Intensity modulated radiation therapy with irregular multileaf collimated field: a dosimetric study on the penumbra region with different leaf stepping patterns

Investigation of Predictors to Achieve Acceptable Lung Dose in T-Shaped Upper and Middle Esophageal Cancer With IMRT and VMAT

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether there are predictors and cutoff points that can predict the acceptable lung dose using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in radiotherapy for upper ang middle esophageal cancer.

Material and Methods

Eighty-two patients with T-shaped upper-middle esophageal cancer (UMEC) were enrolled in this retrospective study. Jaw-tracking IMRT plan (JT-IMRT), full-arc VMAT plan (F-VMAT), and pactial-arc VMAT plan (P-VMAT) were generated for each patient. Dosimetric parameters such as MLD and V20 of total lung were compared among the three plannings. Ten factors such as PCTV_inferior length and PCTV_inferior length/total lung length were calculated to find the predictors and cutoff points of the predictors. All patients were divided into two groups according to the cutoff points, and the dosimetric differences between the two groups of the three plans were compared. ANOVA, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and Mann–Whitney U-test were performed for comparisons between datasets. A p <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Result

The quality of the targets of the three plannings was comparable. The total lung dose in P-VMAT was significantly lower than that in JT IMRT and F-VMAT. Monitor unit (MU) of F-VMAT and P-VMAT was significantly lower than that of JT IMRT. ROC analysis showed that among JT IMRT, F-VMAT, and P-VMAT, PCTV_i-L, and PCTV_i-L/TL_L had diagnostic power to predict the suitability of RT plans according to lung dose constraints of our department. For JT IMRT, the cutoff points of PCTV_i-L and PCTV_i-L/TL_L were 16.6 and 0.59. For F-VMAT, the cutoff points of PCTV_i-L and PCTV_i-L/TL_L were 16.75 and 0.62. For P-VMAT, the cutoff points of PCTV_i-L and PCTV_i-L/TL_L were 15.15 and 0.59. After Mann–Whitney U-test analysis, it was found that among the three plannings, the group with lower PCTV_i-L and PCTV_i-L/TL_L could significantly reduce the dose of total lung and heart (p <0.05).

Conclusion

PCTV_{i-L <}16.6 and PCTV_i-L/TL_L <0.59 for JT IMRT, PCTV_{i-L <}16.75 and PCTV_i-L/TL_L <0.62 for F-VMAT and PCTV_{i-L <}15.15, and PCTV_i-L/TL_L <0.59 for P-VMAT can predict whether patients with T-shaped UMEC can meet the lung dose limits of our department.

Rounded leaf end modeling in Pinnacle VMAT treatment planning for fixed jaw linacs

During volume-modulated arc therapies (VMAT), dosimetric errors are introduced by multiple open dynamic leaf gaps that are present in fixed diaphragm linear accelerators. The purpose of this work was to develop a methodology for adjusting the rounded leaf end modeling parameters to improve out-of-field dose agreement in SmartArc VMAT treatment plans delivered by fixed jaw linacs where leaf gap dose is not negligible. Leaf gap doses were measured for an Elekta beam modulator linac with 0.4 cm micro-multileaf collimators (MLC) using an A16 micro-ionization chamber, a MatriXX ion chamber detector array, and Kodak EDR2 film dosimetry in a solid water phantom. The MLC offset and rounded end tip radius were adjusted in the Pinnacle treatment planning system (TPS) to iteratively arrive at the optimal configuration for 6 MV and 10 MV photon energies. Improvements in gamma index with a 3%/3 mm acceptance criteria and an inclusion threshold of 5% of maximum dose were measured, analyzed, and validated using an ArcCHECK diode detector array for field sizes ranging from 1.6 to 14 cm square field arcs and Task Group (TG) 119 VMAT test cases. The best results were achieved for a rounded leaf tip radius of 13 cm with a 0.1 cm MLC offset. With the optimized MLC model, measured gamma indices ranged between 99.9% and 91.7% for square field arcs with sizes between 3.6 cm and 1.6 cm, with a maximum improvement of 42.7% for the 1.6 cm square field size. Gamma indices improved up to 2.8% in TG-119 VMAT treatment plans. Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) credentialing of a VMAT plan with the head and neck phantom passed with a gamma index of 100%. Fine-tune adjustments to MLC rounded leaf ends may improve patient-specific QA pass rates and provide more accurate predictions of dose deposition to avoidance structures.

