Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators

Impact of log file source and data frequency on accuracy of log file-based patient specific quality assurance

Performing phantom measurements for patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) adds a significant amount of time to the adaptive radiotherapy procedure. Log file based PSQA can be used to increase the efficiency of this process. This study compared the dosimetric accuracy of high-frequency linear accelerator (Linac) log files and low-frequency log data stored in the oncology information system (OIS). Thirty patients were included, that were recently treated in the head and neck (HN), brain, and prostate region with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and an additional ten patients treated using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) with 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) technique. Log data containing a single fraction were used to calculate the dose distributions. The dosimetric differences between Linac log files and OIS logs were evaluated with a gamma analysis with 2%/2 mm criterion and dose threshold of 30%. The original treatment plan was used as a reference. Moreover, DVH parameters of D_98%, D_50%, and D_2% of the planning-target volume (PTV) and dose to several organs at risk (OARs) were reported. Significant differences in dose distributions between the two log types and the original dose were observed for PTV D_98% and D_2% (r < 0.001) for HN cases, PTV D_98% (r = 0.005) for brain cases, and PTV D_50% (r = 0.015) for prostate cases. No significant differences were found between the two log types with respect to D_50%. The root mean square (RMS) error of the leaf positions of the OIS log was approximately twice the RMS error of the Linac log file for VMAT plans, but identical for 3D-CRT plans. The relationship between the gamma pass rate and the RMS error showed a moderate correlation for the Linac log files (r = -0.58, p < 0.001) and strong correlation for OIS logs (r = -0.71, p < 0.001). Furthermore, all doses calculated using Linac log files and OIS log data had a GPR >90% for an RMS error < 3.3 mm. Based on these findings, a tolerance limit of RMS error of 3.3 mm for considering OIS log based PSQA was established. Nevertheless, the OIS log data quality should be improved to achieve adequate PSQA.

How much rotational error is clinically acceptable for single-isocenter/two-lesion lung SBRT treatment on halcyon ring delivery system (RDS)?

PURPOSE

SBRT treatment of two separate lung lesions via single-isocenter/multi-target (SIMT) plan on Halcyon RDS could improve patient comfort, compliance, patient throughput, and clinic efficiency. However, aligning two separate lung lesions synchronously via a single pre-treatment CBCT scan on Halcyon can be difficult due to rotational patient setup errors. Thus, to quantify the dosimetric impact, we simulated loss of target(s) coverage due to small, yet clinically observable rotational patient setup errors on Halcyon for SIMT treatments.

METHODS

Seventeen previously treated 4D-CT based SIMT lung SBRT patients with two separate lesions (total 34 lesions, 50 Gy in five fractions to each lesion) on TrueBeam (6MV-FFF) were re-planned on Halcyon (6MV-FFF) using a similar arc geometry (except couch rotation), dose engine (AcurosXB algorithm), and treatment planning objectives. Rotational patient setup errors of [± 0.5⁰ to ± 3.0⁰] on Halcyon were simulated via Velocity registration software in all three rotation axes and recalculated dose distributions in Eclipse treatment planning system. Dosimetric impact of rotational errors was evaluated for target coverage and organs at risk (OAR).

RESULTS

Average PTV volume and distance to isocenter were 23.7 cc and 6.1 cm. Average change in Paddick's conformity indexes were less than -5%, -10%, and -15% for 1°, 2°, and 3°, respectively for yaw, roll, and pitch rotation directions. Maximum drop off of PTV(D100%) coverage for 2° rotation was -2.0% (yaw), -2.2% (roll), and -2.5% (pitch). With ±1° rotational error, no PTV(D100%) loss was found. Due to anatomical complexity: irregular and highly variable tumor sizes and locations, highly heterogenous dose distribution, and steep dose gradient, no trend for loss of target(s) coverage as a function of distance to isocenter and PTV size was found. Change in maximum dose to OAR were acceptable per NRG-BR001 within ±1.0° rotation, but were up to 5 Gy higher to heart with 2° in the pitch rotation axis.

CONCLUSION

Our clinically realistic simulation results show that rotational patient setup errors up to 1.0° in any rotation axis could be acceptable for selected two separate lung lesions SBRT patients on Halcyon. Multivariable data analysis in large cohort is ongoing to fully characterize Halcyon RDS for synchronous SIMT lung SBRT.

Assessing the impact of intrafraction motion correction on PTV margins and target and OAR dosimetry for single-fraction free-breathing lung stereotactic body radiation therapy

The objective of this research is to investigate intrafraction motion correction on planning target volume (PTV) margin requirements and target and organ-at-risk (OAR) dosimetry in single-fraction lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Sixteen patients (15 with upper lobe lesions, 1 with a middle lobe lesion) were treated with single-fraction lung SBRT. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were acquired before the treatment, between the arcs, and after the delivery of the treatment fraction. Shifts from the reference images were recorded in anterior-posterior (AP), superior-inferior (SI), and lateral (LAT) dimensions. The deviations from the reference image were calculated for 3 clinical scenarios: not applying intratreatment couch shifts and not correcting for pretreatment deviations < 3 mm ( scenario 1), not applying intratreatment couch shifts and correcting for pretreatment deviations < 3 mm ( scenario 2), and applying all pre- and intratreatment couch shifts (scenario 3). PTV margins were determined using the van Herk formalism for each scenario and maximum and average deviations were assessed. The clinical scenarios were modelled in the treatment planning system based on each patient dataset to assess target and OAR dosimetry. Calculated lower-bound PTV margins in the AP, SI, and LAT dimensions were [4.6, 3.5, 2.3] mm in scenario 1, [4.6, 2.4, 2.2] mm in scenario 2, and [1.7, 1.2, 1.0] mm in scenario 3. The margins are lower bounds because they do not include contributions from nonmotion related errors. Average and maximum intrafraction deviations were larger in the AP dimension compared to the SI and LAT dimensions for all scenarios. A unidimensional movement (several mm) in the negative AP dimension was observed in clinical scenarios 1 and 2 but not scenario 3. Average intrafraction deviation vectors were 1.2, 1.1, and 0.3 mm for scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Modelled clinical scenarios revealed that using scenario 3 yields significantly fewer treatment plan objective failures compared to scenarios 1 and 2 using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Intratreatment motion correction between each arc may enable reductions PTV margin requirements. It may also compensate for unidimensional negative AP movement, and improve target and OAR dosimetry.

Practical and technical key challenges in head and neck adaptive radiotherapy: The GORTEC point of view

Anatomical variations occur during head and neck (H&N) radiotherapy (RT) treatment. These variations may result in underdosage to the target volume or overdosage to the organ at risk. Replanning during the treatment course can be triggered to overcome this issue. Due to technological, methodological and clinical evolutions, tools for adaptive RT (ART) are becoming increasingly sophisticated. The aim of this paper is to give an overview of the key steps of an H&N ART workflow and tools from the point of view of a group of French-speaking medical physicists and physicians (from GORTEC). Focuses are made on image registration, segmentation, estimation of the delivered dose of the day, workflow and quality assurance for an implementation of H&N offline and online ART. Practical recommendations are given to assist physicians and medical physicists in a clinical workflow.

Modeling linear accelerator (Linac) beam data by implicit neural representation learning for commissioning and quality assurance applications

BACKGROUND

Linear accelerator (Linac) beam data commissioning and quality assurance (QA) play a vital role in accurate radiation treatment delivery and entail a large number of measurements using a variety of field sizes. How to optimize the effort in data acquisition while maintaining high quality of medical physics practice has been sought after.

PURPOSE

We propose to model Linac beam data through implicit neural representation (NeRP) learning. The potential of the beam model in predicting beam data from sparse measurements and detecting data collection errors was evaluated, with the goal of using the beam model to verify beam data collection accuracy and simplify the commissioning and QA process.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

NeRP models with continuous and differentiable functions parameterized by multilayer perceptrons (MLPs) were used to represent various beam data including percentage depth dose (PDD) and profiles of 6 MV beams with and without flattening filter. Prior knowledge of the beam data was embedded into the MLP network by learning the NeRP of a vendor-provided "golden" beam dataset. The prior-embedded network was then trained to fit clinical beam data collected at one field size and used to predict beam data at other field sizes. We evaluated the prediction accuracy by comparing network-predicted beam data to water tank measurements collected from 14 clinical Linacs. Beam datasets with intentionally introduced errors were used to investigate the potential use of the NeRP model for beam data verification, by evaluating the model performance when trained with erroneous beam data samples.

RESULTS

Linac beam data predicted by the model agreed well with water tank measurements, with averaged Gamma passing rates (1%/1 mm passing criteria) higher than 95% and averaged mean absolute errors less than 0.6%. Beam data samples with measurement errors were revealed by inconsistent beam predictions between networks trained with correct versus erroneous data samples, characterized by a Gamma passing rate lower than 90%.

CONCLUSION

A NeRP beam data modeling technique has been established for predicting beam characteristics from sparse measurements. The model provides a valuable tool to verify beam data collection accuracy and promises to simplify commissioning/QA processes by reducing the number of measurements without compromising the quality of medical physics service.

Determining the quality control frequency of an MR-linac using risk matrix (RM) analysis

PURPOSE

Quality control (QC) is performed routinely through professional guidelines. However, the recommended QC frequency may not be optimal among different institutional settings. Here we propose a novel method for determining the optimal QC frequency using risk matrix (RM) analysis.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A newly installed Magnetic Resonance linac (MR-linac) was chosen as the testing platform and six routine QC items were investigated. Failures of these QC items can adversely affect treatment outcome for the patient. Accordingly, each QC item with its assigned frequency forms a unique failure mode (FM). Using FM-effect analysis (FMEA), the severity (S), occurrence (O), and detection (D) of each FM was obtained. Next, S and D based on RM was used to determine the appropriate QC frequency. Finally, the performance of new frequency for each QC item was evaluated using the metric E = O/D.

