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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |