New methods for optical distance indicator and gantry angle quality control tests in medical linear accelerators: image processing by using a 3D phantom

Scintillation imaging as a high‐resolution, remote, versatile 2D detection system for MR‐linac quality assurance

PURPOSE

To demonstrate the potential benefits of remote camera-based scintillation imaging for routine quality assurance (QA) measurements for magnetic resonance guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) linear accelerators.

METHODS

A wall-mounted CMOS camera with a time-synchronized intensifier was used to image photons produced from a scintillation screen in response to dose deposition from a 6 MV FFF x-ray beam produced by a 0.35 T MR-linac. The oblique angle of the field of view was corrected using a projective transform from a checkerboard calibration target. Output sensitivity and constancy was measured using the scintillator and benchmarked against an A28 ion chamber. Field cross-plane and in-plane profiles were measured for field sizes ranging from 1.68 × 1.66 cm² to 20.02 × 19.92 cm² with both scintillation imaging and using an IC profiler. Multileaf collimator (MLC) shifts were introduced to test sensitivity of the scintillation imaging system to small spatial deviations. A picket fence test and star-shot were delivered to both the scintillator and EBT3 film to compare accuracy in measuring MLC positions and isocenter size.

RESULTS

The scintillation imaging system showed comparable sensitivity and linearity to the ion chamber in response to changes in machine output down to 0.5 MU (R²  = 0.99). Cross-plane profiles show strong agreement with defined field sizes using full width half maximum (FWHM) measurement of <2 mm for field sizes below 15 cm, but the oblique viewing angle was the limiting factor in accuracy of in-plane profile widths. However, the system provided high-resolution profiles in both directions for constancy measurements. Small shifts in the field position down to 0.5 mm were detectable with <0.1 mm accuracy. Multileaf collimator positions as measured with both scintillation imaging and EBT3 film were measured within ± 1 mm tolerance and both detection systems produced similar isocenter sizes from the star-shot analysis (0.81 and 0.83 mm radii).

CONCLUSIONS

Remote scintillation imaging of a two-dimensional screen provided a rapid, versatile, MR-compatible solution to many routine quality assurance procedures including output constancy, profile flatness and symmetry constancy, MLC position verification and isocenter size. This method is high-resolution, does not require post-irradiation readout, and provides simple, instantaneous data acquisition. Full automation of the readout and processing could make this a very simple but effective QA tool, and is adaptable to all medical accelerators.

Correlation analysis between 2D and quasi-3D gamma evaluations for both intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy

The aim of this work was to investigate correlations between 2D and quasi-3D gamma passing rates. A total of 20 patients (10 prostate cases and 10 head and neck cases, H&N) were retrospectively selected. For each patient, both intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated. For each plan, 2D gamma evaluation with radiochromic films and quasi-3D gamma evaluation with fluence measurements were performed with both 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm criteria. Gamma passing rates were grouped together according to delivery techniques and treatment sites. Statistical analyses were performed to examine the correlation between 2D and quasi-3D gamma evaluations. Statistically significant difference was observed between delivery techniques only in the quasi-3D gamma passing rates with 2%/2 mm. Statistically significant differences were observed between treatment sites in the 2D gamma passing rates (differences of less than 8%). No statistically significant correlations were observed between 2D and quasi-3D gamma passing rates except the VMAT group and the group including both IMRT and VMAT with 3%/3 mm (r = 0.564 with p = 0.012 for theVMAT group and r = 0.372 with p = 0.020 for the group including both IMRT and VMAT), however, those were not strong. No strong correlations were observed between 2D and quasi-3D gamma evaluations.

A novel and independent method for time-resolved gantry angle quality assurance for VMAT

Volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment delivery requires three key dynamic components; gantry rotation, dose rate modulation, and multi‐leaf collimator motion, which are all simultaneously varied during the delivery. Misalignment of the gantry angle can potentially affect clinical outcome due to the steep dose gradients and complex MLC shapes involved. It is essential to develop independent gantry angle quality assurance (QA) appropriate to VMAT that can be performed simultaneously with other key VMAT QA testing. In this work, a simple and inexpensive fully independent gantry angle measurement methodology was developed that allows quantitation of the gantry angle accuracy as a function of time. This method is based on the analysis of video footage of a “Double dot” pattern attached to the front cover of the linear accelerator that consists of red and green circles printed on A4 paper sheet. A standard mobile phone is placed on the couch to record the video footage during gantry rotation. The video file is subsequently analyzed and used to determine the gantry angle from each video frame using the relative position of the two dots. There were two types of validation tests performed including the static mode with manual gantry angle rotation and dynamic mode with three complex test plans. The accuracy was 0.26° ± 0.04° and 0.46° ± 0.31° (mean ± 1 SD) for the static and dynamic modes, respectively. This method is user friendly, cost effective, easy to setup, has high temporal resolution, and can be combined with existing time‐resolved method for QA of MLC and dose rate to form a comprehensive set of procedures for time‐resolved QA of VMAT delivery system.

Automating quality assurance of digital linear accelerators using a radioluminescent phosphor coated phantom and optical imaging

Performing mechanical and geometric quality assurance (QA) tests for medical linear accelerators (LINAC) is a predominantly manual process that consumes significant time and resources. In order to alleviate this burden this study proposes a novel strategy to automate the process of performing these tests. The autonomous QA system consists of three parts: (1) a customized phantom coated with radioluminescent material; (2) an optical imaging system capable of visualizing the incidence of the radiation beam, light field or lasers on the phantom; and (3) software to process the captured signals. The radioluminescent phantom, which enables visualization of the radiation beam on the same surface as the light field and lasers, is placed on the couch and imaged while a predefined treatment plan is delivered from the LINAC. The captured images are then processed to self-calibrate the system and perform measurements for evaluating light field/radiation coincidence, jaw position indicators, cross-hair centering, treatment couch position indicators and localizing laser alignment. System accuracy is probed by intentionally introducing errors and by comparing with current clinical methods. The accuracy of self-calibration is evaluated by examining measurement repeatability under fixed and variable phantom setups. The integrated system was able to automatically collect, analyze and report the results for the mechanical alignment tests specified by TG-142. The average difference between introduced and measured errors was 0.13 mm. The system was shown to be consistent with current techniques. Measurement variability increased slightly from 0.1 mm to 0.2 mm when the phantom setup was varied, but no significant difference in the mean measurement value was detected. Total measurement time was less than 10 minutes for all tests as a result of automation. The system's unique features of a phosphor-coated phantom and fully automated, operator independent self-calibration offer the potential to streamline the QA process for modern LINACs.