RESULTS

One new QC frequency was the same as the old frequency, two new QC frequencies were less than the old ones, and three new QC frequencies were higher than the old ones. For six QC items, E values at the new frequencies were not less than their values at the old frequencies. This indicates that the risk of machine failure is reduced at the new QC frequencies.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of RM analysis provides a useful tool for determining the optimal frequencies for routine linac QC. This study demonstrated that linac QC can be performed in a way that maintains high performance of the treatment machine in a radiotherapy clinic.

Long-term experience in quality assurance of on-rail computed tomography systems for image-guided radiotherapy using in-house multifunctional phantoms

To report the long-term quality assurance (QA) experience of an on-rail computed tomography (CT) system for image-guided radiotherapy using an in-house phantom. An on-rail CT system combining the Elekta Synergy and Canon Aquilion LB was used. The treatment couch was shared by the linear accelerators and CT, and the couch was rotated by 180° when using the on-rail-CT system to ensure that the CT direction was toward the head. All QA analyses were performed by radiation technologists on CBCT or on-rail CT images of the in-house phantom. The CBCT center accuracy from the linac laser, couch rotational accuracy (CBCT center vs. on-rail CT center), horizontal accuracy by CT gantry shift, and remote couch shift accuracy were evaluated. This study reported the QA status of the system during the period 2014-2021. The absolute mean accuracy of couch rotation was 0.4 ± 0.28 mm, 0.44 ± 0.36 mm, and 0.37 ± 0.27 mm in the SI, RL, and AP directions, respectively. Horizontal and remote movement accuracies of the treatment couch were also within 0.5 mm of the absolute mean value. A decrease in the accuracy of couch rotation was also observed due to aging deterioration of related parts caused by the frequent use of couch rotation. The three-dimensional accuracy of on-rail CT systems derived mainly from treatment couches can be maintained within 0.5 mm with appropriate accuracy assurance for at least > 8 years.

A simple method to measure the gating latencies in photon and proton based radiotherapy using a scintillating crystal

BACKGROUND

In respiratory gated radiotherapy, low latency between target motion into and out of the gating window and actual beam-on and beam-off is crucial for the treatment accuracy. However, there is presently a lack of guidelines and accurate methods for gating latency measurements.

PURPOSE

To develop a simple and reliable method for gating latency measurements that work across different radiotherapy platforms.

METHODS

Gating latencies were measured at a Varian ProBeam (protons, RPM gating system) and TrueBeam (photons, TrueBeam gating system) accelerator. A motion-stage performed 1 cm vertical sinusoidal motion of a marker block that was optically tracked by the gating system. An amplitude gating window was set to cover the posterior half of the motion (0-0.5 cm). Gated beams were delivered to a 5 mm cubic scintillating ZnSe:O crystal that emitted visible light when irradiated, thereby directly showing when the beam was on. During gated beam delivery, a video camera acquired images at 120 Hz of the moving marker block and light-emitting crystal. After treatment, the block position and crystal light intensity were determined in all video frames. Two methods were used to determine the gate-on (τ_on ) and gate-off (τ_off ) latencies. By method 1, the video was synchronized with gating log files by temporal alignment of the same block motion recorded in both the video and the log files. τ_on was defined as the time from the block entered the gating window (from gating log files) to the actual beam-on as detected by the crystal light. Similarly, τ_off was the time from the block exited the gating window to beam-off. By method 2, τ_on and τ_off were found from the videos alone using motion of different sine periods (1-10 s). In each video, a sinusoidal fit of the block motion provided the times T_min of the lowest block position. The mid-time, T_mid-light , of each beam-on period was determined as the time halfway between crystal light signal start and end. It can be shown that the directly measurable quantity T_mid-light - T_min  = (τ_off +τ_on )/2, which provided the sum (τ_off +τ_on ) of the two latencies. It can also be shown that the beam-on (i.e., crystal light) duration ΔT_light increases linearly with the sine period and depends on τ_off - τ_on : ΔT_light  = constant•period+(τ_off - τ_on ). Hence, a linear fit of ΔT_light as a function of the period provided the difference of the two latencies. From the sum (τ_off +τ_on ) and difference (τ_off - τ_on ), the individual latencies were determined.

RESULTS

Method 1 resulted in mean (±SD) latencies of τ_on  = 255 ± 33 ms, τ_off  = 82 ± 15 ms for the ProBeam and τ_on  = 84 ± 13 ms, τ_off  = 44 ± 11 ms for the TrueBeam. Method 2 resulted in latencies of τ_on  = 255 ± 23 ms, τ_off  = 95 ± 23 ms for the ProBeam and τ_on  = 83 ± 8 ms, τ_off  = 46 ± 8 ms for the TrueBeam. Hence, the mean latencies determined by the two methods agreed within 13 ms for the ProBeam and within 2 ms for the TrueBeam.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel, simple and low-cost method for gating latency measurements that work across different radiotherapy platforms was demonstrated. Only the TrueBeam fully fulfilled the AAPM TG-142 recommendation of maximum 100 ms latencies.

[Study of Phantom Length Correction for kV-Cone Beam CT Dose Evaluation Method Using Farmer-type Ionization Chamber and Cylindrical Phantom]

In this study, we investigated the necessary phantom length for dose evaluation of kV-CBCT mounted on the linear accelerator using a Farmer-type ionization chamber and cylindrical PMMA phantom, which many radiotherapy facilities own. Furthermore, a phantom length correction factor was proposed to compensate for the lack of scattered radiation contributed from the craniocaudal direction due to the inadequate phantom length. The air-absorbed dose at the center of a cylindrical PMMA phantom measured by a Farmer-type ionization chamber indicated that the contribution of scattered radiation saturates when the phantom length is 300 mm or longer. The phantom length correction factor was calculated from an approximate curve showing the relationship of the charge ratio measured using phantoms of 300 mm and 150 mm in length to the X-ray beam width. The air-absorbed dose measured with the 150-mm length phantom, corrected by the phantom length correction factor, showed a 1.61% dose difference from the air-absorbed dose measured with the 300-mm length phantom. In this study, the air-absorbed dose at the center of the phantom could be estimated over a wide X-ray beam width only using a 150-mm length cylindrical PMMA phantom. The method proposed in this study could be used in any radiation therapy facility.

The spatial accuracy of ring-mounted halcyon linac versus C-arm TrueBeam linac for single-isocenter/multi-target SBRT treatment

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment of oligometastatic lesions via single-isocenter/multi-target (SIMT) plan is more efficient than using multi-isocenter/multitarget SBRT. This study quantifies the spatial positioning accuracy of 2 commercially available LINAC systems for SIMT treatment pertaining to the potential amplification of error as a function of the target's distance-to-isocenter. We compare the Ring-Gantry Halcyon LINAC equipped with the fast iterative conebeam-CT (iCBCT) for image-guided SIMT treatment, and the SBRT-dedicated C-Arm TrueBeam with standard pretreatment CBCT imaging. For both systems, Sun Nuclear's MultiMet Winston-Lutz Cube phantom with 6 metallic BBs distributed at different planes up to 7 cm away from the isocenter was used. The phantom was aligned and imaged via CBCT, and then couch corrections were applied. To treat all 6 BBs, an Eclipse 10-field 3D-conformal Field-in-Field (2×2 cm² MLC field to each BB) plan for varying gantry, collimator, and couch (TrueBeam only) positions was developed for both machines with 6MV-FFF beam. The plan was delivered through ARIA once a week. The EPID images were analyzed via Sun Nuclear's software for spatial positioning accuracy. On TrueBeam, the treatment plan was delivered twice: once with 3DoF translational corrections and once with PerfectPitch 6DoF couch corrections. The average 3D spatial positioning accuracy was 0.55 ± 0.30 mm, 0.54 ± 0.24 mm, and 0.56 ± 0.28 mm at isocenter, and 0.59 ± 0.30 mm, 0.69 ± 0.30 mm, and 0.70 ± 0.35 mm at 7 cm distance-to-isocenter for Halcyon, TrueBeam 3DoF, and TrueBeam 6DoF, respectively. This suggests there are no clinically significant deviations of spatial uncertainty between the platforms with the distance-to-isocenter. On both platforms, our weekly independent measurements demonstrated the reproducibility for less than 1.0 mm positional accuracy of off-axis targets up to 7 cm from the isocenter. Due to this, no additional PTV-margin is suggested for lesions within 7 cm of isocenter. This study confirms that Halcyon can deliver similar positional accuracy to SBRT-dedicated TrueBeam to off-axis targets up to 7 cm from isocenter. These results further benchmark the spatial uncertainty of our extensively used SBRT-dedicated TrueBeam LINAC for SIMT SBRT treatments.

