Verification of stereotactic radiosurgery plans for multiple brain metastases using a virtual phantom-based procedure.

Background: The purpose of this study was to describe the use of the VIPER software for patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) of single-isocenter multitarget (SIMT) stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plans. Materials and methods: Twenty clinical of intensity-modulated (IMRT) SIMT SRS plans were reviewed. A total of 88 brain metastases were included. Number of lesions per plan and their individual volumes ranged from 2 to 35 and from 0.03 to 32.8 cm3, respectively. Plans were designed with the Eclipse system, and delivered using a Varian CLINAC linac. SRS technique consisted of non-coplanar static-field sliding-window IMRT. Each plan was mapped onto a virtual cylindrical water phantom (VCP) in the Eclipse to calculate a 3D dose distribution (verification plan). The VIPER software reconstructed the 3D dose distribution inside the VCP from the acquired in-air electronic portal image device (EPID) images of the treatment fields. A 3D gamma analysis was used to compare the reconstructed doses to the Eclipse planned doses on the VCP. Gamma passing rates (GPRs) were calculated using 3% global/2 mm criteria and dose thresholds ranged from 10% to 90% of the maximum dose. Results: The averages (± 1 SD) of the 3D GPRs over the 20 SRS plans were: 99.9 ± 0.2%, 99.7 ± 0.3%, 99.6 ± 0.5%, 99.3 ± 0.9%,99.1 ± 1.6%, 99.0 ± 1.6%, and 98.5 ± 3.3%, for dose thresholds of 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%, 70%, 80% and 90% respectively. Conclusions: This work shows the feasibility of the VIPER software for PSQA of SIMT SRS plans, being a reliable alternative to commercially available 2D detector arrays.

Diagnosis of transition zone prostate cancer by multiparametric MRI: added value of MR spectroscopic imaging with sLASER volume selection.

BACKGROUND: Current multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI) in routine clinical practice has poor-to-moderate diagnostic performance for transition zone prostate cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential diagnostic performance of novel 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) using a semi-localized adiabatic selective refocusing (sLASER) sequence with gradient offset independent adiabaticity (GOIA) pulses in addition to the routine mp-MRI, including T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and quantitative dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) for transition zone prostate cancer detection, localization and grading. METHODS: Forty-one transition zone prostate cancer patients underwent mp-MRI with an external phased-array coil. Normal and cancer regions were delineated by two radiologists and divided into low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk categories based on TRUS guided biopsy results. Support vector machine models were built using different clinically applicable combinations of T2WI, DWI, DCE, and MRSI. The diagnostic performance of each model in cancer detection was evaluated using the area under curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic diagram. Then accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of each model were calculated. Furthermore, the correlation of mp-MRI parameters with low-risk, intermediate-risk and high-risk cancers were calculated using the Spearman correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The addition of MRSI to T2WI + DWI and T2WI + DWI + DCE improved the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for cancer detection. The best performance was achieved with T2WI + DWI + MRSI where the addition of MRSI improved the AUC, accuracy, sensitivity and specificity from 0.86 to 0.99, 0.83 to 0.96, 0.80 to 0.95, and 0.85 to 0.97 respectively. The (choline + spermine + creatine)/citrate ratio of MRSI showed the highest correlation with cancer risk groups (r = 0.64, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The inclusion of GOIA-sLASER MRSI into conventional mp-MRI significantly improves the diagnostic accuracy of the detection and aggressiveness assessment of transition zone prostate cancer.

A novel quality assurance procedure for trajectory log validation using phantom-less real-time latency corrected EPID images.

