Cargando…

Model refinement increases confidence levels and clinical agreement when commissioning a three‐dimensional secondary dose calculation system

PURPOSE: Evaluate custom beam models for a second check dose calculation system using statistically verifiable passing criteria for film analysis, DVH, and 3D gamma metrics. METHODS: Custom beam models for nine linear accelerators for the Sun Nuclear Dose Calculator algorithm (SDC, Sun Nuclear) were...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bismack, Brian, Dolan, Jennifer, Laugeman, Eric, Gopal, Anant, Wen, Ning, Chetty, Indrin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9194992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35389554
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13590
_version_ 1784726867786334208
author Bismack, Brian
Dolan, Jennifer
Laugeman, Eric
Gopal, Anant
Wen, Ning
Chetty, Indrin
author_facet Bismack, Brian
Dolan, Jennifer
Laugeman, Eric
Gopal, Anant
Wen, Ning
Chetty, Indrin
author_sort Bismack, Brian
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Evaluate custom beam models for a second check dose calculation system using statistically verifiable passing criteria for film analysis, DVH, and 3D gamma metrics. METHODS: Custom beam models for nine linear accelerators for the Sun Nuclear Dose Calculator algorithm (SDC, Sun Nuclear) were evaluated using the AAPM‐TG119 test suite (5 Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) and 5 Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans) and a set of clinical plans. Where deemed necessary, adjustments to Multileaf Collimator (MLC) parameters were made to improve results. Comparisons to the Analytic Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA), and gafchromic film measurements were performed. Confidence intervals were set to 95% per TG‐119. Film gamma criteria were 3%/3 mm (conventional beams) or 3%/1 mm (Stereotactic Radiosurgery [SRS] beams). Dose distributions in solid water phantom were evaluated based on DVH metrics (e.g., D95, V20) and 3D gamma criteria (3%/3 mm or 3%/1 mm). Film passing rates, 3D gamma passing rates, and DVH metrics were reported for HD MLC machines and Millennium MLC Machines. RESULTS: For HD MLC machines, SDC gamma film agreement was 98.76% ± 2.30% (5.74% CL) for 6FFF/6srs (3%/1 mm), and 99.80% ± 0.32% (0.83% CL) for 6x (3%/3 mm). For Millennium MLC machines, film passing rates were 98.20% ± 3.14% (7.96% CL), 99.52% ± 1.14% (2.71% CL), and 99.69% ± 0.82% (1.91% CL) for 6FFF, 6x, and 10x, respectively. For SDC to AAA comparisons: HD MLC Linear Accelerators (LINACs); DVH point agreement was 0.97% ± 1.64% (4.18% CL) and 1.05% ± 2.12% (5.20% CL); 3D gamma agreement was 99.97% ± 0.14% (0.30% CL) and 100.00% ± 0.02% (0.05% CL), for 6FFF/6srs and 6x, respectively; Millennium MLC LINACs: DVH point agreement was 0.77% ± 2.40% (5.47% CL), 0.80% ± 3.40% (7.47% CL), and 0.07% ± 2.15% (4.30% CL); 3D gamma agreement was 99.97% ± 0.13% (0.29% CL), 99.97% ± 0.17% (0.36% CL), and 99.99% ± 0.06% (0.12% CL) for 6FFF, 6x, and 10x, respectively. CONCLUSION: SDC shows agreement well within TG119 CLs for film and redundant dose calculation comparisons with AAA. In some models (SRS), this was achieved using stricter criteria. TG119 plans can be used to help guide model adjustments and to establish clinical baselines for DVH and 3D gamma criteria.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9194992
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91949922022-06-21 Model refinement increases confidence levels and clinical agreement when commissioning a three‐dimensional secondary dose calculation system Bismack, Brian Dolan, Jennifer Laugeman, Eric Gopal, Anant Wen, Ning Chetty, Indrin J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: Evaluate custom beam models for a second check dose calculation system using statistically verifiable passing criteria for film analysis, DVH, and 3D gamma metrics. METHODS: Custom beam models for nine linear accelerators for the Sun Nuclear Dose Calculator algorithm (SDC, Sun Nuclear) were evaluated using the AAPM‐TG119 test suite (5 Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) and 5 Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans) and a set of