A survey of compliance with stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy quality recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Many publications have proposed quality standards for stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR). However, data on the level of compliance with these guidelines is lacking in the literature. This study aimed to understand how these guidelines are applied in the clinic and to identify barriers to implementing such recommendations.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with multidisciplinary staff at radiation oncology centres across New South Wales formulated around the RANZCR Guidelines for Safe Practice of Stereotactic Body (Ablative) Radiation Therapy. The interview responses were grouped into 20 topics, assessed against the guidelines and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Good compliance with the guidelines was found, with more than 80% of centres achieving satisfactory results in more than half the topics. The areas with the lowest compliance were auditing, risk assessment and reporting recommendations. Barriers to the quality of SABR treatments included limited training opportunities, low patient numbers and a lack of clear requirements on comprehensive auditing and reporting.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the centres surveyed reported good compliance with most of the RANZCR SABR guidelines. The tasks with the lowest compliance were those that monitor quality outcomes. Potential strategies for improvement include inclusion in clinical trials and the use of databases which link treatment parameters, dosimetry and outcomes. Further work will focus on the barriers identified in this survey and propose practical solutions to improve compliance in these areas.

Image-based features in machine learning to identify delivery errors and predict error magnitude for patient-specific IMRT quality assurance

OBJECTIVE

To identify delivery error type and predict associated error magnitude by image-based features using machine learning (ML).

METHODS

In this study, a total of 40 thoracic plans (including 208 beams) were selected, and four error types with different magnitudes were introduced into the original plans, including 1) collimator misalignment (COLL), 2) monitor unit (MU) variation, 3) systematic multileaf collimator misalignment (MLCS), and 4) random MLC misalignment (MLCR). These dose distributions of portal dose predictions for the original plans were defined as the reference dose distributions (RDD), while those for the error-introduced plans were defined as the error-introduced dose distributions (EDD). Both distributions were calculated for all beams with portal dose image prediction (PDIP). Besides, 14 image-based features were extracted from RDD and EDD of portal dose predictions to obtain the feature vectors. In addition, a random forest was adopted for the multiclass classification task, and regression prediction for error magnitude.

RESULTS

The top five features extracted with the highest weight included 1) the relative displacement in the x direction, 2) the ratio of the absolute minimum residual error to the maximal RDD value, 3) the product of the maximum and minimum residuals, 4) the ratio of the absolute maximum residual error to the maximal RDD value, and 5) the ratio of the absolute mean residual value to the maximal RDD value. The relative displacement in the x direction had the highest weight. The overall accuracy of the five-class classification model was 99.85% for the validation set and 99.30% for the testing set. This model could be applied to the classification of the error-free plan, COLL, MU, MLCS, and MLCR with an accuracy of 100%, 98.4%, 99.9%, 98.0%, and 98.3%, respectively. MLCR had the worst performance in error magnitude prediction (70.1-96.6%), while others had better performance in error magnitude prediction (higher than 93%). In the error magnitude prediction, the mean absolute error (MAE) between predicted error magnitude and actual error ranged from 0.03 to 0.33, with the root mean squared error (RMSE) varying from 0.17 to 0.56 for the validation set. The MAE and RMSE ranged from 0.03 to 0.50 and 0.44 to 0.59 for the test set, respectively.

CONCLUSION

It could be demonstrated in this study that the image-based features extracted from RDD and EDD can be employed to identify different types of delivery errors and accurately predict error magnitude with the assistance of ML techniques. They can be used to associate traditional gamma analysis with clinically based analysis for error classification and magnitude prediction in patient-specific IMRT quality assurance.

An improved method for evaluating LINAC isocenter

BACKGROUND

The traditional approach to medical linear accelerator (LINAC) isocenter quality assurance is to compare the radius of the LINAC isocenter, determined via analysis of Winston-Lutz (WL) dataset, to a threshold in order to approve the LINAC for clinical use. This scalar metric provides little insight into beam-to-target accuracy with gantry and couch motion.

PURPOSE

To develop a method for verifying isocenter with increased sensitivity over traditional WL techniques by accounting for geometric errors that could normally be overlooked.

METHODS

From WL images, we construct radiation beam axis and marker shift locations in a 3D coordinate system. These axes and shift positions are used to construct a new isocenter performance metric, the Z $\mathcal {Z}$ -matrix, which predicts direction and magnitude of beam-to-target errors across combinations of couch and gantry position. We introduce clinical isocenter as the location optimizing a cost function derived from the Z $\mathcal {Z}$ -matrix, which serves as an optimal target for tumor positioning. We demonstrated these techniques on a clinical LINAC with an initial randomly positioned marker which was subsequently repositioned based on the optimized clinical isocenter location. The marker shifts, radiation isocenter, and Z $\mathcal {Z}$ -matrix were compared before and after repositioning. We compared the new technique against typically used WL techniques using a monte carlo simulation modeling variations in LINAC geometry, marker position, and measurement noise.

RESULTS

The technique was successfully demonstrated on a Varian LINAC. Marker repositioning to clinical isocenter yielding an error matrix with magnitudes all below 0.81 mm. As expected, marker position had little impact on the radiation isocenter location and radius, and also had little impact on clinical isocenter location. The verification results show the accuracy of the Z $\mathcal {Z}$ -matrix to predict beam to tumor geometric inaccuracies. The Monte Carlo simulations demonstrate that the Z $\mathcal {Z}$ -matrix is more sensitive and specific for detecting potential treatment errors compared to the traditional WL techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed and demonstrated the usefulness of a framework for verifying isocenter based on a 3D model of the radiation beam axes and tumor movement from couch rotations, derived from 2D WL transmission images. The Z $\mathcal {Z}$ -matrix replaces the scalar isocenter radius as a metric of isocenter quality, providing insight into contribution of couch and radiation beams to isocenter quality, and exposing treatment errors ignored by the traditional method. The clinical isocenter provides an alternate to physical isocenter as a target for tumor positioning in cases of suboptimal LINAC geometry.

Evaluation of deep learning based implanted fiducial markers tracking in pancreatic cancer patients

Real-time target position verification during pancreas stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is important for the detection of unplanned tumour motions. Fast and accurate fiducial marker segmentation is a Requirement of real-time marker-based verification. Deep learning (DL) segmentation techniques are ideal because they don't require additional learning imaging or prior marker information (e.g., shape, orientation). In this study, we evaluated three DL frameworks for marker tracking applied to pancreatic cancer patient data. The DL frameworks evaluated were (1) a convolutional neural network (CNN) classifier with sliding window, (2) a pretrained you-only-look-once (YOLO) version-4 architecture, and (3) a hybrid CNN-YOLO. Intrafraction kV images collected during pancreas SBRT treatments were used as training data (44 fractions, 2017 frames). All patients had 1-4 implanted fiducial markers. Each model was evaluated on unseen kV images (42 fractions, 2517 frames). The ground truth was calculated from manual segmentation and triangulation of markers in orthogonal paired kV/MV images. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the precision-recall curve (AUC) were calculated. In addition, the mean-absolute-error (MAE), root-mean-square-error (RMSE) and standard-error-of-mean (SEM) were calculated for the centroid of the markers predicted by the models, relative to the ground truth. The sensitivity and specificity of the CNN model were 99.41% and 99.69%, respectively. The AUC was 0.9998. The average precision of the YOLO model for different values of recall was 96.49%. The MAE of the three models in the left-right, superior-inferior, and anterior-posterior directions were under 0.88 ± 0.11 mm, and the RMSE were under 1.09 ± 0.12 mm. The detection times per frame on a GPU were 48.3, 22.9, and 17.1 milliseconds for the CNN, YOLO, and CNN-YOLO, respectively. The results demonstrate submillimeter accuracy of marker position predicted by DL models compared to the ground truth. The marker detection time was fast enough to meet the requirements for real-time application.

Daily Quality Assurance Efficiency Evaluation Using SunCHECK Machine and Machine Performance Check

Purpose To investigate time efficiency, applicability, and accuracy of using a web-based, independent quality assurance (QA) platform and vendor-dependent based system check for daily linear accelerator (LINAC) QA. Methods  Time needed to perform daily QA on a single (n=1) LINAC was collected for three months. Task Group report 142 (TG-142) compliant daily QA included dosimetry checks (four photon, four electron beams); imaging checks (planar kilovolt (kV) & megavolt (MV), kV cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)); and mechanical and safety checks using SunCHECK Machine (SCM) (Sun Nuclear Inc., Melbourne, FL, USA). Additionally, Machine Performance Check (MPC) (Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA) was performed for all energies. Four trained radiation therapists performed daily QA on both platforms. Data were collected to identify the time required to complete both SCM and MPC. Additionally, the two platforms were evaluated on usability and features. Output results were compared to our monthly standard to assess accuracy. Results On average, SCM took 22 minutes with a standard deviation of six minutes and MPC took 15 minutes with a standard deviation of three minutes. MPC output results were impacted due to the beam output being coupled to the beam profile changes. As a result, the two systems on average disagreed by -1.41% after three months despite being baselined at the same time point and output agreeing well initially (average difference of -0.1% across all energies). While there was overlap in the tests performed, SCM tests were more relevant to TG-142 while MPC tests were beneficial to machine service and, with a clear understanding of the limitations of the system, found suitable as a secondary backup to SCM for daily output verification. Conclusions  This work demonstrates that a comprehensive TG-142 daily QA can be designed using SCM and MPC can be added as a beneficial tool and backup for output verification while still maintaining an efficient daily QA process.

NEW IDEA FOR DETERMINING THE OPTIMAL NUMBER OF MEASUREMENTS IN ABSORBED DOSE-TO-WATER MEASUREMENT OF HIGH-ENERGY PHOTON BEAM

This study presents a new idea for estimating the number of measurements required for determining the uncertainty in obtaining the desired water absorbed dose using the variation obtained from multicenter absorbed dose measurement data. The number of dose measurements depends on the performance of each linear accelerator (LINAC) tested and the dosimetry equipment and procedure used. However, optimising the number of data collected for the absorbed dose to water has been inadequately reported. Using the absorbed dose measurement data collected 10 times as a reference value, we will compare the changes in the variation of the measurement results caused by the difference in the number of repeated measurements of the absorbed dose. The number of measurements is determined statistically such that this variation would be smaller than the change in absorbed dose. Thus, we can determine the optimum number of measurements suitable for the variability of each LINAC.

