators are suitable for the patients' treatments.

Project description:In radiotherapy, air-filled ion chamber detectors are ubiquitously used in routine dose measurements for treatment planning. However, its use has been restricted by intrinsic low spatial resolution barriers. We developed one procedure for patient-specific quality assurance (QA) in arc radiotherapy by coalescing two adjacent measurement images into a single image to improve spatial resolution and sampling frequency, and investigated how different spatial resolutions affect the QA results. PTW 729 and 1500 ion chamber detectors were used for dosimetric verification via coalescing two measurements with 5 mm-couch shift and the isocenter, and only isocenter measurement, which we call coalescence and standard acquisition (SA). Statistical process control (SPC), process capability analysis (PCA), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used to compare the performance of the two procedures in determining tolerance levels and identifying clinically relevant errors. By analyzing 1256 γ values calculated on interpolated data points, our results indicated that detector 1500 showed higher averages in coalescence cohorts at different tolerance criteria and the dispersion degrees were spread out smaller. Detector 729 yielded a slightly lower process capability of 0.79, 0.76, 1.10, and 1.34, but detector 1500 exhibited somewhat different results of 0.94, 1.42, 1.19, and 1.60 in magnitude. The results of SPC individual control chart showed that cases in coalescence cohorts with γ values lowering its lower control limit (LCL) were greater than those in SA cohorts for detector 1500. A combination of the width of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) leaf, the cross-sectional area of the single detector, and the spacing between adjacent detectors might lead to discrepancies in percent γ values across diverse spatial resolution scenarios. The accuracy of reconstructed volume dose is mainly determined by the interpolation algorithm used in dosimetric systems. The magnitude of filling factor in the ion chamber detectors determined its ability to detect dose deviations. SPC and PCA results indicated that coalescence procedure could detect more potential failure QA results than SA while enhancing action thresholds.

Project description:Volumetric-modulated Dynamic WaveArc therapy (VMDWAT) is a non-coplanar continuous volumetric modulated radiation therapy (VMAT) delivery technique. Here, we monitored mechanical errors and their impact on dose distributions in VMDWAT using logfiles throughout the course of treatment.Fifteen patients were enrolled (2 skull base tumor patients and 13 prostate cancer patients). VMDWAT plans were created for the enrolled patients. The prescribed dose for the skull base tumor was set as 54 Gy at 1.8 Gy per fraction, and that for the prostate cancer was set as 72 to 78 Gy at 2 Gy per fraction. We acquired logfiles to monitor mechanical errors and their impact on dose distribution in each fraction. The root mean square error (RMSE) in the multi-leaf collimator (MLC), gantry angle, O-ring angle and monitor unit (MU) were calculated using logfiles throughout the course of VMDWAT for each patient. The dosimetric impact of mechanical errors throughout the course of VMDWAT was verified using a logfile-based dose reconstruction method. Dosimetric errors between the reconstructed plans and the original plans were assessed.A total of 517 datasets, including 55 datasets for the 2 skull base tumor patients and 462 datasets for the 13 prostate cancer patients, were acquired. The RMSE values were less than 0.1 mm, 0.2°, 0.1°, and 0.4 MU for MLC position, gantry angle, O-ring angle, and MU, respectively. For the skull base tumors, the absolute mean dosimetric errors and two standard deviations throughout the course of treatment were less than 1.4% and 1.1%, respectively. For prostate cancer, these absolute values were less than 0.3% and 0.5%, respectively. The largest dosimetric error of 2.5% was observed in a skull base tumor patient. The resultant dosimetric error in the accumulated daily delivered dose distribution, in the patient with the largest error, was up to 1.6% for all dose-volumetric parameters relative to the planned dose distribution.MLC position, gantry rotation, O-ring rotation and MU were highly accurate and stable throughout the course of treatment. The daily dosimetric errors due to mechanical errors were small. VMDWAT provided high delivery accuracy and stability throughout the course of treatment.UMIN000023870 . Registered: 1 October 2016.

