Assessing the dependency of the uncertainties in the Elekta Agility MLC calibration procedure on the focal spot position

A method for selecting reference beam model of VMAT plans with three 6MV beam-matched linear accelerators during radiation oncology

Our objective was to provide a method for selecting reference beam model and evaluating the dosimetric accuracy of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans delivered on three Elekta beam-matched linacs during radiation oncology. Beam data was measured on three beam-matched linacs including Synergy1, Synergy2 and VersaHD. For eighteen lung and esophagus cases, fifty-four plans were generated using VMAT technique with three linac beam models respectively for point dose measurement and three-dimensional dose measurement. Each VMAT plan was executed sequentially on three linacs respectively. Measurement results were compared with treatment planning system (TPS) calculation results for all VMAT plans. Among three beam-matched linacs, discrepancy in beam output factor, percentage depth dose at 5 cm, 10 cm, 20 cm depth and MLC leaf offset are all within 1% except 20 × 20 cm2 and 30 × 30 cm2 field sizes, and discrepancy in beam profile is all within 2%. With comparison between measurement result and TPS calculation result, the absolute dose deviations are within the range of ± 3%, and the gamma passing rates are all over 95% for all VMAT plans, which are within the tolerance of clinical acceptability. Compared with all plans delivered on Synegy1 and VersaHD, the point dose discrepancy between measured results and TPS calculated results for plans delivered on Synergy2 is smallest, and the gamma passing rate between measured results and TPS calculated results for plans delivered on Synergy2 is highest. The beam-matched linacs demonstrate good agreement between measurement result and TPS calculation result for VMAT plans. The method can be used for selecting reference beam model for VMAT plans.

A novel method to determine linac mechanical isocenter position and size and examples of specific QA applications

The most important geometric characteristic of stereotactic treatment is the accuracy of positioning the target at the treatment isocenter and the accuracy of directing the radiation beam at the treatment isocenter. Commonly, the radiation isocenter is used as the reference for the treatment isocenter, but its method of localization is not strictly defined, and it depends on the linac-specific beam steering parameters. A novel method is presented for determining the linac mechanical isocenter position and size based on the localization of the collimator axis of rotation at arbitrary gantry angle. The collimator axis of rotation position is determined from the radiation beam center position corrected for the focal spot offset. The focal spot offset is determined using the image center shift method with a custom-design rigid phantom with two sets of ball-bearings. Three specific quality assurance (QA) applications and assessment methods are also presented to demonstrate the functionality of linac mechanical isocenter position and size determination in clinical practice. The first is a mechanical and radiation isocenters coincidence test suitable for quick congruence assessment of these two isocenters for a selected energy, usually required after a nonroutine linac repair and/or energy adjustment. The second is a stereotactic beam isocentricity assessment suitable for pretreatment stereotactic QA. The third is a comprehensive linac geometrical performance test suitable for routine linac QA. The uncertainties of the method for determining mechanical isocenter position and size were measured to be 0.05 mm and 0.04 mm, respectively, using four available photon energies, and were significantly smaller than those of determining the radiation isocenter position and size, which were 0.36 mm and 0.12 mm respectively. It is therefore recommended that the mechanical isocenter position and size be used as the reference linac treatment isocenter and a linac mechanical characteristic parameter respectively.

Identification of a potential source of error for 6FFF beams delivered on an AgilityTM multileaf collimator

Purpose

The performance of the Agility^TM multileaf collimator was investigated with a focus on dynamic, small fields for flattening filter free (FFF) beams.

Methods

In this study we have developed a simple tool to test the robustness of the control mechanisms during dynamic beam delivery for Elekta’s VersaHD linear accelerator with Integrity 4.0.4 control software. We have programed the planning system to calculate dose for delivery of sweeping gaps. These sweeping gaps have a constant speed, constant size, and are delivered at a constant dose rate. Therefore they specifically identify delivery problems in dynamic mode.

Results

The Elekta Agility^TM control mechanism fails to maintain accurate delivery for small, dynamic sweeping gaps. For small gap sizes, the Agility^TM control mechanism delivers a field that is more than four times the size of the planned field width without generating an interlock. This has dosimetric implications: The discrepancy between calculated and measured doses increases with decreasing gap size and exceeds 10% and 60% at isocenter for a 3.5 mm and 1 mm gap size, respectively.

Conclusion

A deficiency of the Agility^TM control system was identified in this study. This deficiency is a potential source of error for volumetric modulated arc therapy fields and could therefore contribute to relatively high failure rates in quality assurance measurements, especially for FFF beams.

Consistency of small-field dosimetry, on and off axis, in beam-matched linacs used for stereotactic radiosurgery

PURPOSE

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) can be delivered with a standard linear accelerator (linac). At institutions having more than one linac, beam matching is common practice. In the literature, there are indications that machine central axis (CAX) matching for broad fields does not guarantee matching of small fields with side ≤2 cm. There is no indication on how matching for broad fields on axis translates to matching small fields off axis. These are of interest to multitarget single-isocenter (MTSI) SRS planning and the present work addresses that gap in the literature.

METHODS

We used 6 MV flattening filter free (FFF) beams from four Elekta VersaHD® linacs equipped with an Agility™ multileaf collimator (MLC). The linacs were strictly matched for broad fields on CAX. We compared output factors (OPFs) and effective field size, measured concurrently using a novel 2D solid-state dosimeter "Duo" with a spatial resolution of 0.2 mm, in square and rectangular static fields with sides from 0.5 to 2 cm, either on axis or away from it by 5 to 15 cm.

RESULTS

Among the four linacs, OPF for fields ≥1 × 1 cm2 ranged 1.3% on CAX, whereas off axis a maximum range of 1.9% was observed at 15 cm. A larger variability in OPF was noted for the 0.5 × 0.5 cm2 field, with a range of 5.9% on CAX, which improved to a maximum of 2.3% moving off axis. Two linacs showed greater consistency with a range of 1.4% on CAX and 2.2% at 15 cm off axis. Between linacs, the effective field size varied by <0.04 cm in most cases, both on and off axis. Tighter matching was observed for linacs with a similar focal spot position.

CONCLUSIONS

Verification of small-field consistency for matched linacs used for SRS is an important task for dosimetric validation. A significant benefit of concurrent measurement of field size and OPF allowed for a comprehensive assessment using a novel diode array. Our study showed the four linacs, strictly matched for broad fields on CAX, were still matched down to a field size of 1 x 1 cm2 on and off axis.