Impact of electronic portal image quality on Elekta AQUA® collimator isocenter

PURPOSE

The collimator radiation isocenter position determined in AQUA^® v3.0 [Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden] software test "MLC Leaf and Jaw Position" was independently validated using an in-house MATLAB [Natick, MA: The MathWorks Inc.] script.

METHODS

The AQUA test determines radiation isocenter using the mean field center of nine 4 cm × 4 cm electronic portal imager (EPID) exposures at equidistant collimator angles. Impact of EPID image quality on AQUA reported isocenter for thirteen Elekta linear accelerators with Agility MLC heads were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the thirteen, three had visually and quantitatively identifiable artifacts. For the ten good EPID's there was a systematic 0.25 mm offset of the MATLAB calculated mean field center relative to AQUA in the X-axis and Y-axis. This corresponds to one image pixel and was found to be due to differences in software co-ordinate convention. After subtracting this offset there was no significant difference in AQUA and MATLAB calculated isocenter.

CONCLUSIONS

For the three machines with poor image quality there was a demonstrated variation in AQUA calculated field center and therefore radiation isocenter relative to MATLAB. Restricting the region of interest (ROI) in AQUA software to only the irradiated section of the EPID brought AQUA and MATLAB result for these three machines into agreement.

A hybrid method to improve efficiency of patient specific SRS and SBRT QA using 3D secondary dose verification

PURPOSE

Patient Specific QA (PSQA) by direct phantom measurement for all intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) cases is labor intensive and an inefficient use of the Medical Physicist's time. The purpose of this work was to develop a hybrid quality assurance (QA) technique utilizing 3D dose verification as a screening tool to determine if a measurement is necessary.

METHODS

This study utilized Sun Nuclear DoseCHECK (DC), a 3D secondary verification software, and Fraction 0, a trajectory log IMRT QA software. Twenty-two Lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and thirty single isocentre multi-lesion SRS (MLSRS) plans were retrospectively analysed in DC. Agreement of DC and the TPS dose for selected dosimetric criteria was recorded. Calculated 95% confidence limits (CL) were used to establish action limits. All cases were delivered and measured using the Sun Nuclear stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) MapCheck. Trajectory logs of the delivery were used to calculate Fraction 0 results for the same criteria calculated by DC. Correlation of DC and Fraction 0 results were calculated. Phantom measured QA was compared to Fraction 0 QA results for the cases which had DC criteria action limits exceeded.

RESULTS

Correlation of DC and Fraction 0 results were excellent, demonstrating the same action limits could be used for both and DC can predict Fraction 0 results. Based on the calculated action limits, zero lung SBRT cases and six MLSRS cases were identified as requiring a measurement. All plans that passed the DC screening had a passing measurement based PSQA and agreed with Fraction 0 results.

CONCLUSION

Using 95% CL action limits of dosimetric criteria, a 3D secondary dose verification can be used to determine if a measurement is required for PSQA. This method is efficient for it is part of the normal clinical workflow when verifying any clinical treatment. In addition, it can drastically reduce the number of measurements needed for PSQA.

A step closer to automation: kilovoltage and Megavoltage Planar Imaging Quality Assurance, baseline, tolerance and action levels definition and exploration

PURPOSE

To establish automated quality assurance (QA) procedures for the kilovoltage (kV) and the Megavoltage (MV) imagers of two linear accelerators (LINACS) using a commercial software.

METHODS

SNC Machine™ phantoms and software were used and the baseline values, tolerance and action levels for various image quality parameters were defined. Scaling, spatial resolution, contrast, uniformity and noise were considered, explored and evaluated utilizing the appropriate phantoms and the accompanying software. kV and MV planar radiographic images, for 6MV and 10MV beams were obtained for each LINAC. For both kV and MV QA tasks, the baseline values for spatial resolution, contrast, uniformity and noise were defined.

RESULTS

Subsequent measurements performed were highly reproducible and within tolerance and action levels, while noise showed variations. The calculated tolerance and action levels for noise were looser compared to the other image quality metrics.

CONCLUSIONS

An automated QA workflow of the kV and MV planar radiographic mode of LINAC imagers' was established and appears to be time effective.

Automatic measurement of beam-positioning accuracy at off-isocenter positions

PURPOSE

This study performed an automatic measurement of the off-axis beam-positioning accuracy at a single isocenter via the TrueBeam Developer mode and evaluated the beam-positioning accuracy considering the effect of couch rotational errors.

METHODS

TrueBeam STx and the Winston-Lutz test-dedicated phantom, with a 3 mm diameter steel ball, were used in this study. The phantom was placed on the treatment couch, and the Winston-Lutz test was performed at the isocenter for four gantry angles (0°, 90°, 180°, and 270°) using an electronic portal imaging device. The phantom offset positions were at distances of 0, 25, 50, 75, and 100 mm from the isocenter along the superior-inferior, anterior-posterior, and left-right directions. Seventeen patterns of multileaf collimator-shaped square fields of 10 × 10 mm² were created at the isocenter and off-axis positions for each gantry angle. The beam-positioning accuracy was evaluated with couch rotation along the yaw-axis (0°, ± 0.5°, and ± 1.0°).

RESULTS

The mean beam-positioning errors at the isocenter and off-isocenter distances (from the isocenter to ±100 mm) were 0.46-0.60, 0.44-0.91, and 0.42-1.11 mm for the couch angles of 0°, ±0.5°, and ±1°, respectively. The beam-positioning errors increased as the distance from the isocenter and couch rotation increased.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that the beam-positioning accuracy at the isocenter and off-isocenter positions can be evaluated quickly and automatically using the TrueBeam Developer mode. The proposed procedure is expected to contribute to an efficient evaluation of the beam-positioning accuracy at off-isocenter positions.

AAPM Task Group Report 306: Quality control and assurance for tomotherapy: An update to Task Group Report 148

Since the publication of AAPM Task Group (TG) 148 on quality assurance (QA) for helical tomotherapy, there have been many new developments on the tomotherapy platform involving treatment delivery, on-board imaging options, motion management, and treatment planning systems (TPSs). In response to a need for guidance on quality control (QC) and QA for these technologies, the AAPM Therapy Physics Committee commissioned TG 306 to review these changes and make recommendations related to these technology updates. The specific objectives of this TG were (1) to update, as needed, recommendations on tolerance limits, frequencies and QC/QA testing methodology in TG 148, (2) address the commissioning and necessary QA checks, as a supplement to Medical Physics Practice Guidelines (MPPG) with respect to tomotherapy TPS and (3) to provide risk-based recommendations on the new technology implemented clinically and treatment delivery workflow. Detailed recommendations on QA tests and their tolerance levels are provided for dynamic jaws, binary multileaf collimators, and Synchrony motion management. A subset of TPS commissioning and QA checks in MPPG 5.a. applicable to tomotherapy are recommended. In addition, failure mode and effects analysis has been conducted among TG members to obtain multi-institutional analysis on tomotherapy-related failure modes and their effect ranking.

Quality and Safety Considerations in Image Guided Radiation Therapy: An ASTRO Safety White Paper Update

PURPOSE

This updated report on image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) is part of a series of consensus-based white papers previously published by the American Society for Radiation Oncology addressing patient safety. Since the first white papers were published, IGRT technology and procedures have progressed significantly such that these procedures are now more commonly used. The use of IGRT has now extended beyond high-precision treatments, such as stereotactic radiosurgery and stereotactic body radiation therapy, and into routine clinical practice for many treatment techniques and anatomic sites. Therefore, quality and patient safety considerations for these techniques remain an important area of focus.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened an interdisciplinary task force to assess the original IGRT white paper and update content where appropriate. Recommendations were created using a consensus-building methodology, and task force members indicated their level of agreement based on a 5-point Likert scale from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." A prespecified threshold of ≥75% of raters who selected "strongly agree" or "agree" indicated consensus.

SUMMARY

This IGRT white paper builds on the previous version and uses other guidance documents to primarily focus on processes related to quality and safety. IGRT requires an interdisciplinary team-based approach, staffed by appropriately trained specialists, as well as significant personnel resources, specialized technology, and implementation time. A thorough feasibility analysis of resources is required to achieve the clinical and technical goals and should be discussed with all personnel before undertaking new imaging techniques. A comprehensive quality-assurance program must be developed, using established guidance, to ensure IGRT is performed in a safe and effective manner. As IGRT technologies continue to improve or emerge, existing practice guidelines should be reviewed or updated regularly according to the latest American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group reports or guidelines. Patient safety in the application of IGRT is everyone's responsibility, and professional organizations, regulators, vendors, and end-users must demonstrate a clear commitment to working together to ensure the highest levels of safety.

A method for patient-specific DVH verification using a high-sampling-rate log file in an Elekta linac

We have proposed a method for patient-specific dose-volume histogram (DVH) verification using a 40-ms high-sampling-rate log file (HLF) available in an Elekta linac. Ten prostate volumetric-modulated arc therapy plans were randomly selected, and systematic leaf position errors of ±0.2, ±0.4, or ±0.8 mm were added to the 10 plans, thereby producing a total of 70 plans. An RTP file was created by interpolating each leaf position in the HLF to obtain values at each control point, which is subsequently exported to a treatment planning system. The isocenter dose calculated by the HLF-based plan to a phantom (Delta4 Phantom+) was compared to that measured by the diode in the phantom in order to evaluate the accuracy of the HLF-based dose calculation. The D95 of the planning target volume (PTV) was also compared between the HLF-based plans and the original plans with the systematic leaf position errors, the latter being referred to as theory-based plans. Sensitivities of the DVH parameters in the target, the rectum, and the bladder were also calculated with the varied systematic leaf position errors. The relative differences in the isocenter doses between the HLF-based calculations and the measurements among the 70 plans were 0.21% ± 0.67% (SD). The maximum relative differences in PTV D95 between the HLF-based and the theory-based plans among the 70 cases were 0.11%. The patient-specific DVH verification method detected a change in the target DVH parameters of less than 1% when the systematic leaf position error was ±0.2 mm. It is therefore suggested that the proposed DVH verification method may simplify patient-specific dose quality assurance procedures without compromising accuracy and sensitivity.

Evaluation of HyperArc™ using film and portal dosimetry quality assurance

HyperArc™ is a stereotactic radiotherapy modality designed for targeting multiple brain metastases using a single isocenter with multiple non-coplanar arcs. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of two patient-specific quality assurance methods, film and the Varian Portal Dosimetry System with Varian's HyperArc™ technique and raise important considerations in the customisation of patient-specific quality assurance to accommodate HyperArc™ delivery. Assessment criteria included gamma analysis and mean dose at full width half maximum. The minimum metastasis size, maximum off-axis distance and suitable energy were identified and validated. Patient-specific quality assurance procedures were applied to a range of clinically relevant brain metastasis plans. Initial investigation into energy selection showed no significant differences in gamma pass rates using 6MV, 6MV FFF, or 10MV FFF for metastasis sizes greater than 15 mm diameter at the isocenter. Gamma pass rates (2%/2mm) for 15 mm metastases at the isocenter for all energies were greater than 96.0% for portal dosimetry and greater than 98.7% for film. Fields of size 15 mm placed at various distances (10-70 mm) from the isocenter resulted in a maximum mean dose difference of 1.5% between film and planned. Clinically relevant plans resulted in a maximum mean dose difference for selected metastases of 1.0% between film and plan and a maximum point dose difference of 2.9% between portal dose and plan. Portal dose image prediction was a quick and convenient quality assurance tool for metastases larger than 15 mm near the isocenter but provided diminished geometrical relevance for off-axis metastases. Film QA required exacting procedures but offered the ability to assess the accuracy of geometrical targeting for off-axis metastases and provided dosimetric accuracy for metastases to well below 15 mm diameter.

Machine performance and stability of the first clinical self-shielded stereotactic radiosurgery system: Initial 2-year experience

This study provides insight into the overall system performance, stability, and delivery accuracy of the first clinical self-shielded stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) system. Quality assurance procedures specifically developed for this unit are discussed, and trends and variations over the course of 2-years for beam constancy, targeting and dose delivery are presented. Absolute dose calibration for this 2.7 MV unit is performed to deliver 1 cGy/MU at d_max  = 7 mm at a source-to-axis-distance (SAD) of 450 mm for a 25 mm collimator. Output measurements were made with 2-setups: a device that attaches to a fixed position on the couch (daily) and a spherical phantom that attaches to the collimating wheel (monthly). Beam energy was measured using a cylindrical acrylic phantom at depths of 100 (D₁₀ ) and 200 (D₂₀ ) mm. Beam profiles were evaluated using Gafchromic film and compared with TPS beam data. Accuracy in beam targeting was quantified with the Winston-Lutz (WL) and end-to-end (E2E) tests. Delivery quality assurance (DQA) was performed prior to clinical treatments using Gafchromic EBT3/XD film. Net cumulative output adjustments of 15% (pre-clinical), 9% (1st year) and 3% (2nd year) were made. The mean output was 0.997 ± 0.010 cGy/MU (range: 0.960-1.046 cGy/MU) and 0.993 ± 0.029 cGy/MU (range: 0.884-1.065 cGy/MU) for measurements with the daily and monthly setups, respectively. The mean relative beam energy (D₁₀ /D₂₀ ) was 0.998 ± 0.004 (range: 0.991-1.006). The mean total targeting error was 0.46 ± 0.17 mm (range: 0.06-0.98 mm) for the WL and 0.52 ± 0.28 mm (range: 0.11-1.27 mm) for the E2E tests. The average gamma pass rates for DQA measurements were 99.0% and 90.5% for 2%/2 mm and 2%/1 mm gamma criteria, respectively. This SRS unit meets tolerance limits recommended by TG-135, MPPG 9a., and TG-142 with a treatment delivery accuracy similar to what is achieved by other SRS systems.

Evolving practice in global healthcare: Remote physics support for low- and middle-income countries

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted traditional onsite support for radiotherapy clinics in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Clinics there have struggled to commission new techniques and receive onsite training for their staff. We sought to evaluate whether an offsite approach could fill this gap at a clinic in Jordan by requesting a clinical audit and attempting to commission volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Over 13 months, a consultant provided remote support for a radiotherapy center that had already obtained treatment equipment and licenses. The consultant began by conducting a virtual audit, using a remote login to the center's R&V and TPS, to identify any gaps in the clinical workflow. Suggestions for improving the clinical workflow were proposed, and change implementation was tracked through emails, social media apps, and video conferencing. An extensive table outlined the commissioning process, including all measurements to be done. Social media apps and shared documents were used to track measurements and analysis. The lack of person-to-person interaction in this new remote-support ecosystem created conflicts; we have highlighted some of these, as well as their resolution and the lessons learned from them. The virtual audit identified gaps categorized as machine QA, treatment plan review, and treatment delivery processes. Following the implementation of the proposals, motion management was added, and machine QA became more comprehensive. VMAT was commissioned using the reports of the AAPM and the IAEA. The main challenges for remote support were time difference, establishing an appropriate form and frequency of communication, tone of voice used in messages, and buy-in from local staff. This evolving practice will enable medical physicists to use modern, multimodal remote communication pathways to effectively transfer knowledge to centers in LMICs. The audit-proposal-improvement pathway for remote support can be incorporated to help others while avoiding the pitfalls we faced.

Comparing log file to measurement-based patient-specific quality assurance

Recent technological advances have allowed the possibility of performing patient-specific quality assurance (QA) without time-intensive measurements. The objectives of this study are to: (1) compare how well the log file-based Mobius QA system agrees with measurement-based QA methods (ArcCHECK and portal dosimetry, PD) in passing and failing plans, and; (2) evaluate their error sensitivities. To these ends, ten phantom plans and 100 patient plans were measured with ArcCHECK and PD on VitalBeam, while log files were sent to Mobius for dose recalculation. Gamma evaluation was performed using criteria 3%/2 mm, per TG218 recommendations, and non-inferiority of the Mobius recalculation was determined with statistical testing. Ten random plans were edited to include systematic errors, then subjected to QA. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to compare error sensitivities across the QA systems, and clinical significance of the errors was determined by recalculating dose to patients. We found no significant difference between Mobius, ArcCHECK, and PD in passing plans at the TG218 action limit. Mobius showed good sensitivity to collimator and gantry errors but not MLC bank shift errors, but could flag discrepancies in treatment delivery. Systematic errors were clinically significant only at large magnitudes; such unacceptable plans did not pass QA checks at the TG218 tolerance limit. Our results show that Mobius is not inferior to existing measurement-based QA systems, and can supplement existing QA practice by detecting real-time delivery discrepancies. However, it is still important to maintain rigorous routine machine QA to ensure reliability of machine log files.

[Decomposing a Beam Profile Constancy into Energy and Symmetry Components and Its Evaluation Using an Ionization Chamber Array]

PURPOSE

We have proposed a new formulation that can decompose the profile constancy defined in the AAPM TG 142 into energy and symmetry constancies by measuring beam profiles using an IC profiler (ICP).

METHODS

Measured profiles were laterally inverted to calculate averaged profiles in the lateral direction, thereby cancelling asymmetric components. Validation tests were performed by comparing the proposed calculation and measured results under various experimental conditions. Calculated profile constancies were further compared to decomposed energy and symmetry constancies.

RESULTS

The energy constancy calculated from the averaged beam profile by lateral inversion and the measured PDD(10) constancy agreed within 0.1% when only symmetries were varied. The calculated energy and symmetry constancies, and the measured results agreed within 0.2% when both energies and symmetries were varied.

CONCLUSION

The linac beam profile constancy has been decomposed into energy and symmetry terms. The proposed formulation has been validated by comparing the calculations and the direct measurements using the ICP. We have shown that QA/QC for profile constancy tests can be efficiently performed using the proposed formulation.

[Evaluation on the Availability of the Electrometer Inspection by Users Using a Newly Developed Current Source]

BACKGROUND

If we try to perform the inspection for an electrometer, two types of electronic signals energized to the electrometer can be used. One is the signal that occurs in the ionization chamber irradiated by radiation. The other is the signal that is derived from a current source. The former signal is changed by radiation output, so we need to use two or more sets of the chambers and the electrometers in the inspection. In addition, the high-performance current source is relatively expensive. Therefore, it is difficult for users to inspect the electrometer simply. To deal with these, we have developed a new current source that allows users to perform highly accurate electrometer inspections at their own facilities.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to verify that users can perform electrometer inspections with high accuracy in their own facilities by using a new current source.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A newly current source equips a dry cell battery as a charge generator. Current, polarity, and energized time can be changed by the source setting. We conducted an inspection by energizing the electrometer using the developed current source.