clinical plans. Where deemed necessary, adjustments to Multileaf Collimator (MLC) parameters were made to improve results. Comparisons to the Analytic Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA), and gafchromic film measurements were performed. Confidence intervals were set to 95% per TG‐119. Film gamma criteria were 3%/3 mm (conventional beams) or 3%/1 mm (Stereotactic Radiosurgery [SRS] beams). Dose distributions in solid water phantom were evaluated based on DVH metrics (e.g., D95, V20) and 3D gamma criteria (3%/3 mm or 3%/1 mm). Film passing rates, 3D gamma passing rates, and DVH metrics were reported for HD MLC machines and Millennium MLC Machines. RESULTS: For HD MLC machines, SDC gamma film agreement was 98.76% ± 2.30% (5.74% CL) for 6FFF/6srs (3%/1 mm), and 99.80% ± 0.32% (0.83% CL) for 6x (3%/3 mm). For Millennium MLC machines, film passing rates were 98.20% ± 3.14% (7.96% CL), 99.52% ± 1.14% (2.71% CL), and 99.69% ± 0.82% (1.91% CL) for 6FFF, 6x, and 10x, respectively. For SDC to AAA comparisons: HD MLC Linear Accelerators (LINACs); DVH point agreement was 0.97% ± 1.64% (4.18% CL) and 1.05% ± 2.12% (5.20% CL); 3D gamma agreement was 99.97% ± 0.14% (0.30% CL) and 100.00% ± 0.02% (0.05% CL), for 6FFF/6srs and 6x, respectively; Millennium MLC LINACs: DVH point agreement was 0.77% ± 2.40% (5.47% CL), 0.80% ± 3.40% (7.47% CL), and 0.07% ± 2.15% (4.30% CL); 3D gamma agreement was 99.97% ± 0.13% (0.29% CL), 99.97% ± 0.17% (0.36% CL), and 99.99% ± 0.06% (0.12% CL) for 6FFF, 6x, and 10x, respectively. CONCLUSION: SDC shows agreement well within TG119 CLs for film and redundant dose calculation comparisons with AAA. In some models (SRS), this was achieved using stricter criteria. TG119 plans can be used to help guide model adjustments and to establish clinical baselines for DVH and 3D gamma criteria. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9194992/ /pubmed/35389554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13590 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://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
Bismack, Brian
Dolan, Jennifer
Laugeman, Eric
Gopal, Anant
Wen, Ning
Chetty, Indrin
Model refinement increases confidence levels and clinical agreement when commissioning a three‐dimensional secondary dose calculation system
title Model refinement increases confidence levels and clinical agreement when commissioning a three‐dimensional secondary dose calculation system
title_full Model refinement increases confidence levels and clinical agreement when commissioning a three‐dimensional secondary dose calculation system
title_fullStr Model refinement increases confidence levels and clinical agreement when commissioning a three‐dimensional secondary dose calculation system
title_full_unstemmed Model refinement increases confidence levels and clinical agreement when commissioning a three‐dimensional secondary dose calculation system
title_short Model refinement increases confidence levels and clinical agreement when commissioning a three‐dimensional secondary dose calculation system
title_sort model refinement increases confidence levels and clinical agreement when commissioning a three‐dimensional secondary dose calculation system
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9194992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35389554
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13590
work_keys_str_mv AT bismackbrian modelrefinementincreasesconfidencelevelsandclinicalagreementwhencommissioningathreedimensionalsecondarydosecalculationsystem
AT dolanjennifer modelrefinementincreasesconfidencelevelsandclinicalagreementwhencommissioningathreedimensionalsecondarydosecalculationsystem
AT laugemaneric modelrefinementincreasesconfidencelevelsandclinicalagreementwhencommissioningathreedimensionalsecondarydosecalculationsystem
AT gopalanant modelrefinementincreasesconfidencelevelsandclinicalagreementwhencommissioningathreedimensionalsecondarydosecalculationsystem
AT wenning modelrefinementincreasesconfidencelevelsandclinicalagreementwhencommissioningathreedimensionalsecondarydosecalculationsystem
AT chettyindrin modelrefinementincreasesconfidencelevelsandclinicalagreementwhencommissioningathreedimensionalsecondarydosecalculationsystem