Cargando…

Development of a log file analysis tool for proton patient QA, system performance tracking, and delivered dose reconstruction

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): To describe a log file–based patient‐specific quality assurance (QA) method and develop an in‐house tool for system performance tracking and dose reconstruction in pencil‐beam scanning proton therapy that can be used for pre‐treatment plan review. MATERIALS/METHODS: The softwar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ates, Ozgur, Pirlepesov, Fakhriddin, Zhao, Li, Hua, Chia‐ho, Merchant, Thomas E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10338751/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36951089
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13972
_version_ 1785071693366034432
author Ates, Ozgur
Pirlepesov, Fakhriddin
Zhao, Li
Hua, Chia‐ho
Merchant, Thomas E.
author_facet Ates, Ozgur
Pirlepesov, Fakhriddin
Zhao, Li
Hua, Chia‐ho
Merchant, Thomas E.
author_sort Ates, Ozgur
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): To describe a log file–based patient‐specific quality assurance (QA) method and develop an in‐house tool for system performance tracking and dose reconstruction in pencil‐beam scanning proton therapy that can be used for pre‐treatment plan review. MATERIALS/METHODS: The software extracts beam‐specific information from the treatment delivery log file and automatically compares the monitor units (MU), lateral position, and size of each spot against the intended values in the treatment plan to identify any discrepancies in the beam delivery. The software has been used to analyze 992 patients, 2004 plans, 4865 fields, and more than 32 million proton spots from 2016 to 2021. The composite doses of 10 craniospinal irradiation (CSI) plans were reconstructed based on the delivered spots and compared with the original plans as an offline plan review method. RESULTS: Over the course of 6 years, the proton delivery system has proved stable in delivering patient QA fields with proton energies of 69.4–221.3 MeV and an MU range of 0.003–1.473 MU per spot. The planned mean and standard deviation (SD) of the energy and spot MU were 114.4 ± 26.4 MeV and 0.010 ± 0.009 MU, respectively. The mean and SD of the differences in MU and position between the delivered and planned spots were 9.56 × 10(−8) ± 2.0 × 10(−4) MU and 0.029/−0.007 ± 0.049/0.044 mm on the X/Y‐axis for random differences and 0.005/0.125 ± 0.189/0.175 mm on the X/Y‐axis for systematic differences. The mean and SD of the difference between the commissioning and delivered spot sizes were 0.086/0.089 ± 0.131/0.166 mm on the X/Y‐axis. CONCLUSION: A tool has been developed to extract crucial information about the performance of the proton delivery and monitor system and provide a dose reconstruction based on delivered spots for quality improvement. Each patient's plan was verified before treatment to ensure accurate and safe delivery within the delivery tolerance of the machine.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10338751
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103387512023-07-14 Development of a log file analysis tool for proton patient QA, system performance tracking, and delivered dose reconstruction Ates, Ozgur Pirlepesov, Fakhriddin Zhao, Li Hua, Chia‐ho Merchant, Thomas E. J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): To describe a log file–based patient‐specific quality assurance (QA) method and develop an in‐house tool for system performance tracking and dose reconstruction in pencil‐beam scanning proton therapy that can be used for pre‐treatment plan review. MATERIALS/METHODS: The software extracts beam‐specific information from the treatment delivery log file and automatically compares the monitor units (MU), lateral position, and size of each spot against the intended values in the treatment plan to identify any discrepancies in the beam delivery. The software has been used to analyze 992 patients, 2004 plans, 4865 fields, and more than 32 million proton spots from 2016 to 2021. The composite doses of 10 craniospinal irradiation (CSI) plans were reconstructed based on the delivered spots and compared with the original plans as an offline plan review method. RESULTS: Over the course of 6 years, the proton delivery system has proved stable in delivering patient QA fields with proton energies of 69.4–221.3 MeV and an MU range of 0.003–1.473 MU per spot. The planned mean and standard deviation (SD) of the energy and spot MU were 114.4 ± 26.4 MeV and 0.010 ± 0.009 MU, respectively. The mean and SD of the differences in MU and position between the delivered and planned spots were 9.56 × 10(−8) ± 2.0 × 10(−4) MU and 0.029/−0.007 ± 0.049/0.044 mm on the X/Y‐axis for random differences and 0.005/0.125 ± 0.189/0.175 mm on the X/Y‐axis for systematic differences. The mean and SD of the difference between the commissioning and delivered spot sizes were 0.086/0.089 ± 0.131/0.166 mm on the X/Y‐axis. CONCLUSION: A tool has been developed to extract crucial information about the performance of the proton delivery and monitor system and provide a dose reconstruction based on delivered spots for quality improvement. Each patient's plan was verified before treatment to ensure accurate and safe delivery within the delivery tolerance of the machine. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10338751/ /pubmed/36951089 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13972 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Ates, Ozgur
Pirlepesov, Fakhriddin
Zhao, Li
Hua, Chia‐ho
Merchant, Thomas E.
Development of a log file analysis tool for proton patient QA, system performance tracking, and delivered dose reconstruction
title Development of a log file analysis tool for proton patient QA, system performance tracking, and delivered dose reconstruction
title_full Development of a log file analysis tool for proton patient QA, system performance tracking, and delivered dose reconstruction
title_fullStr Development of a log file analysis tool for proton patient QA, system performance tracking, and delivered dose reconstruction
title_full_unstemmed Development of a log file analysis tool for proton patient QA, system performance tracking, and delivered dose reconstruction
title_short Development of a log file analysis tool for proton patient QA, system performance tracking, and delivered dose reconstruction
title_sort development of a log file analysis tool for proton patient qa, system performance tracking, and delivered dose reconstruction
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10338751/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36951089
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13972
work_keys_str_mv AT atesozgur developmentofalogfileanalysistoolforprotonpatientqasystemperformancetrackinganddelivereddosereconstruction
AT pirlepesovfakhriddin developmentofalogfileanalysistoolforprotonpatientqasystemperformancetrackinganddelivereddosereconstruction
AT zhaoli developmentofalogfileanalysistoolforprotonpatientqasystemperformancetrackinganddelivereddosereconstruction
AT huachiaho developmentofalogfileanalysistoolforprotonpatientqasystemperformancetrackinganddelivereddosereconstruction
AT merchantthomase developmentofalogfileanalysistoolforprotonpatientqasystemperformancetrackinganddelivereddosereconstruction