Cargando…

Effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy

Delivery quality assurance (DQA) of tomotherapy plans is routinely performed with silver halide film which has a limited range due to the effects of saturation. DQA plans with dose values exceeding this limit require the dose of the entire plan to be scaled downward if film is used, to evaluate the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Whitmore, Nathan, Nalichowski, Adrian, Burmeister, Jay
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5716129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22231213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v13i1.3621
_version_ 1783283881735094272
author Whitmore, Nathan
Nalichowski, Adrian
Burmeister, Jay
author_facet Whitmore, Nathan
Nalichowski, Adrian
Burmeister, Jay
author_sort Whitmore, Nathan
collection PubMed
description Delivery quality assurance (DQA) of tomotherapy plans is routinely performed with silver halide film which has a limited range due to the effects of saturation. DQA plans with dose values exceeding this limit require the dose of the entire plan to be scaled downward if film is used, to evaluate the dose distribution in two dimensions. The potential loss of fidelity between scaled and unscaled DQA plans as a function of dose scaling is investigated. Three treatment plans for 12 Gy fractions designed for SBRT of the lung were used to create DQA procedures that were scaled between 100% and 10%. The dose was measured with an ionization chamber array and compared to values from the tomotherapy treatment planning system. Film and cylindrical ion chamber measurements were also made for one patient for scaling factors of 50% to 10% to compare with the ionization chamber array measurements. The array results show the average gamma pass rate is [Formula: see text] from 100% to 30% scaling. The average gamma pass rate falls to 93.6% and 51.1% at 20% and 10% scaling, respectively. Film analysis yields similar pass rates. Cylindrical ion chambers did not exhibit significant variation with dose scaling, but only represent points in the low gradient region of the dose distribution. Scaling the dose changes the mechanics of the radiation delivery, as well as the signal‐to‐noise ratio. Treatment plans which exhibit parameters that differ significantly from those common to DQA plans studied in this paper may exhibit different behavior. Dose scaling should be limited to the smallest degree possible. Planar information, such as that from film or a detector array, is required. The results show that it is not necessary to perform both a scaled and unscaled DQA plan for the treatment plans considered here. PACS numbers: 87.55.km, 87.55.Qr
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5716129
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57161292018-04-02 Effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy Whitmore, Nathan Nalichowski, Adrian Burmeister, Jay J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics Delivery quality assurance (DQA) of tomotherapy plans is routinely performed with silver halide film which has a limited range due to the effects of saturation. DQA plans with dose values exceeding this limit require the dose of the entire plan to be scaled downward if film is used, to evaluate the dose distribution in two dimensions. The potential loss of fidelity between scaled and unscaled DQA plans as a function of dose scaling is investigated. Three treatment plans for 12 Gy fractions designed for SBRT of the lung were used to create DQA procedures that were scaled between 100% and 10%. The dose was measured with an ionization chamber array and compared to values from the tomotherapy treatment planning system. Film and cylindrical ion chamber measurements were also made for one patient for scaling factors of 50% to 10% to compare with the ionization chamber array measurements. The array results show the average gamma pass rate is [Formula: see text] from 100% to 30% scaling. The average gamma pass rate falls to 93.6% and 51.1% at 20% and 10% scaling, respectively. Film analysis yields similar pass rates. Cylindrical ion chambers did not exhibit significant variation with dose scaling, but only represent points in the low gradient region of the dose distribution. Scaling the dose changes the mechanics of the radiation delivery, as well as the signal‐to‐noise ratio. Treatment plans which exhibit parameters that differ significantly from those common to DQA plans studied in this paper may exhibit different behavior. Dose scaling should be limited to the smallest degree possible. Planar information, such as that from film or a detector array, is required. The results show that it is not necessary to perform both a scaled and unscaled DQA plan for the treatment plans considered here. PACS numbers: 87.55.km, 87.55.Qr John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2012-01-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5716129/ /pubmed/22231213 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v13i1.3621 Text en © 2012 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
Whitmore, Nathan
Nalichowski, Adrian
Burmeister, Jay
Effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy
title Effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy
title_full Effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy
title_fullStr Effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy
title_full_unstemmed Effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy
title_short Effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy
title_sort effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5716129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22231213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v13i1.3621
work_keys_str_mv AT whitmorenathan effectsofdosescalingondeliveryqualityassuranceintomotherapy
AT nalichowskiadrian effectsofdosescalingondeliveryqualityassuranceintomotherapy
AT burmeisterjay effectsofdosescalingondeliveryqualityassuranceintomotherapy