RESULTS

The coefficient of variation of the charge amount in the measurement using the new current source was within 0.05%. The electrometer calibration coefficients measured by sensitivity comparison using this current source could be obtained based on electrometers calibrated at a certified facility of the Japan Calibration Service System.

CONCLUSION

We have shown that the new current source can be used as a relative current value by using a calibrated electrometer as a reference, indicating that the user can check the electrometer.

Individualized breathing trace quality assurance for lung radiotherapy patients undergoing 4DCT simulation

4DCT simulation is a popular solution for radiotherapy simulation of lung cancer patients as it allows the clinician to gain an appreciation for target motion during the patient breathing cycle. Resultant binning of images and production of the 4DCT dataset relies heavily on the recorded breathing trace; but quality assurance is not routinely performed on these and there lacks any substantial recommendations thereof. An application was created for Windows in C# that was able to analyze the VXP breathing trace files from Varian RPM/RGSC and quantify various metrics associated with the patient breathing cycle. This data was then used to consider errors in voluming of targets for several example cases in order to justify recommendations on quality assurance. For 281 real patient breathing traces from 4DCT simulation of lung targets, notable differences were found between RGSC and application calculations of phase data. For any new patient without individualized QA, the average marked phase calculation (which is used for 4DCT reconstruction) is only accurate to within 19% of the actual phases. The error in BPM within the scan due to breathing rate variation is 37%. The uncertainty in amplitude due to breathing variation is 34% in the mean. Phase uncertainty leads to misbinning which we have shown can lead to missing 66% of the target for gated treatment. Variation in inhalation/exhalation level leads to voluming errors which, without individualized QA, can be assumed to be 11% (PTV is smaller than actual). Without individualized quality assurance of patient breathing traces, large uncertainties have to be assumed for metrics of both phase and amplitude, leading to clinically significant uncertainties in treatment. It is recommended to perform individualized quality assurance as this provides the clinician with an accurate quantification of uncertainty for their patient.

Implementation of superficial radiation therapy (SRT) using SRT-100 Vision™ for non-melanoma skin cancer in a Radiation Oncology clinic

PURPOSE

This article describes our experience in implementation of superficial radiation therapy (SRT) using SRT-100 Vision™ for non-melanoma skin cancer.

METHODS

Following the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group-61 protocol, absolute output (absorbed dose to water at surface (cGy/min)) was measured for three energies (50, 70, and 100 kV) and for six applicators (1.5-5.0 cm in diameter). Percent depth dose (PDD) and profiles were also measured. Timer testing and ultrasound testing were performed. A treatment time calculation worksheet was created. Quality assurance (QA) of SRT-100 Vision was implemented. After treatment workflow for our clinic was developed, end-to-end (E2E) testing was performed using a Rando phantom. Considerations for treatment using SRT-100 Vision were made.

RESULTS

Absolute output (cGy/min) decreases as energy increases and applicator size decreases. Due to scatter from the applicator, PDD at depths ≤5 mm does not follow conventional trends but PDD at depths ≥15 mm increases with increasing applicator size. Profiles for the 5 cm applicator do not have strong dependence on depth except profiles at 5 mm for 50 kV. Timer/end errors are negligible for all three energies. Ultrasound images confirm allowed field of view and depth as well as no image artifacts and spatial integrity. Daily, monthly and annual QA of SRT-100 Vision implemented in our clinic is listed in a table format. E2E testing results (<1%) demonstrate the functionality and performance of our treatment workflow. Our considerations for SRT treatment include patient, applicator size and energy selections, patient setup, and shields.

CONCLUSIONS

This article is expected to serve as guidance for Radiation Oncology and/or Dermatology clinics aspiring to initiate an SRT program in their clinics.

MR-linac daily semi-automated end-to-end quality control verification

PURPOSE

Adaptive radiation therapy (ART) on the integrated Elekta Unity magnetic resonance (MR)-linac requires routine quality assurance to verify delivery accuracy and system data transfer. In this work, our objective was to develop and validate a novel automated end-to-end test suite that verifies data transfer between multiple software platforms and quantifies the performance of multiple machine subcomponents critical to the ART process.

METHODS

We designed and implemented a software tool to quantify the MR and megavoltage (MV) isocenter coincidence, treatment couch positioning consistency, isocenter shift accuracy for the adapted plan as well as the MLC and jaw position accuracy following the beam aperture adaptation. Our tool employs a reference treatment plan with a simulated isocenter shift generated on an MR image of a readily available phantom with MR and MV visible fiducials. Execution of the test occurs within the standard adapt-to-position (ATP) clinical workflow with MV images collected of the delivered treatment fields. Using descriptive statistics, we quantified uncertainty in couch positioning, isocentre shift as well as the jaw and MLC positions of the adapted fields. We also executed sensitivity measurements to evaluate the detection algorithm's performance.

RESULTS

We report the results of 301 daily testing instances. We demonstrated consistent tracking of the MR-to-MV alignment with respect to the established value and to detect small changes on the order of 0.2 mm following machine service events. We found couch position consistency relative to the test baseline value was within 95% CI [-0.31, 0.26 mm]. For phantom shifts that form the basis for the plan adaptation, we found agreement between MV-image-detected phantom shift and online image registration, within ± 1.5 mm in all directions with a 95% CI difference of [-1.29, 0.79 mm]. For beam aperture adaptation accuracy, we found differences between the planned and detected jaw positions had a mean value of 0.27 mm and 95% CI of [-0.29, 0.82 mm] and -0.17 mm and 95% CI of [-0.37, 0.05 mm] for the MLC positions. Automated fiducial detected accuracy was within 0.08 ± 0.20 mm of manual localization. Introduced jaw and MLC position errors (1-10 mm) were detected within 0.55 mm (within 1 mm for 15/256 instances for the jaws). Phantom shifts (1.3 or 5 mm in each cardinal direction) from a reference position were detected within 0.26 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

We have demonstrated the accuracy and sensitivity of a daily end-to-end test suite capable of detecting errors in multiple machine subcomponents including system data transfer. Our test suite evaluates the entire treatment workflow and has captured system communication issues prior to patient treatment. With automated processing and the use of a standard vendor-provided phantom, it is possible to expand to other Unity sites.

An ESTRO-ACROP guideline on quality assurance and medical physics commissioning of online MRI guided radiotherapy systems based on a consensus expert opinion

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this consensus expert opinion was to define quality assurance (QA) tests for online magnetic resonance image (MRI) guided radiotherapy (oMRgRT) systems and to define the important medical physics aspects for installation and commissioning of an oMRgRT system.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten medical physicists and two radiation oncologists experienced in oMRgRT participated in the survey. In the first round of the consensus expert opinion, ideas on QA and commissioning were collected. Only tests and aspects different from commissioning of a CT guided radiotherapy (RT) system were considered. In the following two rounds all twelve participants voted on the importance of the QA tests, their recommended frequency and their suitability for the two oMRgRT systems approved for clinical use as well as on the importance of the aspects to consider during medical physics commissioning.

RESULTS

Twenty-four QA tests were identified which are potentially important during commissioning and routine QA on oMRgRT systems compared to online CT guided RT systems. An additional eleven tasks and aspects related to construction, workflow development and training were collected. Consensus was found for most tests on their importance, their recommended frequency and their suitability for the two approved systems. In addition, eight aspects mostly related to the definition of workflows were also found to be important during commissioning.

CONCLUSIONS

A program for QA and commissioning of oMRgRT systems was developed to support medical physicists to prepare for safe handling of such systems.

Preliminary evaluation of a novel secondary check tool for intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment planning

PURPOSE

To evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of the Delta4 Insight (DI) secondary-check dosimetry system.

METHODS

Absolute dosimetry in reference conditions, output factors, percent depth doses normalized and off-axis dose profiles for different field sizes calculated by DI were compared with measurements. Dose calculations for 20 clinical IMRT/VMAT plans generated in the TPS using both AAA or AcurosXB algorithms were compared with measurements. The average difference between calculated and measured point dose in high-dose region was calculated for all cases. 3D dose measurements were performed in Delta4 Phantom+ and a comparison between calculated and measured dose distributions was performed by means of the gamma analysis with 3 %/2 mm criteria. The dose distributions calculated by DI for 20 IMRT/VMAT plans were compared with those calculated by the TPS.

RESULTS

The absolute dosimetry computed by DI showed dose value in agreement with the measured one within 0.3 %. The average differences between measured and calculated output factors were less than 2.5 %. The average PDD differences were less than 0.6 %. An excellent agreement between calculations and off-axis measurements is found. The point doses calculated for the 20 recalculated plan showed good agreement with measurements with average differences less than 0.5 %. The average gamma pass rate values for the Delta4 Phantom + 3D dose analysis was greater than 97.%. The comparison of DI with theTPS showed good agreement for the used metrics.

CONCLUSIONS

Delta4 Insight may provide a useful independent secondary dose verification system for IMRT/VMAT plans, complementing the traditional global QA protocols.

Prediction of portal dosimetry quality assurance results using log files-derived errors and machine learning techniques

Objective

This work aims to use machine learning models to predict gamma passing rate of portal dosimetry quality assurance with log file derived features. This allows daily treatment monitoring for patients and reduce wear and tear on EPID detectors to save cost and prevent downtime.

