Cargando…

Implementation of an improved dose‐per‐MU model for double‐scattered proton beams to address interbeamline modulation width variability

Because treatment planning systems (TPSs) generally do not provide monitor units (MUs) for double‐scattered proton plans, models to predict MUs as a function of the range and the nominal modulation width requested of the beam delivery system, such as the one developed by the MGH group, have been pro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lin, Liyong, Shen, JiaJien, Ainsley, Christopher G., Solberg, Timothy D., McDonough, James E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711055/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24892352
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i3.4748
_version_ 1783282998553083904
author Lin, Liyong
Shen, JiaJien
Ainsley, Christopher G.
Solberg, Timothy D.
McDonough, James E.
author_facet Lin, Liyong
Shen, JiaJien
Ainsley, Christopher G.
Solberg, Timothy D.
McDonough, James E.
author_sort Lin, Liyong
collection PubMed
description Because treatment planning systems (TPSs) generally do not provide monitor units (MUs) for double‐scattered proton plans, models to predict MUs as a function of the range and the nominal modulation width requested of the beam delivery system, such as the one developed by the MGH group, have been proposed. For a given nominal modulation width, however, the measured modulation width depends on the accuracy of the vendor's calibration process and may differ from this nominal value, and also from one beamline to the next. Although such a difference can be replicated in our TPS, the output dependence on range and modulation width for each beam option or suboption has to be modeled separately for each beamline in order to achieve maximal 3% inaccuracy. As a consequence, the MGH output model may not be directly transferable. This work, therefore, serves to extend the model to more general clinic situations. In this paper, a parameterized linear‐quadratic transformation is introduced to convert the nominal modulation width to the measured modulation width for each beam option or suboption on a per‐beamline basis. Fit parameters are derived for each beamline from measurements of 60 reference beams spanning the minimum and maximum ranges, and modulation widths from 2 cm to full range per option or suboption. Using the modeled modulation width, we extract the MGH parameters for the output dependence on range and modulation width. Our method has been tested with 1784 patient‐specific fields delivered across three different beamlines at our facility. For these fields, all measured outputs fall within 3%, and 64.4% fall within 1%, of our model. Using a parameterized linear‐quadratic modulation width, MU calculation models can be established on a per‐beamline basis for each double scattering beam option or suboption. PACS number: 87.53.Qc
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5711055
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57110552018-04-02 Implementation of an improved dose‐per‐MU model for double‐scattered proton beams to address interbeamline modulation width variability Lin, Liyong Shen, JiaJien Ainsley, Christopher G. Solberg, Timothy D. McDonough, James E. J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Measurements Because treatment planning systems (TPSs) generally do not provide monitor units (MUs) for double‐scattered proton plans, models to predict MUs as a function of the range and the nominal modulation width requested of the beam delivery system, such as the one developed by the MGH group, have been proposed. For a given nominal modulation width, however, the measured modulation width depends on the accuracy of the vendor's calibration process and may differ from this nominal value, and also from one beamline to the next. Although such a difference can be replicated in our TPS, the output dependence on range and modulation width for each beam option or suboption has to be modeled separately for each beamline in order to achieve maximal 3% inaccuracy. As a consequence, the MGH output model may not be directly transferable. This work, therefore, serves to extend the model to more general clinic situations. In this paper, a parameterized linear‐quadratic transformation is introduced to convert the nominal modulation width to the measured modulation width for each beam option or suboption on a per‐beamline basis. Fit parameters are derived for each beamline from measurements of 60 reference beams spanning the minimum and maximum ranges, and modulation widths from 2 cm to full range per option or suboption. Using the modeled modulation width, we extract the MGH parameters for the output dependence on range and modulation width. Our method has been tested with 1784 patient‐specific fields delivered across three different beamlines at our facility. For these fields, all measured outputs fall within 3%, and 64.4% fall within 1%, of our model. Using a parameterized linear‐quadratic modulation width, MU calculation models can be established on a per‐beamline basis for each double scattering beam option or suboption. PACS number: 87.53.Qc John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2014-05-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5711055/ /pubmed/24892352 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i3.4748 Text en © 2014 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Measurements
Lin, Liyong
Shen, JiaJien
Ainsley, Christopher G.
Solberg, Timothy D.
McDonough, James E.
Implementation of an improved dose‐per‐MU model for double‐scattered proton beams to address interbeamline modulation width variability
title Implementation of an improved dose‐per‐MU model for double‐scattered proton beams to address interbeamline modulation width variability
title_full Implementation of an improved dose‐per‐MU model for double‐scattered proton beams to address interbeamline modulation width variability
title_fullStr Implementation of an improved dose‐per‐MU model for double‐scattered proton beams to address interbeamline modulation width variability
title_full_unstemmed Implementation of an improved dose‐per‐MU model for double‐scattered proton beams to address interbeamline modulation width variability
title_short Implementation of an improved dose‐per‐MU model for double‐scattered proton beams to address interbeamline modulation width variability
title_sort implementation of an improved dose‐per‐mu model for double‐scattered proton beams to address interbeamline modulation width variability
topic Radiation Measurements
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711055/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24892352
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i3.4748
work_keys_str_mv AT linliyong implementationofanimproveddosepermumodelfordoublescatteredprotonbeamstoaddressinterbeamlinemodulationwidthvariability
AT shenjiajien implementationofanimproveddosepermumodelfordoublescatteredprotonbeamstoaddressinterbeamlinemodulationwidthvariability
AT ainsleychristopherg implementationofanimproveddosepermumodelfordoublescatteredprotonbeamstoaddressinterbeamlinemodulationwidthvariability
AT solbergtimothyd implementationofanimproveddosepermumodelfordoublescatteredprotonbeamstoaddressinterbeamlinemodulationwidthvariability
AT mcdonoughjamese implementationofanimproveddosepermumodelfordoublescatteredprotonbeamstoaddressinterbeamlinemodulationwidthvariability