The use of trajectory log files for routine patient quality assurance is gaining acceptance. Such use requires the validation of the trajectory log itself. However, the accurate localization of a multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf while it is in motion remains a challenging task. We propose an efficient phantom-less technique using the EPID to verify the dynamic MLC positions with high accuracy. Measurements were made on four Varian TrueBeams equipped with M120 MLCs. Two machines were equipped with the S1000 EPID; two were equipped with the S1200 EPID. All EPIDs were geometrically corrected prior to measurements. Dosimetry mode EPID measurements were captured by a frame grabber card directly linked to the linac. All leaf position measurements were corrected both temporally and geometrically. The readout latency of each panel, as a function of pixel row, was determined using a 40 × 1.0 cm2 sliding window (SW) field moving at 2.5 cm/s orthogonal to the row readout direction. The latency of each panel type was determined by averaging the results of two panels of the same type. Geometric correction was achieved by computing leaf positions with respect to the projected isocenter position as a function of gantry angle. This was determined by averaging the central axis position of fields at two collimator positions of 90° and 270°. The radiological to physical leaf end position was determined by comparison of the measured gap with that determined using a feeler gauge. The radiological to physical leaf position difference was found to be 0.1 mm. With geometric and latency correction, the proposed method was found to be improve the ability to detect dynamic MLC positions from 1.0 to 0.2 mm for all leaves. Latency and panel residual geometric error correction improve EPID-based MLC position measurement. These improvements provide for the first time a trajectory log QA procedure.

Validation of virtual water phantom software for pre-treatment verification of single-isocenter multiple-target stereotactic radiosurgery.

The aim of this study was to benchmark the accuracy of the VIrtual Phantom Epid dose Reconstruction (VIPER) software for pre-treatment dosimetric verification of multiple-target stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). VIPER is an EPID-based method to reconstruct a 3D dose distribution in a virtual phantom from in-air portal images. Validation of the VIPER dose calculation was assessed using several MLC-defined fields for a 6 MV photon beam. Central axis percent depth doses (PDDs) and output factors were measured with an ionization chamber in a water tank, while dose planes at a depth of 10 cm in a solid flat phantom were acquired with radiochromic films. The accuracy of VIPER for multiple-target SRS plan verification was benchmarked against Monte Carlo simulations. Eighteen multiple-target SRS plans designed with the Eclipse treatment planning system were mapped to a cylindrical water phantom. For each plan, the 3D dose distribution reconstructed by VIPER within the phantom was compared with the Monte Carlo simulation, using a 3D gamma analysis. Dose differences (VIPER vs. measurements) generally within 2% were found for the MLC-defined fields, while film dosimetry revealed gamma passing rates (GPRs) ≥95% for a 3%/1 mm criteria. For the 18 multiple-target SRS plans, average 3D GPRs greater than 93% and 98% for the 3%/2 mm and 5%/2 mm criteria, respectively. Our results validate the use of VIPER as a dosimetric verification tool for pre-treatment QA of single-isocenter multiple-target SRS plans. The method requires no setup time on the linac and results in an accurate 3D characterization of the delivered dose.

Voxel-based supervised machine learning of peripheral zone prostate cancer using noncontrast multiparametric MRI.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop and assess the performance of supervised machine learning technique to classify magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) voxels as cancerous or noncancerous using noncontrast multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI), comprised of T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and advanced diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this work, 191 radiomic features were extracted from mp-MRI from prostate cancer patients. A comprehensive set of support vector machine (SVM) models for T2WI and mp-MRI (T2WI + DWI, T2WI + DTI, and T2WI + DWI + DTI) were developed based on novel Bayesian parameters optimization method and validated using leave-one-patient-out approach to eliminate any possible overfitting. The diagnostic performance of each model was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The average sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the models were evaluated using the test data set and the corresponding binary maps generated. Finally, the SVM plus sigmoid function of the models with the highest performance were used to produce cancer probability maps. RESULTS: The T2WI + DWI + DTI models using the optimal feature subset achieved the best performance in prostate cancer detection, with the average AUROC , sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.93 ± 0.03, 0.85 ± 0.05, 0.82 ± 0.07, and 0.83 ± 0.04, respectively. The average diagnostic performance of T2WI + DTI models was slightly higher than T2WI + DWI models (+3.52%) using the optimal radiomic features. CONCLUSIONS: Combination of noncontrast mp-MRI (T2WI, DWI, and DTI) features with the framework of a supervised classification technique and Bayesian optimization method are able to differentiate cancer from noncancer voxels with high accuracy and without administration of contrast agent. The addition of cancer probability maps provides additional functionality for image interpretation, lesion heterogeneity evaluation, and treatment management.