Physical and dosimetric characteristic of high-definition multileaf collimator (HDMLC) for SRS and IMRT

Physical and dosimetric characteristics of HDMLC were studied for SRS6, 6, and 10 MV X‐rays from Novalis Tx. This in‐built tertiary collimator consists of 60 pairs (32×0.25 cm; 26×0.5 cm and 2×0.7 cm) of leaves. Properties of HDMLC studied included alignment, readout and radiation field congruence, radiation penumbra, accuracy and reproducibility of leaf position and gap width, static and dynamic leaf shift, tongue‐and‐groove effect, leaf transmission and leakage, leaf travel speed, and delivery of dynamic conformal arc and IMRT. All tests were performed using a calibrated ionization chamber, film dosimetry and DynaLog file analysis. Alignment of leaves with isocenter plane was better than 0.03 cm at all gantry and collimator positions. The congruence of HDMLC readout and radiation field agreed to within ± 0.03cm for filed sizes ranging from 1×1 to 20×20 cm2. Mean 80% to 20% penumbra width parallel (perpendicular) to leaf motion was 0.24±0.05(0.21±0.02) cm, 0.37±0.12(0.29±0.07) cm, and 0.51±0.13(0.43±0.07) cm for SRS6, 6, and 10 MV X‐rays, respectively. Circular field penumbra was comparable to corresponding square field. Average penumbra of 1×20 cm2 field was effectively constant over off‐axis positions of up to 12 cm with mean value of 0.16 (± 0.01)cm at 1.5 cm depth and 0.38 (± 0.04)cm at 10 cm depth. Minimum and maximum effective penumbra along the straight diagonal edge of irregular fields increased from 0.3 and 0.32 cm at 70° steep angle to 0.35 and 0.56 cm at 20° steep angle. Modified Picket Fence test showed average FWHM of 0.18 cm and peak‐to‐peak distance of 1.99 cm for 0.1 cm band and 2 cm interband separation. Dynamic multileaf collimation (DMLC) output factor remained within ± 1% for 6 MV and ± 0.5% for 10 MV X‐rays at all gantry positions, and was reproducible within ± 0.5% over a period of 14 months. The static leaf shift was 0.03 cm for all energies, while dynamic leaf shift was 0.044 cm for 10 MV and 0.039 cm for both SRS6 and 6 MV X‐rays. The dose depression and corresponding tongue‐and‐groove size were 24% and 0.17 cm for 6 MV and 19% and 0.20 cm for 10 MV X‐rays. Average transmission through HDMLC was 1.09%, 1.14% and 1.34% for SRS6, 6 and 10 MV X‐rays. Analysis of DynaLog files for leaf speed test in arc dynamic mode, delivery test of dynamic conformal arc, and step‐and‐shoot and sliding window IMRT showed at least 95% or more of the error counts had misplacements < 0.2cm, with maximum root mean square (RMS) error value calculated at 0.13 cm. Accurate and reproducible leaf position and gap width, and less leakage and small consistent penumbra over the fields demonstrate HDMLC suitable for high‐dose resolution SRS and IMRT.

PACS number: 87.56.N‐, 87.55.Qr, 87.50.cm, 87.55.de, 87.53.Ly

Matching extended-SSD electron beams to multileaf collimated photon beams in the treatment of head and neck cancer

PURPOSE

Matching the penumbra of a 6 MeV electron beam to the penumbra of a 6 MV photon beam is a dose optimization challenge, especially when the electron beam is applied from an extended source-to-surface distance (SSD), as in the case of some head and neck treatments. Traditionally low melting point alloy blocks have been used to define the photon beam shielding over the spinal cord region. However, these are inherently time consuming to construct and employ in the clinical situation. Multileaf collimators (MLCs) provide a fast and reproducible shielding option but generate geometrically nonconformal approximations to the desired beam edge definition. The effects of substituting Cerrobend for the MLC shielding mode in the context of beam matching with extended-SSD electron beams are the subject of this investigation.