Methods

578 VMAT trajectory log files selected from prostate, lung and spine SBRT were used in this work. Four machine learning models were explored to identify the best performing regression model for predicting gamma passing rate within each sub-site and the entire unstratified data. Predictors used in these models comprised of hand-crafted log file-derived features as well as modulation complexity score. Cross validation was used to evaluate the model performance in terms of R² and RMSE.

Result

Using gamma passing rate of 1%/1mm criteria and entire dataset, LASSO regression has a R² of 0.121 ± 0.005 and RMSE of 4.794 ± 0.013%, SVM regression has a R² of 0.605 ± 0.036 and RMSE of 3.210 ± 0.145%, Random Forest regression has a R² of 0.940 ± 0.019 and RMSE of 1.233 ± 0.197%. XGBoost regression has the best performance with a R² and RMSE value of 0.981 ± 0.015 and 0.652 ± 0.276%, respectively.

Conclusion

Log file-derived features can predict gamma passing rate of portal dosimetry with an average error of less than 2% using the 1%/1mm criteria. This model can potentially be applied to predict the patient specific QA results for every treatment fraction.

Commissioning and performance evaluation of commercially available mobile imager for image guided total body irradiation

BACKGROUND

The setup of lung shield (LS) in total body irradiation (TBI) with the computed radiography (CR) system is a time-consuming task and has not been quantitatively evaluated. The TBI mobile imager (TBI-MI) can solve this problem through real-time monitoring. Therefore, this study aimed to perform commissioning and performance evaluation of TBI-MI to promote its use in clinical practice.

METHODS

The source-axis distance in TBI treatment, TBI-MI (CNERGY TBI, Cablon Medical B.V.), and the LS position were set to 400, 450, and 358 cm, respectively. The evaluation items were as follows: accuracy of image scaling and measured displacement error of LS, image quality (linearity, signal-to-noise ratio, and modulation transfer function) using an EPID QC phantom, optimal thresholding to detect intra-fractional motion in the alert function, and the scatter radiation dose from TBI-MI.

RESULTS

The accuracy of image scaling and the difference in measured displacement of the LS was <4 mm in any displacements and directions. The image quality of TBI imager was slightly inferior to the CR image but was visually acceptable in clinical practice. The signal-to-noise ratio was improved at high dose rate. The optimal thresholding value to detect a 10-mm body displacement was determined to be approximately 5.0%. The maximum fraction of scattering radiation to irradiated dose was 1.7% at patient surface.

CONCLUSION

MI-TBI can quantitatively evaluate LS displacement with acceptable image quality. Furthermore, real-time monitoring with alert function to detect intrafraction patient displacement can contribute to safe TBI treatment.

Quality and Safety Considerations in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy: An ASTRO Safety White Paper Update

PURPOSE

This updated report on intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is part of a series of consensus-based white papers previously published by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) addressing patient safety. Since the first white papers were published, IMRT went from widespread use to now being the main delivery technique for many treatment sites. IMRT enables higher radiation doses to be delivered to more precise targets while minimizing the dose to uninvolved normal tissue. Due to the associated complexity, IMRT requires additional planning and safety checks before treatment begins and, therefore, quality and safety considerations for this technique remain important areas of focus.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

ASTRO convened an interdisciplinary task force to assess the original IMRT white paper and update content where appropriate. Recommendations were created using a consensus-building methodology, and task force members indicated their level of agreement based on a 5-point Likert scale, from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." A prespecified threshold of ≥75% of raters who select "strongly agree" or "agree" indicated consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

This IMRT white paper primarily focuses on quality and safety processes in planning and delivery. Building on the prior version, this consensus paper incorporates revised and new guidance documents and technology updates. IMRT requires an interdisciplinary team-based approach, staffed by appropriately trained individuals as well as significant personnel resources, specialized technology, and implementation time. A comprehensive quality assurance program must be developed, using established guidance, to ensure IMRT is performed in a safe and effective manner. Patient safety in the delivery of IMRT is everyone's responsibility, and professional organizations, regulators, vendors, and end-users must work together to ensure the highest levels of safety.

Application of failure mode and effects analysis to validate a novel hybrid Linac QC program that integrates automated and conventional QC testing

A hybrid quality control (QC) program was developed that integrates automated and conventional Linac QC, realizing the benefits of both automated and conventional QC, increasing efficiency and maintaining independent measurement methods. Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) was then applied in order to validate the program prior to clinical implementation. The hybrid QC program consists of automated QC with machine performance check and DailyQA3 array on the TrueBeam Linac, and Delta4 volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) standard plan measurements, alongside conventional monthly QC at a reduced frequency. The FMEA followed the method outlined in TG-100. Process maps were created for each treatment type at our center: VMAT, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), conformal, and palliative. Possible failure modes were established by evaluating each stage in the process map. The FMEA followed semiquantitative methods, using data from our QC records from eight Linacs over 3 years for the occurrence estimates, and simulation of failure modes in the treatment planning system, with scoring surveys for severity and detectability. The risk priority number (RPN) was calculated from the product of the occurrence, severity, and detectability scores and then normalized to the maximum and ranked to determine the most critical failure modes. The highest normalized RPN values (100, 90) were found to be for MLC position dynamic for both VMAT and SBRT treatments. The next highest score was 35 for beam position for SBRT, and the majority of scores were less than 20. Overall, these RPN scores for the hybrid Linac QC program indicated that it would be acceptable, but the high RPN score associated with the dynamic MLC failure mode indicates that it would be valuable to perform more rigorous testing of the MLC. The FMEA proved to be a useful tool in validating hybrid QC.

Comparison of dosimetric effects of MLC positional errors on VMAT and IMRT plans for SBRT radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer

The positional accuracy of multi-leaf collimators (MLC) is important in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The aim of this study was to investigate the impact between MLC positional error and dosimetry of volume intensity modulated (VMAT) and general intensity modulated (IMRT) plans for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Fifteen patients with NSCLC were selected to design the 360 SBRT-VMAT plans and the 360 SBRT-IMRT error plans. The DICOM files for these treatment plans were imported into a proprietary computer program that introduced delivery errors. Random and systematic MLC position (0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 mm) errors were introduced. The systematic errors were shift errors (caused by gravity), opening errors, and closing errors. The CI, GI, d2cm and generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) were calculated for the original plan and all treatment plans, accounting for the errors. Dose sensitivity was calculated using linear regression for MLC position errors. The random MLC errors were relatively insignificant. MLC shift, opening, and closing errors had a significant effect on the dose distribution of the SBRT plan. VMAT was more significant than IMRT. To ensure that the gEUD variation of PTV is controlled within 2%, the shift error, opening error, and closing error of IMRT should be less than 2.4 mm, 1.15 mm, and 0.97 mm, respectively. For VMAT, the shift error, opening error, and closing error should be less than 0.95 mm, 0.32 mm, and 0.38 mm, respectively. The dose sensitivity results obtained in this study can be used as a guide for patient-based quality assurance efforts. The position error of the MLC system had a significant impact on the gEUD of the SBRT technology. The MLC systematic error has a greater dosimetric impact on the VMAT plan than on the IMRT plan for SBRT, which should be carefully monitored.

Dosimetric evaluation of a treatment planning system using the AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline 5.a (MPPG 5.a) validation tests

Verifying the accuracy of the dose calculation algorithm is considered one of the most critical steps in radiotherapy treatment for delivering an accurate dose to the patient. This work aimed to evaluate the dosimetric performance of the treatment planning system (TPS) algorithms; the AAA (v. 15.6), AXB (v. 15.6) and eMC (v. 15.6) following the AAPM medical physics practice guideline 5.a (MPPG 5.a) validation tests package in a Varian iX Linear Accelerator (Linac). A series of tests were developed based on the MPPG 5.a. on a Varian's Eclipse TPS (v. 15.6) (Varian Medical Systems). First, the basic photon and electron tests were validated by comparing the TPS calculated dose with the measurements. Next, for heterogeneity tests, we verified the Computed Tomography number to electron density (CT-to-ED) curve by comparing it with the baseline values, and TPS calculated point doses beyond heterogeneous media were compared to the measurements. Finally, for IMRT/VMAT dose validation tests, clinical reference plans were re-calculated on ArcCheck's virtual phantom (Sun Nuclear Corporation, Melbourne, FL, USA) and exported to the Linac for delivery using the ArcCheck dosimetry system. All validation tests were evaluated following the MPPG 5.a recommended tolerances. In basic dose validation tests, the TPS calculated depth dose profiles agreed well with the measurements, with a minimum gamma passing rate of 95% at 2%/2 mm criteria. However, disagreements are seen in the build-up and penumbra region. Results for most point doses in homogeneous water phantoms were within the MPPG 5.a tolerance. For the heterogeneity tests, the CT-to-ED curve was established, and calculated point doses were all within 3% of the measurements for heterogeneous media for both photon algorithms at three energies. These results are within the MPPG5.a the recommended tolerance of 3%. Moreover, for electron beams, the differences between the calculated and measured point doses averaged 5% and 7%, but were just within the MPPG 5.a tolerance of 7%. For IMRT and VMAT validation tests using a gamma criteria of a 2%/2 mm, IMRT plans showed maximum and minimum passing rates of 98.2% and 97.4%, respectively. Whereas VMAT plans showed maximum and minimum passing rates of 100% and 94.3%, respectively. We conclude that the dosimetric accuracy of the Eclipse TPS (v15.6) algorithm is adequate for clinical use. The MPPG 5.a tests are valuable for evaluating dose calculation accuracy and are very useful for TPS upgrade checks, commissioning tests, and routine TPS QA.