Supervised risk predictor of central gland lesions in prostate cancer using 1 H MR spectroscopic imaging with gradient offset-independent adiabaticity pulses.

BACKGROUND: Due to the histological heterogeneity of the central gland, accurate detection of central gland prostate cancer remains a challenge. PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of in vivo 3D 1 H MR spectroscopic imaging (3D 1 H MRSI) with a semi-localized adiabatic selective refocusing (sLASER) sequence and gradient-modulated offset-independent adiabatic (GOIA) pulses for detection of central gland prostate cancer. Additionally four risk models were developed to differentiate 1) normal vs. cancer, 2) low- vs. high-risk cancer, 3) low- vs. intermediate-risk cancer, and 4) intermediate- vs. high-risk cancer voxels. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. SUBJECTS: Thirty-six patients with biopsy-proven central gland prostate cancer. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3T MRI / 3D 1 H MRSI using GOIA-sLASER. ASSESSMENT: Cancer and normal regions of interest (ROIs) were selected by an experienced radiologist and 1 H MRSI voxels were placed within the ROIs to calculate seven metabolite signal ratios. Voxels were split into two subsets, 80% for model training and 20% for testing. STATISTICAL TESTS: Four support vector machine (SVM) models were built using the training dataset. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for each model were calculated for the testing dataset. RESULTS: High-quality MR spectra were obtained for the whole central gland of the prostate. The normal vs. cancer diagnostic model achieved the highest predictive performance with an accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 96.2%, 95.8%, and 93.1%, respectively. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the low- vs. high-risk cancer and low- vs. intermediate-risk cancer models were 82.5%, 89.2%, 70.2%, and 73.0%, 84.7%, 60.8%, respectively. The intermediate- vs. high-risk cancer model yielded an accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity lower than 55%. DATA CONCLUSION: The GOIA-sLASER sequence with an external phased-array coil allows for fast assessment of central gland prostate cancer. The classification offers a promising diagnostic tool for discriminating normal vs. cancer, low- vs. high-risk cancer, and low- vs. intermediate-risk cancer. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:1926-1936.

Remote dosimetric auditing of clinical trials: The need for vendor specific models to convert images to dose.

INTRODUCTION: A previous pilot study has demonstrated the feasibility of a novel image-based approach for remote dosimetric auditing of clinical trials. The approach uses a model to convert in-air acquired intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) images to delivered dose inside a virtual phantom. The model was developed using images from an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) on a Varian linear accelerator. It was tuned using beam profiles and field size factors (FSFs) of a series of square fields measured in water tank. This work investigates the need for vendor specific conversion models for image-based auditing. The EPID measured profile and FSF data for Varian (vendor 1) and Elekta (vendor 2) systems are compared along with the performance of the existing Varian model (VM) and a new Elekta model (EM) for a series of audit IMRT fields measured on vendor 2 systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The EPID measured beam profile and FSF data were studied for the two vendors to quantify and understand their relevant dosimetric differences. Then, an EM was developed converting EPID to dose in the virtual water phantom using a vendor 2 water tank data and images from corresponding EPID. The VM and EM were compared for predicting vendor 2 measured dose in water tank. Then, the performance of the new EM was compared to the VM for auditing of 54 IMRT fields from four vendor 2 facilities. Statistical significance of using vendor specific models was determined. RESULTS: Observed dosimetry differences between the two vendors suggested developing an EM would be beneficial. The EM performed better than VM for vendor 2 square and IMRT fields. The IMRT audit gamma pass rates were (99.8 ± 0.5)%, (98.6 ± 2.3)% and (97.0 ± 3.0)% at respectively 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm and 2%/2 mm with improvements at most fields compared with using the VM. For the pilot audit, the difference between gamma results of the two vendors was reduced when using vendor specific models (VM: P < 0.0001, vendor specific models: P = 0.0025). CONCLUSION: A new model was derived to convert images from vendor 2 EPIDs to dose for remote auditing vendor 2 deliveries. Using vendor specific models is recommended to remotely audit systems from different vendors, however, the improvements found were not major.

