Cargando…

Modulation factors calculated with an EPID‐derived MLC fluence model to streamline IMRT/VMAT second checks

This work outlines the development of a robust method of calculating modulation factors used for the independent verification of MUs for IMRT and VMAT treatments, to replace onerous ion chamber measurements. Two‐dimensional fluence maps were calculated for dynamic MLC fields that include MLC interle...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Steciw, Stephen, Rathee, Satyapal, Warkentin, Brad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5714641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24257271
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v14i6.4274
_version_ 1783283625656057856
author Steciw, Stephen
Rathee, Satyapal
Warkentin, Brad
author_facet Steciw, Stephen
Rathee, Satyapal
Warkentin, Brad
author_sort Steciw, Stephen
collection PubMed
description This work outlines the development of a robust method of calculating modulation factors used for the independent verification of MUs for IMRT and VMAT treatments, to replace onerous ion chamber measurements. Two‐dimensional fluence maps were calculated for dynamic MLC fields that include MLC interleaf leakage, transmission, and tongue‐and‐groove effects, as characterized from EPID‐acquired images. Monte Carlo‐generated dose kernels were then used to calculate doses for a modulated field and that field with the modulation removed at a depth specific to the calculation point in the patient using in‐house written software, Mod_Calc. The ratio of these two doses was taken to calculate modulation factors. Comparison between Mod_Calc calculation and ion chamber measurement of modulation factors for 121 IMRT fields yielded excellent agreement, where the mean difference between the two was [Formula: see text]. This validated use of Mod_Calc clinically. Analysis of 5,271 dynamic fields from clinical use of Mod_Calc gave a mean difference of [Formula: see text] between Mod_Calc and Eclipse‐generated factors. In addition, 99.3% and 96.5% fields pass 5% and 2% criteria, respectively, for agreement between these two predictions. The development and use of Mod_Calc at our clinic has considerably streamlined our QA process for IMRT and RapidArc fields, compared to our previous method based on ion chamber measurements. As a result, it has made it feasible to maintain our established and trusted current in‐house method of MU verification, without resorting to commercial software alternatives. PACS numbers: 87.55.km, 87.55.Qr, 87.55.kd, 87.57.uq
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5714641
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57146412018-04-02 Modulation factors calculated with an EPID‐derived MLC fluence model to streamline IMRT/VMAT second checks Steciw, Stephen Rathee, Satyapal Warkentin, Brad J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics This work outlines the development of a robust method of calculating modulation factors used for the independent verification of MUs for IMRT and VMAT treatments, to replace onerous ion chamber measurements. Two‐dimensional fluence maps were calculated for dynamic MLC fields that include MLC interleaf leakage, transmission, and tongue‐and‐groove effects, as characterized from EPID‐acquired images. Monte Carlo‐generated dose kernels were then used to calculate doses for a modulated field and that field with the modulation removed at a depth specific to the calculation point in the patient using in‐house written software, Mod_Calc. The ratio of these two doses was taken to calculate modulation factors. Comparison between Mod_Calc calculation and ion chamber measurement of modulation factors for 121 IMRT fields yielded excellent agreement, where the mean difference between the two was [Formula: see text]. This validated use of Mod_Calc clinically. Analysis of 5,271 dynamic fields from clinical use of Mod_Calc gave a mean difference of [Formula: see text] between Mod_Calc and Eclipse‐generated factors. In addition, 99.3% and 96.5% fields pass 5% and 2% criteria, respectively, for agreement between these two predictions. The development and use of Mod_Calc at our clinic has considerably streamlined our QA process for IMRT and RapidArc fields, compared to our previous method based on ion chamber measurements. As a result, it has made it feasible to maintain our established and trusted current in‐house method of MU verification, without resorting to commercial software alternatives. PACS numbers: 87.55.km, 87.55.Qr, 87.55.kd, 87.57.uq John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2013-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5714641/ /pubmed/24257271 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v14i6.4274 Text en © 2013 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 Oncology Physics
Steciw, Stephen
Rathee, Satyapal
Warkentin, Brad
Modulation factors calculated with an EPID‐derived MLC fluence model to streamline IMRT/VMAT second checks
title Modulation factors calculated with an EPID‐derived MLC fluence model to streamline IMRT/VMAT second checks
title_full Modulation factors calculated with an EPID‐derived MLC fluence model to streamline IMRT/VMAT second checks
title_fullStr Modulation factors calculated with an EPID‐derived MLC fluence model to streamline IMRT/VMAT second checks
title_full_unstemmed Modulation factors calculated with an EPID‐derived MLC fluence model to streamline IMRT/VMAT second checks
title_short Modulation factors calculated with an EPID‐derived MLC fluence model to streamline IMRT/VMAT second checks
title_sort modulation factors calculated with an epid‐derived mlc fluence model to streamline imrt/vmat second checks
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5714641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24257271
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v14i6.4274
work_keys_str_mv AT steciwstephen modulationfactorscalculatedwithanepidderivedmlcfluencemodeltostreamlineimrtvmatsecondchecks
AT ratheesatyapal modulationfactorscalculatedwithanepidderivedmlcfluencemodeltostreamlineimrtvmatsecondchecks
AT warkentinbrad modulationfactorscalculatedwithanepidderivedmlcfluencemodeltostreamlineimrtvmatsecondchecks