Improvements in dose accuracy delivered with static-MLC IMRT on an integrated linear accelerator control system

被引:11
作者
Li, Ji [1 ]
Wiersma, Rodney D. [1 ]
Stepaniak, Christopher J. [1 ]
Farrey, Karl J. [1 ]
Al-Hallaq, Hania A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Chicago, Dept Radiat & Cellular Oncol, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
关键词
TrueBeam; intensity modulated radiotherapy; step-and-shoot; over shoot; dose rate dependence; BEAMS; LIMITATIONS; DOSIMETRY; PHOTON; MOTION;
D O I
10.1118/1.3701778
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
Purpose: Dose accuracy has been shown to vary with dose per segment and dose rate when delivered with static multileaf collimator (SMLC) intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) by Varian C-series MLC controllers. The authors investigated the impact of monitor units (MUs) per segment and dose rate on the dose delivery accuracy of SMLC-IMRT fields on a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator (LINAC), which delivers dose and manages motion of all components using a single integrated controller. Methods: An SMLC sequence was created consisting of ten identical 10 x 10 cm(2) segments with identical MUs. Beam holding between segments was achieved by moving one out-of-field MLC leaf pair. Measurements were repeated for various combinations of MU/segment ranging from 1 to 40 and dose rates of 100-600 MU/min for a 6 MV photon beam (6X) and dose rates of 800-2400 MU/min for a 10 MV flattening-filter free photon (10XFFF) beam. All measurements were made with a Farmer (0.6 cm(3)) ionization chamber placed at the isocenter in a solid-water phantom at 10 cm depth. The measurements were performed on two Varian LINACs: C-series Trilogy and TrueBeam. Each sequence was delivered three times and the dose readings for the corresponding segments were averaged. The effects of MU/segment, dose rate, and LINAC type on the relative dose variation (Delta(i)) were compared using F-tests (alpha = 0.05). Results: On the Trilogy, large Delta(i) was observed in small MU segments: at 1 MU/segment, the maximum Delta(i) was 10.1% and 57.9% at 100 MU/min and 600 MU/min, respectively. Also, the first segment of each sequence consistently overshot (Delta(i) > 0), while the last segment consistently undershot (Delta(i) < 0). On the TrueBeam, at 1 MU/segment, Delta(i) ranged from 3.0% to 4.5% at 100 and 600 MU/min; no obvious overshoot/undershoot trend was observed. F-tests showed statistically significant difference [(1 - beta) =1.0000] between the Trilogy and the TrueBeam up to 10 MU/segment, at all dose rates greater than 100 MU/min. The linear trend of decreasing dose accuracy as a function of increasing dose rate on the Trilogy is no longer apparent on TrueBeam, even for dose rates as high as 2400 MU/min. Dose inaccuracy averaged over all ten segments in each beam delivery sequence was larger for Trilogy than TrueBeam, with the largest discrepancy (0.2% vs 3%) occurring for 1 MU/segment beams at both 300 and 600 MU/min. Conclusions: Earlier generations of Varian LINACs exhibited large dose variations for small MU segments in SMLC-IMRT delivery. Our results confirmed these findings. The dose delivery accuracy for SMLC-IMRT is significantly improved on TrueBeam compared to Trilogy for every combination of low MU/segment (1-10) and high dose rate (200-600 MU/min), in part due to the faster sampling rate (100 vs 20 Hz) and enhanced electronic integration of the MLC controller with the LINAC. SMLC-IMRT can be implemented on TrueBeam with higher dose accuracy per beam (+/- 0.2% vs +/- 3%) than previous generations of Varian C-series LINACs for 1 MU/segment delivered at 600 MU/min). (C) 2012 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.3701778]
引用
收藏
页码:2456 / 2462
页数:7
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]   AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams [J].
Almond, PR ;
Biggs, PJ ;
Coursey, BM ;
Hanson, WF ;
Huq, MS ;
Nath, R ;
Rogers, DWO .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1999, 26 (09) :1847-1870
[2]  
Ezzell G A, 2001, J Appl Clin Med Phys, V2, P138, DOI 10.1120/1.1386508
[3]   Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses [J].
Faul, Franz ;
Erdfelder, Edgar ;
Buchner, Axel ;
Lang, Albert-Georg .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2009, 41 (04) :1149-1160
[4]   Dosimetry limitations and a dose correction methodology for step-and-shoot IMRT [J].
Grigorov, GN ;
Chow, JCL ;
Barnett, RB .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2006, 51 (03) :637-652
[5]   Dosimetric characteristics of linear accelerator photon beams with small monitor unit settings [J].
Kang, Sei-Kwon ;
Cheong, Kwang-Ho ;
Hwang, Taejin ;
Cho, Byung Chul ;
Kim, Su SSan ;
Kim, Kyoung Ju ;
Oh, Do Hoon ;
Bae, Hoonsik ;
Suh, Tae-Suk .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2008, 35 (11) :5172-5178
[6]   The management of respiratory motion in radiation oncology report of AAPM Task Group 76 [J].
Keall, Paul J. ;
Mageras, Gig S. ;
Balter, James M. ;
Emery, Richard S. ;
Forster, Kenneth M. ;
Jiang, Steve B. ;
Kapatoes, Jeffrey M. ;
Low, Daniel A. ;
Murphy, Martin J. ;
Murray, Brad R. ;
Ramsey, Chester R. ;
Van Herk, Marcel B. ;
Vedam, S. Sastry ;
Wong, John W. ;
Yorke, Ellen .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2006, 33 (10) :3874-3900
[7]   Deep inspiration breath hold and respiratory gating strategies for reducing organ motion in radiation treatment [J].
Mageras, GS ;
Yorke, E .
SEMINARS IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2004, 14 (01) :65-75
[8]   Dynamic MLC leaf sequencing for integrated linear accelerator control systems [J].
Popple, Richard A. ;
Brezovich, Ivan A. .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (11) :6039-6045
[9]  
Snedecor G., 1989, Statistical Methods, V8
[10]   Examination of geometric and dosimetric accuracies of gated step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy [J].
Wiersma, R. D. ;
Xing, L. .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2007, 34 (10) :3962-3970