Commissioning and dosimetric validation of a novel compensator-based Co-60 IMRT system for evaluating suitability to automated treatment planning

被引:2
作者
Oh, Kyuhak [1 ,2 ]
Sengupta, Bishwambhar [1 ]
Olanrewaju, Adenike [2 ]
Zhang, Lifei [2 ]
Nair, Sajeesh S. [3 ]
Mani, Tamilarasan [4 ]
Palanisamy, Manikandan [4 ]
KanduKuri, UdayKumar S. [4 ]
Netherton, Tucker J. [2 ]
Cardenas, Carlos E. [5 ]
Court, Laurence E. [2 ]
Ford, Eric C. [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Washington, Dept Radiat Oncol, Med Ctr, Seattle, WA USA
[2] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Phys, Div Radiat Oncol, Houston, TX USA
[3] Gen Hosp, Ernakulam, Kerala, India
[4] Panacea Med Technol Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
[5] Univ Alabama Birmingham, Dept Radiat Oncol, Birmingham, AL USA
[6] Univ Washington, Dept Radiat Oncol, Med Ctr, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
cobalt-60; compensator; head and neck cancer; IMRT; treatment planning; MODULATED RADIATION-THERAPY; CERROBEND COMPENSATOR; BRASS COMPENSATOR; TREATMENT PLANS; TELETHERAPY; RADIOTHERAPY; QUALITY; COBALT; LINAC; HEAD;
D O I
10.1002/mp.16423
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PurposeA novel compensator-based system has been proposed which delivers intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with cobalt-60 beams. This could improve access to advanced radiotherapy in low- and middle-income countries. For this system to be clinically viable and to be adapted into the Radiation Planning Assistant (RPA), being developed to offer automated planning services in low- and middle-income countries, it is necessary to commission and validate it in a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). MethodsThe novel treatment device considered here employs a cobalt-60 source and nine compensators. Each compensator is produced by 3-D printing a thin plastic mold which is then filled on-demand within the machine with reusable 2-mm-diameter spherical tungsten balls. This system was commissioned in the Eclipse TPS and validation tests were conducted with Monte Carlo using Geant4 Application for Tomographic Emission for percentage depth dose, in-plane profiles, penumbra, and IMRT dose validation. And the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 119 benchmarking testing was performed. Additionally, compensator-based cobalt-60 IMRT plans were created for 46 head-and-neck cancer cases and compared to the linac-based volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans used clinically, then dosimetric parameters were evaluated. Beam-on time for each field was calculated. In addition, the measurement was also performed in a limited environment and compared with the Monte Carlo simulations. ResultsThe differences in percent depth doses and in-plane profiles between the Eclipse and Monte Carlo simulations were 0.65% +/- 0.41% and 1.02% +/- 0.99%, respectively, and the 80%-20% penumbra agreed within 0.46 +/- 0.27 mm. For the Task Group 119 validation plans, all treatment planning goals were met and gamma passing rates were >95% (3%/3 mm criteria). In 46 clinical head-and-neck cases, the cobalt-60 compensator-based IMRT plans had planning target volume (PTV) coverages similar to linac-based VMAT plans: all dosimetric values for PTV were within 1.5%. The organs at risk dose parameters were somewhat higher in cobalt-60 compensator-based IMRT plans versus linac-based VMAT plans. The mean dose differences for the spinal cord, brain, and brainstem were 4.43 +/- 1.92, 3.39 +/- 4.67, and 2.40 +/- 3.71 Gy, while those for the rest of the organs were <1 Gy. The average beam-on time per field was 0.42 +/- 0.10 min for the 6 MV multi-leaf-collimator plans while those for the cobalt-60 compensator plans were 0.17 +/- 0.01 and 0.31 +/- 0.01 min at the dose rates of 350 and 175 cGy/min. There was a good agreement between in-plane profiles from measurements and Monte Carlo simulations, which differences are 1.34 +/- 1.90% and 0.13 +/- 2.16% for two different fields. ConclusionsA novel compensator-based IMRT system using cobalt-60 beams was commissioned and validated in a commercial TPS. Plan quality with this system was comparable to that of linac-based plans in all test cases with shorter estimated beam-on times. This system enables reliable, high-quality plans with reduced cost and complexity and may have benefits for underserved regions of the world. This system is being integrated into the RPA, a web-based platform for auto-contouring and auto-planning.