A proposed method for linear accelerator photon beam steering using EPID.

Beam steering is the process of calibrating the angle and translational position with which a linear accelerator's (linac's) electron beam strikes the x-ray target with respect to the collimator rotation axis. The shape of the dose profile is highly dependent on accurate beam steering and is essential for ensuring correct delivery of the radiotherapy treatment plan. Traditional methods of beam steering utilize a scanning water tank phantom that makes the process user-dependent. This study is the first to provide a methodology for both beam angle steering and beam translational position steering based on EPID imaging of the beam and does not require a phantom. Both the EPID-based beam angle steering and beam translational steering methods described have been validated against IC Profiler measurement. Wide field symmetry agreement was found between the EPID and IC Profiler to within 0.06 ± 0.14% (1 SD) and 0.32 ± 0.11% (1 SD) for flattened and flattening-filter-free (FFF) beams, respectively. For a 1.1% change in symmetry measured by IC Profiler the EPID method agreed to within 0.23%. For beam translational position steering, the EPID method agreed with IC Profiler method to within 0.03 ± 0.05 mm (1 SD) at isocenter. The EPID-based methods presented are quick to perform, simple, accurate and could easily be integrated with the linac, potentially via the MPC application. The methods have the potential to remove user variability and to standardize the process of beam steering throughout the radiotherapy community.

Evaluation of the truebeam machine performance check (MPC): OBI X-ray tube alignment procedure.

Alignment of the On-Board Imager (OBI) X-ray tube is important for ensuring imaging to treatment isocenter coincidence, which in turn is important for accurate Image Guided Radiotherapy (IGRT). Varian introduced a new X-ray tube alignment procedure for the TrueBeam linac in software version 2.5 MR2 as part of the machine performance check (MPC) application. This study evaluated the new procedure against conventional methods and examined the clinical significance of X-ray tube misalignment. Long term stability and short term repeatability of MPC tube alignment was assessed as well as sensitivity of the method to setup error. Standard quality assurance tests expected to be sensitive to tube misalignment were performed before and after tube alignment. These tests included: IsoCal verification; MPC kV imager offset; Winston-Lutz: kV imaging to treatment/radiation isocenter coincidence; CBCT image QA using the Catphan phantom; and OBI image geometric accuracy and center pixel alignment. Tube alignment measurements were performed with MPC, the two-plate method, and wire-on-faceplate method. The X-ray tube was then realigned by approximately 1.01 mm in the tangential plane based upon MPC and the tube alignment and standard quality assurance measurements were repeated. The time taken for each tube alignment method was estimated. The MPC method of tube alignment was found to be repeatable, insignificantly sensitive to phantom setup error and quick and simple to perform. The standard QA tests were generally insensitive to the tube alignment change, possibly because of the IsoCal correction. However, reduction in the magnitude of IsoCal correction and MPC kV imager offset was recorded after tube alignment. There was also apparent improvement in CBCT image uniformity. The MPC procedure is recommended for X-ray tube alignment.

Evaluation of the TrueBeam machine performance check (MPC) beam constancy checks for flattened and flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beams.

