Sensitivity of volumetric modulated arc therapy patient specific QA results to multileaf collimator errors and correlation to dose volume histogram based metrics

PURPOSE

This study investigates the impact of systematic multileaf collimator (MLC) positional errors on gamma analysis results used for quality assurance (QA) of Rapidarc treatments. In addition, this study evaluates the relationship of these gamma analysis results and clinical dose volume histogram metrics (DVH) for Rapidarc treatment plans.

METHODS

Five prostate plans were modified by the introduction of systematic MLC errors. The MLC shifts to each individual active leaf introduced were 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, and 1 mm. All QA verification plans were delivered and estimated 3D patient dose or high density phantom dose were obtained based on the ArcCHECK measurement files. QA gamma analysis of 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm were implemented and relationships to dose differences in DVH metrics encountered due to MLC errors were determined. Tolerances of 3% and 5% for DVH metric were implemented to determine the sensitivity of gamma analysis to MLC errors. A calculation of sensitivity was determined from the number of incidences of false negative and false positive cases in gamma analysis results.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of global gamma analysis for criteria of 3%/3 mm was 0.78 and for 2%/2 mm was 0.82. A number of instances occurred for an acceptable VMAT QA gamma index which did not indicate a DVH metric dose error greater than 5%. The correlation between global gamma analysis using criteria 3%/3 mm and DVH metric dose error were all <0.8 indicating less than a strong correlation.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a greater sensitivity for detection of dosimetric errors occurring in a Rapidarc plan using gamma criteria of 2%/2 mm than 3%/3 mm. However, there is lack of consistently strong correlation between global gamma indexes and clinical DVH metrics for PTV and bladder and rectum for Rapidarc plans. It is recommended that the sole use of gamma index for Rapidarc QA plan evaluation could be insufficient and a methodology for evaluation of delivered dose to patient is required.

The sensitivity of gamma-index method to the positioning errors of high-definition MLC in patient-specific VMAT QA for SBRT

Background

To investigate the sensitivity of various gamma criteria used in the gamma-index method for patient-specific volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) quality assurance (QA) for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using a flattening filter free (FFF) photon beam.

Methods

Three types of intentional misalignments were introduced to original high-definition multi-leaf collimator (HD-MLC) plans. The first type, referred to Class Out, involved the opening of each bank of leaves. The second type, Class In, involved the closing of each bank of leaves. The third type, Class Shift, involved the shifting of each bank of leaves towards the ground. Patient-specific QAs for the original and the modified plans were performed with MapCHECK2 and EBT2 films. The sensitivity of the gamma-index method using criteria of 1%/1 mm, 1.5%/1.5 mm, 1%/2 mm, 2%/1 mm and 2%/2 mm was investigated with absolute passing rates according to the magnitudes of MLCs misalignments. In addition, the changes in dose-volumetric indicators due to the magnitudes of MLC misalignments were investigated. The correlations between passing rates and the changes in dose-volumetric indicators were also investigated using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (γ).

Results

The criterion of 2%/1 mm was able to detect Class Out and Class In MLC misalignments of 0.5 mm and Class Shift misalignments of 1 mm. The widely adopted clinical criterion of 2%/2 mm was not able to detect 0.5 mm MLC errors of the Class Out or Class In types, and also unable to detect 3 mm Class Shift errors. No correlations were observed between dose-volumetric changes and gamma passing rates (γ < 0.8).

Conclusions

Gamma criterion of 2%/1 mm was found to be suitable as a tolerance level with passing rates of 90% and 80% for patient-specific VMAT QA for SBRT when using MapCHECK2 and EBT2 film, respectively.

Cross-validation of two commercial methods for volumetric high-resolution dose reconstruction on a phantom for non-coplanar VMAT beams

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Delta(4) (ScandiDos AB, Uppsala, Sweden) and ArcCHECK with 3DVH software (Sun Nuclear Corp., Melbourne, FL, USA) are commercial quasi-three-dimensional diode dosimetry arrays capable of volumetric measurement-guided dose reconstruction. A method to reconstruct dose for non-coplanar VMAT beams with 3DVH is described. The Delta(4) 3D dose reconstruction on its own phantom for VMAT delivery has not been thoroughly evaluated previously, and we do so by comparison with 3DVH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Reconstructed volumetric doses for VMAT plans delivered with different table angles were compared between the Delta(4) and 3DVH using gamma analysis.

RESULTS

The average γ (2% local dose-error normalization/2mm) passing rate comparing the directly measured Delta(4) diode dose with 3DVH was 98.2 ± 1.6% (1SD). The average passing rate for the full volumetric comparison of the reconstructed doses on a homogeneous cylindrical phantom was 95.6 ± 1.5%. No dependence on the table angle was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Modified 3DVH algorithm is capable of 3D VMAT dose reconstruction on an arbitrary volume for the full range of table angles. Our comparison results between different dosimeters make a compelling case for the use of electronic arrays with high-resolution 3D dose reconstruction as primary means of evaluating spatial dose distributions during IMRT/VMAT verification.

A comparison of the gamma index analysis in various commercial IMRT/VMAT QA systems

PURPOSE

To investigate the variability of the global gamma index (γ) analysis in various commercial IMRT/VMAT QA systems and to assess the impact of measurement with low resolution detector arrays on γ.

MATERIALS

Five commercial QA systems (PTW 2D-Array, Scandidos Delta4, SunNuclear ArcCHECK, Varian EPID, and Gafchromic EBT2 film) were investigated. The response of γ analysis to deliberately introduced errors in pelvis and head & neck IMRT and RapidArc™ plans was evaluated in each system. A theoretical γ was calculated in each commercial QA system software (PTW Verisoft, Delta4 software, SNC Patient, Varian Portal Dosimetry and IBA OmniPro, respectively), using treatment planning system resolution virtual measurements and compared to an independent calculation. Error-induced plans were measured on a linear accelerator and were evaluated against the error-free dose distribution calculated using Varian Eclipse™ in the relevant phantom CT scan. In all cases, global γ was used with a 20% threshold relative to a point selected in a high dose and low gradient region. The γ based on measurement was compared against the theoretical to evaluate the response of each system.

RESULTS

There was statistically good agreement between the predicted γ based on the virtual measurements from each software (concordance correlation coefficient, ρc>0.92) relative to the independent prediction in all cases. For the actual measured data, the agreement with the predicted γ reduces with tightening passing criteria and the variability between the different systems increases. This indicates that the detector array configuration and resolution have greater impact on the experimental calculation of γ due to under-sampling of the dose distribution, blurring effects, noise, or a combination.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important to understand the response and limitations of the gamma index analysis combined with the equipment in use. For the same pass-rate criteria, different devices and software combinations exhibit varying levels of agreement with the predicted γ analysis.