Project description:AimThis study aims to report preclinical validation, and the first clinical treatment of total bone marrow irradiation (TMI) and total bone marrow and lymph nodal irradiation (TMLI) using Volumetric modulated arc therapy in Halcyon-E ring gantry linear accelerator. Preclinical validation includes simulation, planning, patient-specific QA, and dry run.Material and methodFour patients, two female and two male, with body weights of 116 kg, 52 kg, 64 kg, and 62 kg; with two with chronic myeloid leukemia, one each with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) were simulated and planned for TMI/TMLI. Patients were immobilized with a full-body vacuum bag. Head first supine (HFS) and Feet first supine (FFS) CT scans were acquired from head to knee and knee to toe. Planning target volume (PTV) was created with a uniform margin of 6 mm over the total bone marrow/bone marrow + lymph nodes. HFS and FFS PTVs were optimized independently using 6MV unflatten energy for 12 Gy in 6 fractions. Plans were merged to create the resultant dose distribution using a junction bias dose matching technique. The total number of isocenters was ≤ 10 per CT set, and two to four full arcs were used for each isocenter. A junction dose gradient technique was used for dose feathering between arcs between adjacent isocenters.ResultOnly one female patient diagnosed as AML received the TMLI treatment, while the other three patients dropped out due to clinical complications and comorbidities that developed in the time between simulation and treatment. The result presented has been averaged over all four patients. For PTV, 95% dose was normalised to 95% volume, PTV_V107% receiving 3.3 ± 3.1%. Total lung mean and V12Gy were 1048.6 ± 107.1 cGy and 19.5 ± 12.1%. Maximum lens doses were 489.5 ± 35.5 cGy (left: L) and 497 ± 69.2 cGy (right: R). The mean cardiac and bilateral kidney doses were 921.75 ± 89.2 cGy, 917.9 ± 63.2 cGy (L), and 805.9 ± 9.7 cGy (R). Average Monitor Unit was 7738.25 ± 1056.6. The median number of isocenters was 17(HFS+FFS), average MU/Dose (cGy) ratio per isocenter was 2.28 ± 0.3.ConclusionHalcyon-E ring gantry linear accelerator capable of planning and delivering TMI/TMLI..

Project description:Existing volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) optimization using coplanar arcs is highly efficient but usually dosimetrically inferior to intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with optimized non-coplanar beams. To achieve both dosimetric quality and delivery efficiency, we proposed in this study, a novel integrated optimization method for non-coplanar VMAT (4?VMAT). 4?VMAT with direct aperture optimization (DAO) was achieved by utilizing a least square dose fidelity objective, along with an anisotropic total variation term for regularizing the fluence smoothness, a single segment term for imposing simple apertures, and a group sparsity term for selecting beam angles. Continuous gantry/couch angle trajectories were selected using the Dijkstra's algorithm, where the edge and node costs were determined based on the maximal gantry rotation speed and the estimated fluence map at the current iteration, respectively. The couch-gantry-patient collision space was calculated based on actual machine geometry and a human subject 3D surface. Beams leading to collision are excluded from the DAO and beam trajectory selection (BTS). An alternating optimization strategy was implemented to solve the integrated DAO and BTS problem. The feasibility of 4?VMAT using one full-arc or two full-arcs was tested on nine patients with brain, lung, or prostate cancer. The plan was compared against a coplanar VMAT (2?VMAT) plan using one additional arc and collimator rotation. Compared to 2?VMAT, 4?VMAT reduced the average maximum and mean organs-at-risk dose by 9.63% and 3.08% of the prescription dose with the same target coverage. R50 was reduced by 23.0%. Maximum doses to the dose limiting organs, such as the brainstem, the major vessels, and the proximal bronchus, were reduced by 8.1 Gy (64.8%), 16.3 Gy (41.5%), and 19.83 Gy (55.5%), respectively. The novel 4?VMAT approach affords efficient delivery of non-coplanar arc trajectories that lead to dosimetric improvements compared with coplanar VMAT using more arcs.