引用
收藏
页码:4466 / 4479
页数:14
相关论文
共 51 条
  • [1] A comparison between cobalt and linear accelerator-based treatment plans for conformal and intensity-modulated radiotherapy
    Adams, E. J.
    Warrington, A. P.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2008, 81 (964) : 304 - 310
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2022, New World Bank country classifications by income level: 2022-2023
  • [3] Expanding global access to radiotherapy
    Atun, Rifat
    Jaffray, David A.
    Barton, Michael B.
    Bray, Freddie
    Baumann, Michael
    Vikram, Bhadrasain
    Hanna, Timothy P.
    Knaul, Felicia M.
    Lievens, Yolande
    Lui, Tracey Y. M.
    Milosevic, Michael
    O'Sullivan, Brian
    Rodin, Danielle L.
    Rosenblatt, Eduardo
    Van Dyk, Jacob
    Yap, Mei Ling
    Zubizarreta, Eduardo
    Gospodarowicz, Mary
    [J]. LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2015, 16 (10) : 1153 - 1186
  • [4] Challenges and Prospects for Providing Radiation Oncology Services in Africa
    Balogun, Onyinye
    Rodin, Danielle
    Ngwa, Wilfred
    Grover, Surbhi
    Longo, John
    [J]. SEMINARS IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2017, 27 (02) : 184 - 188
  • [5] Linear attenuation coefficients for compensator based imrt
    Bartrum, T.
    Bailey, M.
    Nelson, V.
    Grace, M.
    [J]. AUSTRALASIAN PHYSICAL & ENGINEERING SCIENCES IN MEDICINE, 2007, 30 (04) : 281 - 287
  • [6] Ben Prajogi G., 2019, APPL RAD ONCOL, V8, P10
  • [7] Revisiting the dose constraints for head and neck OARs in the current era of IMRT
    Brodin, N. Patrik
    Tome, Wolfgang A.
    [J]. ORAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 86 : 8 - 18
  • [8] Chang Sha X, 2004, J Appl Clin Med Phys, V5, P15, DOI 10.1120/jacmp.2021.25274
  • [9] Quality of tri-Co-60 MR-IGRT treatment plans in comparison with VMAT treatment plans for spine SABR
    Choi, Chang Heon
    Park, So-Yeon
    Kim, Jung-In
    Kim, Jin Ho
    Kim, Kyubo
    Carlson, Joel
    Park, Jong Min
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2017, 90 (1070)
  • [10] Radiation Planning Assistant - A Streamlined, Fully Automated Radiotherapy Treatment Planning System
    Court, Laurence E.
    Kisling, Kelly
    McCarroll, Rachel
    Zhang, Lifei
    Yang, Jinzhong
    Simonds, Hannah
    du Toit, Monique
    Trauernicht, Chris
    Burger, Hester
    Parkes, Jeannette
    Mejia, Mike
    Bojador, Maureen
    Balter, Peter
    Branco, Daniela
    Steinmann, Angela
    Baltz, Garrett
    Gay, Skylar
    Anderson, Brian
    Cardenas, Carlos
    Jhingran, Anuja
    Shaitelman, Simona
    Bogler, Oliver
    Schmeller, Kathleen
    Followill, David
    Howell, Rebecca
    Nelson, Christopher
    Peterson, Christine
    Beadle, Beth
    [J]. JOVE-JOURNAL OF VISUALIZED EXPERIMENTS, 2018, (134):