Machine Performance Check (MPC) is an automated and integrated image-based tool for verification of beam and geometric performance of the TrueBeam linac. The aims of the study were to evaluate the MPC beam performance tests against current daily quality assurance (QA) methods, to compare MPC performance against more accurate monthly QA tests and to test the sensitivity of MPC to changes in beam performance. The MPC beam constancy checks test the beam output, uniformity, and beam center against the user defined baseline. MPC was run daily over a period of 5 months (n = 115) in parallel with the Daily QA3 device. Additionally, IC Profiler, in-house EPID tests, and ion chamber measurements were performed biweekly and results presented in a form directly comparable to MPC. The sensitivity of MPC was investigated using controlled adjustments of output, beam angle, and beam position steering. Over the period, MPC output agreed with ion chamber to within 0.6%. For an output adjustment of 1.2%, MPC was found to agree with ion chamber to within 0.17%. MPC beam center was found to agree with the in-house EPID method within 0.1 mm. A focal spot position adjustment of 0.4 mm (at isocenter) was measured with MPC beam center to within 0.01 mm. An average systematic offset of 0.5% was measured in the MPC uniformity and agreement of MPC uniformity with symmetry measurements was found to be within 0.9% for all beams. MPC uniformity detected a change in beam symmetry of 1.5% to within 0.3% and 0.9% of IC Profiler for flattened and FFF beams, respectively.

Evaluation of the truebeam machine performance check (MPC): mechanical and collimation checks.

Machine performance check (MPC) is an automated and integrated image-based tool for verification of beam and geometric performance of the TrueBeam linac. The aims of the study were to evaluate the performance of the MPC geometric tests relevant to beam collimation (MLC and jaws) and mechanical systems (gantry and collimator). Evaluation was performed by comparing MPC to QA tests performed routinely in the department over a 4-month period. The MPC MLC tests were compared to an in-house analysis of the Picket Fence test. The jaw positions were compared against an in-house EPID-based method, against the traditional light field and graph paper technique and against the Daily QA3 device. The MPC collimator and gantry were compared against spirit level and the collimator further compared to Picket Fence analysis. In all cases, the results from the routine QA procedure were presented in a form directly comparable to MPC to allow a like-to-like comparison. The sensitivity of MPC was also tested by deliberately miscalibrating the appropriate linac parameter. The MPC MLC was found to agree with Picket Fence to within 0.3 mm and the MPC jaw check agreed with in-house EPID measurements within 0.2 mm. All MPC parameters were found to be accurately sensitive to deliberately introduced calibration errors. For the tests evaluated, MPC appears to be suitable as a daily QA check device.

Evaluation of the truebeam machine performance check (MPC) geometric checks for daily IGRT geometric accuracy quality assurance.

Machine Performance Check (MPC) is an automated and integrated image-based tool for verification of beam and geometric performance of the TrueBeam linac. The aims of the study were to evaluate the performance of the MPC geometric tests relevant to OBI/CBCT IGRT geometric accuracy. This included evaluation of the MPC isocenter and couch tests. Evaluation was performed by comparing MPC to QA tests performed routinely in the department over a 4-month period. The MPC isocenter tests were compared against an in-house developed Winston-Lutz test and the couch compared against routine mechanical QA type procedures. In all cases the results from the routine QA procedure was presented in a form directly comparable to MPC to allow a like-to-like comparison. The sensitivity of MPC was also tested by deliberately miscalibrating the appropriate linac parameter. The MPC isocenter size and MPC kV imager offset were found to agree with Winston-Lutz to within 0.2 mm and 0.22 mm, respectively. The MPC couch tests agreed with routine QA to within 0.12 mm and 0.15°. The MPC isocenter size and kV imager offset parameters were found to be affected by a change in beam focal spot position with the kV imager offset more sensitive. The MPC couch tests were all unaffected by an offset in the couch calibration but the three axes that utilized two point calibrations were sensitive to a miscalibration of the size in the span of the calibration. All MPC tests were unaffected by a deliberate misalignment of the MPC phantom and roll of the order of one degree.

A novel and independent method for time-resolved gantry angle quality assurance for VMAT.

