Cargando…
Long‐term experience of MPC across multiple TrueBeam linacs: MPC concordance with conventional QC and sensitivity to real‐world faults
Machine Performance Check (MPC) is an automated Quality Control (QC) tool that is integrated into the TrueBeam and Halcyon linear accelerators (Linacs), utilizing the imaging systems to verify the Linac beam and geometry. This work compares the concordance of daily MPC results with conventional QC t...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7484877/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32790139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12950 |
_version_ | 1783581062858801152 |
---|---|
author | Pearson, Michael Eaton, David Greener, Tony |
author_facet | Pearson, Michael Eaton, David Greener, Tony |
author_sort | Pearson, Michael |
collection | PubMed |
description | Machine Performance Check (MPC) is an automated Quality Control (QC) tool that is integrated into the TrueBeam and Halcyon linear accelerators (Linacs), utilizing the imaging systems to verify the Linac beam and geometry. This work compares the concordance of daily MPC results with conventional QC tests over a 3‐year period for eight Linacs in order to assess the sensitivity of MPC in detecting faults. The MPC output measurements were compared with the monthly ionization chamber measurements for 6 and 10 MV photon beams and 6, 9, 12, 16, and 18 MeV electron beams. All 6 MV Beam and Geometry (6MVBG) MPC test failures were analyzed to determine the failure rate and the number of true and false negative results, using the conventional QC record as the reference. The concordance between conventional QC test failures and MPC test failures was investigated. The mean agreement across 1933 MPC output and monthly comparison chamber measurements for all beam energies was 0.2%, with 97.8% within 1.5%, and a maximum difference of 2.9%. Of the 5000–6000 MPC individual test parameter results for the 6MVBG test, the highest failure rate was BeamOutputChange (0.5%), then BeamCenterShift (0.3%), and was ≤ 0.1% for the remaining parameters. There were 50 true negative and 27 false negative out of tolerance MPC results, with false negatives resolved by repeating MPC or by independent measurement. The analysis of conventional QC failures demonstrated that MPC detected all failures, except occasions when MPC reported output within tolerance, a result of the MPC–chamber response variation. The variation in MPC output versus chamber measurement indicates MPC is appropriate for daily output constancy but not for the measurement of absolute output. The comparison of the 6MVBG results and conventional records provides evidence that MPC is a sensitive method of performing beam and mechanical checks in a clinical setting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7484877 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74848772020-09-17 Long‐term experience of MPC across multiple TrueBeam linacs: MPC concordance with conventional QC and sensitivity to real‐world faults Pearson, Michael Eaton, David Greener, Tony J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics Machine Performance Check (MPC) is an automated Quality Control (QC) tool that is integrated into the TrueBeam and Halcyon linear accelerators (Linacs), utilizing the imaging systems to verify the Linac beam and geometry. This work compares the concordance of daily MPC results with conventional QC tests over a 3‐year period for eight Linacs in order to assess the sensitivity of MPC in detecting faults. The MPC output measurements were compared with the monthly ionization chamber measurements for 6 and 10 MV photon beams and 6, 9, 12, 16, and 18 MeV electron beams. All 6 MV Beam and Geometry (6MVBG) MPC test failures were analyzed to determine the failure rate and the number of true and false negative results, using the conventional QC record as the reference. The concordance between conventional QC test failures and MPC test failures was investigated. The mean agreement across 1933 MPC output and monthly comparison chamber measurements for all beam energies was 0.2%, with 97.8% within 1.5%, and a maximum difference of 2.9%. Of the 5000–6000 MPC individual test parameter results for the 6MVBG test, the highest failure rate was BeamOutputChange (0.5%), then BeamCenterShift (0.3%), and was ≤ 0.1% for the remaining parameters. There were 50 true negative and 27 false negative out of tolerance MPC results, with false negatives resolved by repeating MPC or by independent measurement. The analysis of conventional QC failures demonstrated that MPC detected all failures, except occasions when MPC reported output within tolerance, a result of the MPC–chamber response variation. The variation in MPC output versus chamber measurement indicates MPC is appropriate for daily output constancy but not for the measurement of absolute output. The comparison of the 6MVBG results and conventional records provides evidence that MPC is a sensitive method of performing beam and mechanical checks in a clinical setting. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-08-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7484877/ /pubmed/32790139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12950 Text en © 2020 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 Pearson, Michael Eaton, David Greener, Tony Long‐term experience of MPC across multiple TrueBeam linacs: MPC concordance with conventional QC and sensitivity to real‐world faults |
title | Long‐term experience of MPC across multiple TrueBeam linacs: MPC concordance with conventional QC and sensitivity to real‐world faults |
title_full | Long‐term experience of MPC across multiple TrueBeam linacs: MPC concordance with conventional QC and sensitivity to real‐world faults |
title_fullStr | Long‐term experience of MPC across multiple TrueBeam linacs: MPC concordance with conventional QC and sensitivity to real‐world faults |
title_full_unstemmed | Long‐term experience of MPC across multiple TrueBeam linacs: MPC concordance with conventional QC and sensitivity to real‐world faults |
title_short | Long‐term experience of MPC across multiple TrueBeam linacs: MPC concordance with conventional QC and sensitivity to real‐world faults |
title_sort | long‐term experience of mpc across multiple truebeam linacs: mpc concordance with conventional qc and sensitivity to real‐world faults |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7484877/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32790139 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12950 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pearsonmichael longtermexperienceofmpcacrossmultipletruebeamlinacsmpcconcordancewithconventionalqcandsensitivitytorealworldfaults AT eatondavid longtermexperienceofmpcacrossmultipletruebeamlinacsmpcconcordancewithconventionalqcandsensitivitytorealworldfaults AT greenertony longtermexperienceofmpcacrossmultipletruebeamlinacsmpcconcordancewithconventionalqcandsensitivitytorealworldfaults |