Cargando…

Evaluating the sensitivity of Halcyon’s automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: A phantom study using static IMRT

PURPOSE: The Varian Halcyon™ electronic portal imaging detector is always in‐line with the beam and automatically acquires transit images for every patient with full‐field coverage. These images could be used for “every patient, every monitor unit” quality assurance (QA) and eventually adaptive radi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ray, Xenia, Bojechko, Casey, Moore, Kevin L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6839375/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31587477
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12749
_version_ 1783467409118593024
author Ray, Xenia
Bojechko, Casey
Moore, Kevin L.
author_facet Ray, Xenia
Bojechko, Casey
Moore, Kevin L.
author_sort Ray, Xenia
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The Varian Halcyon™ electronic portal imaging detector is always in‐line with the beam and automatically acquires transit images for every patient with full‐field coverage. These images could be used for “every patient, every monitor unit” quality assurance (QA) and eventually adaptive radiotherapy. This study evaluated the imager’s sensitivity to potential clinical errors and day‐to‐day variations from clinical exit images. METHODS: Open and modulated fields were delivered for each potential error. To evaluate output changes, monitor units were scaled by 2%–10% and delivered to solid water slabs and a homogeneous CIRS phantom. To mimic weight changes, 0.5–5.0 cm of buildup was added to the solid water. To evaluate positioning changes, a homogeneous and heterogeneous CIRS phantom were shifted 2–10 cm and 0.2–1.5 cm, respectively. For each test, mean relative differences (MRDs) and standard deviations in the pixel‐difference histograms (σ(RD)) between test and baseline images were calculated. Lateral shift magnitudes were calculated using cross‐correlation and edge‐detection filtration. To assess patient variations, MRD and σ(RD) were calculated from six prostate patients’ daily exit images and compared between fractions with and without gas present. RESULTS: MRDs responded linearly to output and buildup changes with a standard deviation of 0.3%, implying a 1% output change and 0.2 cm changes in buildup could be detected with 2.5σ confidence. Shifting the homogenous phantom laterally resulted in detectable MRD and σ(RD) changes, and the cross‐correlation function calculated the shift to within 0.5 mm for the heterogeneous phantom. MRD and σ(RD) values were significantly associated with the presence of gas for five of the six patients. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid analyses of automatically acquired Halcyon™ exit images could detect mid‐treatment changes with high sensitivity, though appropriate thresholds will need to be set. This study presents the first steps toward developing effortless image evaluation for all aspects of every patient’s treatment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6839375
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68393752019-11-14 Evaluating the sensitivity of Halcyon’s automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: A phantom study using static IMRT Ray, Xenia Bojechko, Casey Moore, Kevin L. J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: The Varian Halcyon™ electronic portal imaging detector is always in‐line with the beam and automatically acquires transit images for every patient with full‐field coverage. These images could be used for “every patient, every monitor unit” quality assurance (QA) and eventually adaptive radiotherapy. This study evaluated the imager’s sensitivity to potential clinical errors and day‐to‐day variations from clinical exit images. METHODS: Open and modulated fields were delivered for each potential error. To evaluate output changes, monitor units were scaled by 2%–10% and delivered to solid water slabs and a homogeneous CIRS phantom. To mimic weight changes, 0.5–5.0 cm of buildup was added to the solid water. To evaluate positioning changes, a homogeneous and heterogeneous CIRS phantom were shifted 2–10 cm and 0.2–1.5 cm, respectively. For each test, mean relative differences (MRDs) and standard deviations in the pixel‐difference histograms (σ(RD)) between test and baseline images were calculated. Lateral shift magnitudes were calculated using cross‐correlation and edge‐detection filtration. To assess patient variations, MRD and σ(RD) were calculated from six prostate patients’ daily exit images and compared between fractions with and without gas present. RESULTS: MRDs responded linearly to output and buildup changes with a standard deviation of 0.3%, implying a 1% output change and 0.2 cm changes in buildup could be detected with 2.5σ confidence. Shifting the homogenous phantom laterally resulted in detectable MRD and σ(RD) changes, and the cross‐correlation function calculated the shift to within 0.5 mm for the heterogeneous phantom. MRD and σ(RD) values were significantly associated with the presence of gas for five of the six patients. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid analyses of automatically acquired Halcyon™ exit images could detect mid‐treatment changes with high sensitivity, though appropriate thresholds will need to be set. This study presents the first steps toward developing effortless image evaluation for all aspects of every patient’s treatment. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6839375/ /pubmed/31587477 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12749 Text en © 2019 The Authors. 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
Ray, Xenia
Bojechko, Casey
Moore, Kevin L.
Evaluating the sensitivity of Halcyon’s automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: A phantom study using static IMRT
title Evaluating the sensitivity of Halcyon’s automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: A phantom study using static IMRT
title_full Evaluating the sensitivity of Halcyon’s automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: A phantom study using static IMRT
title_fullStr Evaluating the sensitivity of Halcyon’s automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: A phantom study using static IMRT
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the sensitivity of Halcyon’s automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: A phantom study using static IMRT
title_short Evaluating the sensitivity of Halcyon’s automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: A phantom study using static IMRT
title_sort evaluating the sensitivity of halcyon’s automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: a phantom study using static imrt
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6839375/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31587477
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12749
work_keys_str_mv AT rayxenia evaluatingthesensitivityofhalcyonsautomatictransitimageacquisitionfortreatmenterrordetectionaphantomstudyusingstaticimrt
AT bojechkocasey evaluatingthesensitivityofhalcyonsautomatictransitimageacquisitionfortreatmenterrordetectionaphantomstudyusingstaticimrt
AT moorekevinl evaluatingthesensitivityofhalcyonsautomatictransitimageacquisitionfortreatmenterrordetectionaphantomstudyusingstaticimrt