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment delivery requires three key dynamic components; gantry rotation, dose rate modulation, and multi-leaf collimator motion, which are all simultaneously varied during the delivery. Misalignment of the gantry angle can potentially affect clinical outcome due to the steep dose gradients and complex MLC shapes involved. It is essential to develop independent gantry angle quality assurance (QA) appropriate to VMAT that can be performed simultaneously with other key VMAT QA testing. In this work, a simple and inexpensive fully independent gantry angle measurement methodology was developed that allows quantitation of the gantry angle accuracy as a function of time. This method is based on the analysis of video footage of a "Double dot" pattern attached to the front cover of the linear accelerator that consists of red and green circles printed on A4 paper sheet. A standard mobile phone is placed on the couch to record the video footage during gantry rotation. The video file is subsequently analyzed and used to determine the gantry angle from each video frame using the relative position of the two dots. There were two types of validation tests performed including the static mode with manual gantry angle rotation and dynamic mode with three complex test plans. The accuracy was 0.26° ± 0.04° and 0.46° ± 0.31° (mean ± 1 SD) for the static and dynamic modes, respectively. This method is user friendly, cost effective, easy to setup, has high temporal resolution, and can be combined with existing time-resolved method for QA of MLC and dose rate to form a comprehensive set of procedures for time-resolved QA of VMAT delivery system.

Technical note: TROG 15.01 SPARK trial multi-institutional imaging dose measurement.

PURPOSE: The Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG) 15.01 Stereotactic Prostate Adaptive Radiotherapy utilizing Kilovoltage intrafraction monitoring (SPARK) trial is a multicenter trial using Kilovoltage Intrafraction Monitoring (KIM) to monitor prostate position during the delivery of prostate radiation therapy. KIM increases the accuracy of prostate radiation therapy treatments and allows for hypofractionation. However, an additional imaging dose is delivered to the patient. A standardized procedure to determine the imaging dose per frame delivered using KIM was developed and applied at four radiation therapy centers on three different types of linear accelerator. METHODS: Dose per frame for kilovoltage imaging in fluoroscopy mode was measured in air at isocenter using an ion chamber. Beam quality and dose were determined for a Varian Clinac iX linear accelerator, a Varian Trilogy, four Varian Truebeams and one Elekta Synergy at four different radiation therapy centers. The imaging parameters used on the Varian machines were 125 kV, 80 mA, and 13 ms. The Elekta machine was measured at 120 kV, 80 mA, and 12 ms. Absorbed doses to the skin and the prostate for a typical SBRT prostate treatment length were estimated according to the IPEMB protocol. RESULTS: The average dose per kV frame to the skin was 0.24 ± 0.03 mGy. The average estimated absorbed dose to the prostate for all five treatment fractions across all machines measured was 39.9 ± 2.6 mGy for 1 Hz imaging, 199.7 ± 13.2 mGy for 5 Hz imaging and 439.3 ± 29.0 mGy for 11 Hz imaging. CONCLUSIONS: All machines measured agreed to within 20%. Additional dose to the prostate from using KIM is at most 1.3% of the prescribed dose of 36.25 Gy in five fractions delivered during the trial.

A method for evaluating treatment quality using in vivo EPID dosimetry and statistical process control in radiation therapy.