METHODS

Relative dose beam data from a Varian EX 2100 linear accelerator were acquired in a water tank under the 6 MeV electron beam at both standard and extended-SSD and under the 6 MV photon beam defined by Cerrobend and a number of MLC stepping regimes. The effect of increasing the electron beam SSD on the beam penumbra was assessed. MLC stepping was also assessed in terms of the effects on both the mean photon beam penumbra and the intraleaf dose-profile nonuniformity relative to the MLC midleaf. Computational techniques were used to combine the beam data so as to simulate composite relative dosimetry in the water tank, allowing fine control of beam abutment gap variation. Idealized volumetric dosimetry was generated based on the percentage depth-dose data for the beam modes and the abutment geometries involved. Comparison was made between each composite dosimetry dataset and the relevant ideal dosimetry dataset by way of subtraction.

RESULTS

Weighted dose-difference volume histograms (DDVHs) were produced, and these, in turn, summed to provide an overall dosimetry score for each abutment and shielding type/angle combination. Increasing the electron beam SSD increased the penumbra width (defined as the lateral distance of the 80% and 20% isodose contours) by 8-10 mm at the depths of 10-20 mm. Mean photon beam penumbra width increased with increased MLC stepping, and the mean MLC penumbra was approximately 1.5 times greater than that across the corresponding Cerrobend shielding. Intraleaf dose discrepancy in the direction orthogonal to the beam edge also increased with MLC stepping.

CONCLUSIONS

The weighted DDVH comparison techniques allowed the composite dosimetry resulting from the interplay of the abovementioned variables to be ranked. The MLC dosimetry ranked as good or better than that resulting from beam matching with Cerrobend for all except large field overlaps (-2.5 mm gap). The results for the linear-weighted DDVH comparison suggest that optimal MLC abutment dosimetry results from an optical surface gap of around 1 +/- 0.5 mm. Furthermore, this appears reasonably lenient to abutment gap variation, such as that arising from uncertainty in beam markup or other setup errors.

Dosimetric characteristics of dual-layer multileaf collimation for small-field and intensity-modulated radiation therapy applications

The purpose of the present work was to measure the performance characteristics in the penumbra region and on the leaf‐end of an innovative dual‐layer micro multileaf collimator (DmMLC). The DmMLC consists of two orthogonal (upper and lower) layers of leaves; a standard MLC consists of one layer. The DmMLC provides unique performance characteristics in smoothing dose undulation, reducing leaf‐end transmission, and reducing MLC field dependence of the leaf stepping angle. Two standard MLCs (80‐leaf and 120‐leaf versions: Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA), a DmMLC (AccuKnife: Initia Medical Technology, Canton, MA), and a Cerrobend (Cerro Metal Products, Bellefonte, PA) block were used in performance studies involving a triangular field, a cross leaf‐end field, and a circular field. Measurements were made with 6‐MV X‐rays and extended dose range film at a depth of 5 cm in Solid Water (Gammex rmi, Middleton, WI) at a source–axis distance of 100 cm. The field penumbra width measured between the 20% and 80% isodose lines through the MLC‐80, MLC‐120, DmMLC, and Cerrobend block were 9.0, 5.0, 3.0, and 2.0 mm respectively. The dose undulation amplitude of the 50% isodose line was measured as 5.5, 2.0, and 0.5 mm for the MLC‐80, MLC‐120, and DmMLC respectively. The planar dose difference between the MLC‐80, MLC‐120, and DmMLC against Cerrobend block was measured as ranging at ±52.5%,±35.0%, and ±20.0% respectively. The leaf‐end transmission was measured at 22.4% in maximum and 15.4% in average when closing a single layer of the DmMLC, and at 2.4% in maximum and 2.1% in average when closing both layers. The MLC dependence of the leaf stepping angle with the DmMLC ranged from 45 degrees to 90 degrees. The standard MLC leaf stepping angle ranged from 0 degrees to 90 degrees. In conclusion, the dose undulation, leaf‐end transmission, and MLC field dependence of the leaf stepping angle with the DmMLC were remarkably reduced as compared with those of the standard MLCs. And as compared with Cerrobend block, the DmMLC provided very comparable performance in field‐edge smoothing and in the shaping of complex fields.

PACS numbers: 87.56.Jk, 87.56.Nk, 87.56.Nj, 87.57.Nt