Validation of a GPU-Based 3D dose calculator for modulated beams

被引:13
作者
Ahmed, Saeed [1 ,2 ]
Hunt, Dylan [2 ]
Kapatoes, Jeff [3 ]
Hayward, Robert [3 ]
Zhang, Geoffrey [2 ]
Moros, Eduardo G. [2 ]
Feygelman, Vladimir [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ S Florida, Dept Phys, Tampa, FL 33620 USA
[2] H Lee Moffitt Canc Ctr & Res Inst, Dept Radiat Oncol, Tampa, FL USA
[3] Sun Nucl Corp, Melbourne, FL USA
关键词
convolution/superposition; dose calculations; GPU-accelerated calculations; segmented beams; QUALITY-ASSURANCE;
D O I
10.1002/acm2.12074
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
A superposition/convolution GPU-accelerated dose computation algorithm (the Calculator) has been recently incorporated into commercial software. The algorithm requires validation prior to clinical use. Three photon energies were examined: conventional 6 MV and 15 MV, and 10 MV flattening filter free (10 MVFFF). For a set of IMRT and VMAT plans based on four of the five AAPM Practice Guideline 5a downloadable datasets, ion chamber (IC) measurements were performed on the water-equivalent phantoms. The average difference between the Calculator and IC was -0.3 +/- 0.8% (1SD). The same plans were projected on a phantom containing a biplanar diode array. We used the forthcoming criteria for routine gamma analysis, 3% dose-error (global (G) normalization, 2 mm distance to agreement, and 10% low dose cutoff). The c (3% G/2 mm) average passing rate was 98.9 +/- 2.1%. Measurement-guided three-dimensional dose reconstruction on the patient CT dataset (excluding the Lung) resulted in a similar average agreement rate with the Calculator: 98.2 +/- 2.0%. The mean c (3% G/2 mm) passing rate comparing the Calculator to the TPS (again excluding the Lung) was 99.0 +/- 1.0%. Because of the significant inhomogeneity, the Lung case was investigated separately. The calculator has an alternate heterogeneity correction mode that can change the results in the thorax for higher-energy beams (15 MV). As this correction is nonphysical and was optimized for simple slab geometries, its application leads to mixed results when compared to the TPS and independent Monte Carlo calculations, depending on the CT dataset and the plan. The Calculator vs. TPS 15 MV Guideline 5a IMRT and VMAT plans demonstrate 96.3% and 93.4% c (3% G/2 mm) passing rates respectively. For the lower energies, which should be predominantly used in the thoracic region, the passing rates for the same plans and criteria range from 98.6 to 100%. Overall, the Calculator accuracy is sufficient for the intended use.
引用
收藏
页码:73 / 82
页数:10
相关论文
共 7 条
[1]   Testing of dynamic multileaf collimation [J].
Chui, CS ;
Spirou, S ;
LoSasso, T .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1996, 23 (05) :635-641
[2]   An EPID based method for efficient and precise asymmetric jaw alignment quality assurance [J].
Clews, Luke ;
Greer, Peter B. .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (12) :5488-5496
[3]   Evaluation of the Machine Performance Check application for TrueBeam Linac [J].
Clivio, Alessandro ;
Vanetti, Eugenio ;
Rose, Steven ;
Nicolini, Giorgia ;
Belosi, Maria F. ;
Cozzi, Luca ;
Baltes, Christof ;
Fogliata, Antonella .
RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2015, 10
[4]   Investigation of an amorphous silicon EPID for measurement and quality assurance of enhanced dynamic wedge [J].
Greer, Peter B. ;
Barnes, Michael P. .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2007, 52 (04) :1075-1087
[5]   Task Group 142 report: Quality assurance of medical accelerators [J].
Klein, Eric E. ;
Hanley, Joseph ;
Bayouth, John ;
Yin, Fang-Fang ;
Simon, William ;
Dresser, Sean ;
Serago, Christopher ;
Aguirre, Francisco ;
Ma, Lijun ;
Arjomandy, Bijan ;
Liu, Chihray ;
Sandin, Carlos ;
Holmes, Todd .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (09) :4197-4212
[6]   EPID-based verification of the MLC performance for dynamic IMRT and VMAT [J].
Rowshanfarzad, Pejman ;
Sabet, Mahsheed ;
Barnes, Michael P. ;
O'Connor, Daryl J. ;
Greer, Peter B. .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (10) :6192-6207
[7]  
Varian Medical Systems, 2013, MACH PERF CHECK REF