Cargando…
EPID‐based in vivo dosimetry using Dosimetry Check™: Overview and clinical experience in a 5‐yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients
BACKGROUND: Independent verification of the dose delivered by complex radiotherapy can be performed by electronic portal imaging device (EPID) dosimetry. This paper presents 5‐yr EPID in vivo dosimetry (IVD) data obtained using the Dosimetry Check (DC) software on a large cohort including breast, lu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6333145/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30536528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12441 |
_version_ | 1783387510186967040 |
---|---|
author | Nailon, William H. Welsh, Daniel McDonald, Kim Burns, Donna Forsyth, Julie Cooke, Gillian Cutanda, Francisco Carruthers, Linda J. McLaren, Duncan B. Puxeu Vaqué, Josep Kehoe, Terence Andiappa, Sankar |
author_facet | Nailon, William H. Welsh, Daniel McDonald, Kim Burns, Donna Forsyth, Julie Cooke, Gillian Cutanda, Francisco Carruthers, Linda J. McLaren, Duncan B. Puxeu Vaqué, Josep Kehoe, Terence Andiappa, Sankar |
author_sort | Nailon, William H. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Independent verification of the dose delivered by complex radiotherapy can be performed by electronic portal imaging device (EPID) dosimetry. This paper presents 5‐yr EPID in vivo dosimetry (IVD) data obtained using the Dosimetry Check (DC) software on a large cohort including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck (H&N) cancer patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The difference between in vivo dose measurements obtained by DC and point doses calculated by the Eclipse treatment planning system was obtained on 3795 radiotherapy patients treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) (n = 842) and three‐dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) (n = 2953) at 6, 10, and 15 MV. In cases where the dose difference exceeded ±10% further inspection and additional phantom measurements were performed. RESULTS: The mean and standard deviation [Formula: see text] of the percentage difference in dose obtained by DC and calculated by Eclipse in VMAT was: [Formula: see text] in brain, [Formula: see text] in H&N, and [Formula: see text] in prostate cancer. In 3DCRT, this was [Formula: see text] in brain, [Formula: see text] in breast, [Formula: see text] in bladder, [Formula: see text] in H&N, 2.60 ± 5.35% in lung and [Formula: see text] in prostate cancer. A total of 153 plans exceeded the ±10% alert criteria, which included: 88 breast plans accounting for 7.9% of all breast treatments; 28 H&N plans accounting for 4.4% of all H&N treatments; and 12 prostate plans accounting for 3.5% of all prostate treatments. All deviations were found to be as a result of patient‐related anatomical deviations and not from procedural errors. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary data shows that EPID‐based IVD with DC may not only be useful in detecting errors but has the potential to be used to establish site‐specific dose action levels. The approach is straightforward and has been implemented as a radiographer‐led service with no disruption to the patient and no impact on treatment time. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6333145 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63331452019-01-23 EPID‐based in vivo dosimetry using Dosimetry Check™: Overview and clinical experience in a 5‐yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients Nailon, William H. Welsh, Daniel McDonald, Kim Burns, Donna Forsyth, Julie Cooke, Gillian Cutanda, Francisco Carruthers, Linda J. McLaren, Duncan B. Puxeu Vaqué, Josep Kehoe, Terence Andiappa, Sankar J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics BACKGROUND: Independent verification of the dose delivered by complex radiotherapy can be performed by electronic portal imaging device (EPID) dosimetry. This paper presents 5‐yr EPID in vivo dosimetry (IVD) data obtained using the Dosimetry Check (DC) software on a large cohort including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck (H&N) cancer patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The difference between in vivo dose measurements obtained by DC and point doses calculated by the Eclipse treatment planning system was obtained on 3795 radiotherapy patients treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) (n = 842) and three‐dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) (n = 2953) at 6, 10, and 15 MV. In cases where the dose difference exceeded ±10% further inspection and additional phantom measurements were performed. RESULTS: The mean and standard deviation [Formula: see text] of the percentage difference in dose obtained by DC and calculated by Eclipse in VMAT was: [Formula: see text] in brain, [Formula: see text] in H&N, and [Formula: see text] in prostate cancer. In 3DCRT, this was [Formula: see text] in brain, [Formula: see text] in breast, [Formula: see text] in bladder, [Formula: see text] in H&N, 2.60 ± 5.35% in lung and [Formula: see text] in prostate cancer. A total of 153 plans exceeded the ±10% alert criteria, which included: 88 breast plans accounting for 7.9% of all breast treatments; 28 H&N plans accounting for 4.4% of all H&N treatments; and 12 prostate plans accounting for 3.5% of all prostate treatments. All deviations were found to be as a result of patient‐related anatomical deviations and not from procedural errors. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary data shows that EPID‐based IVD with DC may not only be useful in detecting errors but has the potential to be used to establish site‐specific dose action levels. The approach is straightforward and has been implemented as a radiographer‐led service with no disruption to the patient and no impact on treatment time. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6333145/ /pubmed/30536528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12441 Text en © 2018 Lothian Health Board Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://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 Nailon, William H. Welsh, Daniel McDonald, Kim Burns, Donna Forsyth, Julie Cooke, Gillian Cutanda, Francisco Carruthers, Linda J. McLaren, Duncan B. Puxeu Vaqué, Josep Kehoe, Terence Andiappa, Sankar EPID‐based in vivo dosimetry using Dosimetry Check™: Overview and clinical experience in a 5‐yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients |
title |
EPID‐based in vivo dosimetry using Dosimetry Check™: Overview and clinical experience in a 5‐yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients |
title_full |
EPID‐based in vivo dosimetry using Dosimetry Check™: Overview and clinical experience in a 5‐yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients |
title_fullStr |
EPID‐based in vivo dosimetry using Dosimetry Check™: Overview and clinical experience in a 5‐yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients |
title_full_unstemmed |
EPID‐based in vivo dosimetry using Dosimetry Check™: Overview and clinical experience in a 5‐yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients |
title_short |
EPID‐based in vivo dosimetry using Dosimetry Check™: Overview and clinical experience in a 5‐yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients |
title_sort | epid‐based in vivo dosimetry using dosimetry check™: overview and clinical experience in a 5‐yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6333145/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30536528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12441 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nailonwilliamh epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT welshdaniel epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT mcdonaldkim epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT burnsdonna epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT forsythjulie epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT cookegillian epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT cutandafrancisco epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT carrutherslindaj epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT mclarenduncanb epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT puxeuvaquejosep epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT kehoeterence epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients AT andiappasankar epidbasedinvivodosimetryusingdosimetrycheckoverviewandclinicalexperienceina5yrstudyincludingbreastlungprostateandheadandneckcancerpatients |