ISRS Technical Guidelines for Stereotactic Radiosurgery: Treatment of Small Brain Metastases (≤1 cm in Diameter)

PURPOSE

The objective of this literature review was to develop International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS) consensus technical guidelines for the treatment of small, ≤1 cm in maximal diameter, intracranial metastases with stereotactic radiosurgery. Although different stereotactic radiosurgery technologies are available, most of them have similar treatment workflows and common technical challenges that are described.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic review of the literature published between 2009 and 2020 was performed in Pubmed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) methodology. The search terms were limited to those related to radiosurgery of brain metastases and to publications in the English language.

RESULTS

From 484 collected abstract 37 articles were included into the detailed review and bibliographic analysis. An additional 44 papers were identified as relevant from a search of the references. The 81 papers, including additional 7 international guidelines, were deemed relevant to at least one of five areas that were considered paramount for this report. These areas of technical focus have been employed to structure these guidelines: imaging specifications, target volume delineation and localization practices, use of margins, treatment planning techniques, and patient positioning.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review has demonstrated that Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) for small (1 cm) brain metastases can be safely performed on both Gamma Knife (GK) and CyberKnife (CK) as well as on modern LINACs, specifically tailored for radiosurgical procedures, However, considerable expertise and resources are required for a program based on the latest evidence for best practice.

A clinically relevant online patient QA solution with daily CT scans and EPID-based in vivo dosimetry: a feasibility study on rectal cancer

Objective. Adaptive radiation therapy (ART) could protect organs at risk (OARs) while maintain high dose coverage to targets. However, there is still a lack of efficient online patient quality assurance (QA) methods, which is an obstacle to large-scale adoption of ART. We aim to develop a clinically relevant online patient QA solution for ART using daily CT scans and EPID-based in vivo dosimetry. Approach. Ten patients with rectal cancer at our center were included. Patients’ daily CT scans and portal images were collected to generate reconstructed 3D dose distributions. Contours of targets and OARs were recontoured on these daily CT scans by a clinician or an auto-segmentation algorithm, then dose-volume indices were calculated, and the percent deviation of these indices to their original plans were determined. This deviation was regarded as the metric for clinically relevant patient QA. The tolerance level was obtained using a 95% confidence interval of the QA metric distribution. These deviations could be further divided into anatomically relevant or delivery relevant indicators for error source analysis. Finally, our QA solution was validated on an additional six clinical patients. Main results. In rectal cancer, the 95% confidence intervals of the QA metric for PTV ΔD 95 (%) were [−3.11%, 2.35%], and for PTV ΔD 2 (%) were [−0.78%, 3.23%]. In validation, 68% for PTV ΔD 95 (%), and 79% for PTV ΔD 2 (%) of the 28 fractions are within tolerances of the QA metrics. one patient’s dosimetric impact of anatomical variations during treatment were observed through the source of error analysis. Significance. The online patient QA solution using daily CT scans and EPID-based in vivo dosimetry is clinically feasible. Source of error analysis has the potential for distinguishing sources of error and guiding ART for future treatments.

Development and Evaluation of Jaw Position Detection Method in Jaw-tracking Delivery Using an Electronic Portal Imaging Device Cine Mode

Objectives

To develop a method for detecting jaw positions during jaw-tracking delivery to ensure an accurate delivery of radiation to patients using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) in the cine mode on a linear accelerator for radiotherapy.

Materials

A bidirectional picket fence (BPF) plan was used in a novel application to detect jaw positions during jaw-tracking delivery. In the BPF plan, jaws tracked multileaf collimator (MLC) apertures. The irradiated patterns were acquired by an EPID in the cine mode.

Methods

The upper- and lower-half leaves in the MLC moved in opposite directions to facilitate detection of jaw positions on EPID images. A picket-fence-like image was created by summing all acquired cine images and evaluated to detect MLC leaf positions.

Results

Jaw positions determined on the cine images were compared with those expected from the delivered BPF plan. The absolute differences (average ± 1 standard deviation) were 0.16 ± 0.19 mm for the X1 jaw and 0.11 ± 0.16 mm for the X2 jaw. The maximum error in the MLC leaf positions detected in the picket-fence-like pattern were 0.11 mm.

Conclusions

Jaw positions during jaw-tracking delivery were identified using the cine EPID images and could be determined within an accuracy better than 0.5 mm. The BPF plan is also available as a picket fence test and can determine the MLC leaf positions to an accuracy better than 0.5 mm.

Elekta Unity MR-linac commissioning: mechanical and dosimetry tests

We report the commissioning results of Elekta Unity for the dosimetric performance and mechanical quality assurance (QA), and propose additional commissioning procedures. Mechanical tests included multi-leaf collimator (MLC) positional accuracy, radiation isocenter diameter at the center and off-center position, and coincidence between the magnetic resonance (MR) image center and radiation isocenter. Comparisons between the measurements and calculations of the simple irradiated field, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) commissioning, MLC output factor ratio, validation of independent dose calculation software and end-to-end testing were performed to evaluate dosimetric performance. The average values of the MLC positional accuracy for film- and imaging device-based analysis were −0.1 and 0.3 mm, respectively. The measured radiation isocenter size was 0.41 mm, and the off-center results were within 1 mm. The coincidence was −0.21, −1.19 and 0.49 mm along the x-, y- and z-axes, respectively. The calculated percent depth doses (PDD) and profiles agreed with the measurements. The results of independent dose calculation were within the action level recommended by American Associations of Physicist in Medicine. The gamma passing rate (GPR) for IMRT commissioning was 98.6 ± 0.9%, and end-to-end testing of adapted plans showed agreement within 2% between the measurement and calculation. We reported the results of mechanical and dosimetric performances of Elekta Unity, and proposed novel commissioning procedures. Our results should provide knowledge to the physics community for enhancing the QA programs.

Treatment plan prescreening for patient-specific quality assurance measurements using independent Monte Carlo dose calculations

PURPOSE

This study proposes a method to identify plans that failed patient-specific quality assurance (QA) and attempts to establish a criterion to prescreen treatment plans for patient-specific QA measurements with independent Monte Carlo dose calculations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patient-specific QA results measured with an ArcCHECK diode array of 207 patients (head and neck: 25; thorax: 61; abdomen: 121) were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were treated with the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique and plans were optimized with a Pinnacle v16.2 treatment planning system using an analytical algorithm-based dose engine. Afterwards, phantom verification plans were designed and recalculated by an independent GPU-accelerated Monte Carlo (MC) dose engine, ArcherQA. Moreover, sensitivity and specificity analyzes of gamma passing rates between measurements and MC calculations were carried out to show the ability of MC to monitor failing plans (ArcCHECK 3%/3 mm,<90%), and attempt to determine the appropriate threshold and gamma passing rate criterion utilized by ArcherQA to prescreen treatment plans for ArcCHECK measurements. The receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was also utilized to characterize the performance of different gamma passing rate criterion used by ArcherQA.

RESULTS

The thresholds for 100% sensitivity to detect plans that failed patient-specific QA by independent calculation were 97.0%, 95.4%, and 91.0% for criterion 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm, respectively, which corresponded to specificities of 0.720, 0.528, and 0.585, respectively. It was shown that the 3%/3 mm criterion with 97% threshold for ArcherQA demonstrated perfect sensitivity and the highest specificity compared with other criteria, which may be suitable for prescreening treatment plans treated with the investigated machine to implement measurement-based patient-specific QA of patient plans. In addition, the area under the curve (AUC) calculated from ROC analysis for criterion 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm used by ArcherQA were 0.948, 0.924, and 0.929, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Independent dose calculation with the MC-based program ArcherQA has potential as a prescreen treatment for measurement-based patient-specific QA. AUC values (>0.9) showed excellent classification accuracy for monitoring failing plans with independent MC calculations.

Dosimetric impact of mechanical movements of the Linac gantry during treatments with small fields

Objective

Current accepted linac Quality Assurance (QA) guidelines used for Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) suggest a mechanical isocentre tolerance level of 1 mm. However, this tolerance level has not been well-established for the specific case of small field stereotactic VMAT. This study aims to evaluate the clinical impact of mechanical uncertainty on this treatment modality by modelling systematic gantry sag derived isocentre variance in the Treatment Planning System (TPS).

Approach

A previously reported dataset of gantry sag values in the literature served as a starting point for this study. Using an in-house developed VMAT arc splitting algorithm, isocentre shifts were applied at a Control Point (CP) level to DICOM-RT treatment plans. Dose distributions for varying isocentre shift magnitudes were calculated for a set of 29 stereotactic VMAT plans using the Eclipse Acuros XB dose algorithm. These plans had a range of Planning Target Volume (PTV) sizes. A quantitative comparison of each plan was conducted by evaluating five Dose Volume Histogram (DVH)-derived plan quality metrics.

Results

All metrics exhibited a deterioration in plan quality with increasing magnitudes of isocentre shift. At small PTV sizes, these effects were amplified, exhibiting significant changes at 1 mm of average shift when typical targets and tolerances were considered. For plans with PTVs between 0 and 5 cm3, a 1 mm shift reduced PTV coverage by 6.6 ± 2.2% and caused a 12.1 ± 3.8% deterioration in the conformity index. Based on the results of this study, the prevalent tolerance of 1 mm may not be suitable for treatments of small PTVs with small fields.

Significance

In contrast to commonly accepted values, an absolute mechanical isocentre of 0.5 mm with action level at 0.75 mm is recommended for stereotactic VMAT of PTV sizes below 10 cm3.