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of the study was to evaluate the dosimetry of the Halcyon in prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and hippocampal-sparing for small cell lung cancer (SCLC).MethodsFive VMAT plans were designed on CT images of 15 patients diagnosed with SCLC and received PCI. Three plans with two full arcs were generated on the Trilogy and the TrueBeam accelerators, and flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter free (FFF) modes were used on TrueBeam. Two Halcyon plans with two and three full arcs were generated, referred to as H-2A and H-3A, respectively. The prescription dose was 25 Gy in 2.5-Gy fractions. The dose limit for hippocampus were D100 ≤ 9Gy and Dmax ≤ 16Gy. The Wilcoxon matched-paired signed-rank test was used to evaluate the significance of the observed differences between the five plans.ResultsH-2A plans significantly increased the D2 of PTV, and H-3A plans showed comparable or even better target dosimetry (better conformity) compared to the three plans on C-arm accelerators. Compared to T and TB plans, the two Halcyon plans significantly reduced the D100 and mean doses of bilateral hippocampus, the mean doses of eyeballs, and the maximum doses of lenses. D100 of hippocampus was reduced in TrueBeam plans comparing to Trilogy plans. The FFF plans on TrueBeam also represented advantages in Dmean and D100 of hippocampas, Dmean and Dmax of eyeballs, and the Dmax of lenses compared to FF plans. Halcyon plans and TrueBeam plans with FFF mode increased the MUs compared to FF plans. Comparing to H-2A, the H-3A plans exhibited additional dosimetric advantages, including D2, CI and HI of PTV, as well as the maximum and mean doses of hippocampus and eyeballs, and the maximum doses of optic nerves and brainstem. The two Halcyon plans significantly reduced the delivery time and showed the higher gamma passing rate than the three plans of C-arm accelerators.ConclusionsCompared with the C-arm accelerators, the dose of hippocampus and the delivery times on Halcyon are relatively significantly reduced for hippocampal-sparing PCI. Three arcs are recommended for VMAT plans with the Halcyon in hippocampal-sparing PCI.

Project description:Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the utility of a new plan feature (planomics feature) for predicting the results of patient-specific quality assurance using the head and neck (H&N) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan. Methods: One hundred and thirty-one H&N VMAT plans in our institution from 2019 to 2021 were retrospectively collected. Dosimetric verification for all plans was carried out using the portal dosimetry system integrated into the Eclipse treatment planning system based on the electronic portal imaging devices. Gamma passing rates (GPR) were analyzed using three gamma indices of 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm with a 10% dose threshold. Forty-eight conventional features affecting the dose delivery accuracy were used in the study, and 2,476 planomics features were extracted based on the radiotherapy plan file. Three prediction and classification models using conventional features (CF), planomics features (PF), and hybrid features (HF) combining two sets of features were constructed by the gradient boosting regressor (GBR) and Ridge classifier for each GPR of 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm, respectively. The absolute prediction error (APE) and the area under the curve (AUC) were adopted for assessing the performance of prediction and classification models. Results: In the GPR prediction, the average APE of the models using CF, PF, and HF was 1.3 ± 1.2%/3.6 ± 3.0%, 1.7 ± 1.5%/3.8 ± 3.5%, and 1.1 ± 1.0%/4.1 ± 3.1% for 2%/2 mm; 0.7 ± 0.6%/2.0 ± 2.0%, 1.0±1.1%/2.2 ± 1.8%, and 0.6 ± 0.6%/2.2 ± 1.9% for 3%/2 mm; and 0.4 ± 0.3%/1.2 ± 1.2%, 0.4±0.5%/1.3 ± 1.0%, and 0.3±0.3%/1.2 ± 1.1% for 3%/3 mm, respectively. In the regression prediction, three models give a similar modeling performance for predicting the GPR. The classification results were 0.67 ± 0.03/0.66 ± 0.07, 0.77 ± 0.03/0.73 ± 0.06, and 0.78 ± 0.02/0.75 ± 0.04 for 3%/3 mm, respectively. For 3%/2 mm, the AUCs of the training and testing cohorts were 0.64 ± 0.03/0.62 ± 0.07, 0.70 ± 0.03/0.67 ± 0.06, and 0.75 ± 0.03/0.71 ± 0.07, respectively, and for 2%/2 mm, the average AUCs of the training and testing cohorts were 0.72 ± 0.03/0.72 ± 0.06, 0.78 ± 0.04/0.73 ± 0.07, and 0.81 ± 0.03/0.75 ± 0.06, respectively. In the classification, the PF model has a better classification performance than the CF model. Moreover, the HF model provides the best result among the three classifications models. Conclusions: The planomics features can be used for predicting and classifying the GPR results and for improving the model performance after combining the conventional features for the GPR classification.