Purpose Due to increasing complexity, modern radiotherapy techniques require comprehensive quality assurance (QA) programmes, that to date generally focus on the pre-treatment stage. The purpose of this paper is to provide a method for an individual patient treatment QA evaluation and identification of a "quality gap" for continuous quality improvement. Design/methodology/approach A statistical process control (SPC) was applied to evaluate treatment delivery using in vivo electronic portal imaging device (EPID) dosimetry. A moving range control chart was constructed to monitor the individual patient treatment performance based on a control limit generated from initial data of 90 intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and ten volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) patient deliveries. A process capability index was used to evaluate the continuing treatment quality based on three quality classes: treatment type-specific, treatment linac-specific, and body site-specific. Findings The determined control limits were 62.5 and 70.0 per cent of the χ pass-rate for IMRT and VMAT deliveries, respectively. In total, 14 patients were selected for a pilot study the results of which showed that about 1 per cent of all treatments contained errors relating to unexpected anatomical changes between treatment fractions. Both rectum and pelvis cancer treatments demonstrated process capability indices were less than 1, indicating the potential for quality improvement and hence may benefit from further assessment. Research limitations/implications The study relied on the application of in vivo EPID dosimetry for patients treated at the specific centre. Sampling patients for generating the control limits were limited to 100 patients. Whilst the quantitative results are specific to the clinical techniques and equipment used, the described method is generally applicable to IMRT and VMAT treatment QA. Whilst more work is required to determine the level of clinical significance, the authors have demonstrated the capability of the method for both treatment specific QA and continuing quality improvement. Practical implications The proposed method is a valuable tool for assessing the accuracy of treatment delivery whilst also improving treatment quality and patient safety. Originality/value Assessing in vivo EPID dosimetry with SPC can be used to improve the quality of radiation treatment for cancer patients.

Time-resolved beam symmetry measurement for VMAT commissioning and quality assurance.

In volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment delivery perfect beam symmetry is assumed by the planning system. This study aims to test this assumption and present a method of measuring time-resolved beam symmetry measurement during a VMAT delivery that includes extreme variations of dose rate and gantry speed. The Sun Nuclear IC Profiler in gantry mount was used to measure time-resolved in-plane and cross-plane profiles during plan delivery from which symmetry could be determined. Time-resolved symmetry measurements were performed throughout static field exposures at cardinal gantry angles, conformal arcs with constant dose rate and gantry speed, and during a VMAT test plan with gantry speed and dose rate modulation. Measurements were performed for both clockwise and counterclockwise gantry rotation and across four Varian 21iX lin-acs. The symmetry was found to be generally constant throughout the static field exposures to within 0.3% with an exception on one linac of up to 0.7%. Agreement in symmetry between cardinal angles was always within 1.0% and typically within 0.6%. During conformal arcs the results for clockwise and counterclockwise rotation were in agreement to within 0.3%. Both clockwise and counterclockwise tended to vary in similar manner by up to 0.5% during arc consistent with the cardinal gantry angle static field results. During the VMAT test plan the symmetry generally was in agreement with the conformal arc results. Greater variation in symmetry was observed in the low-dose-rate regions by up to 1.75%. All results were within clinically acceptable levels using the tolerances of NCS Report 24 (2015).

VMAT linear accelerator commissioning and quality assurance: dose control and gantry speed tests.

In VMAT treatment delivery the ability of the linear accelerator (linac) to accurately control dose versus gantry angle is critical to delivering the plan correctly. A new VMAT test delivery was developed to specifically test the dose versus gantry angle with the full range of allowed gantry speeds and dose rates. The gantry-mounted IBA MatriXX with attached inclinometer was used in movie mode to measure the instantaneous relative dose versus gantry angle during the plan every 0.54 s. The results were compared to the expected relative dose at each gantry angle calculated from the plan. The same dataset was also used to compare the instantaneous gan-try speeds throughout the delivery compared to the expected gantry speeds from the plan. Measurements performed across four linacs generally show agreement between measurement and plan to within 1.5% in the constant dose rate regions and dose rate modulation within 0.1 s of the plan. Instantaneous gantry speed was measured to be within 0.11°/s of the plan (1 SD). An error in one linac was detected in that the nominal gantry speed was incorrectly calibrated. This test provides a practical method to quality-assure critical aspects of VMAT delivery including dose versus gantry angle and gantry speed control. The method can be performed with any detector that can acquire time-resolved dosimetric information that can be synchronized with a measurement of gantry angle. The test fulfils several of the aims of the recent Netherlands Commission on Radiation Dosimetry (NCS) Report 24, which provides recommendations for comprehensive VMAT quality assurance.

An EPID-based system for gantry-resolved MLC quality assurance for VMAT.

Multileaf collimator (MLC) positions should be precisely and independently mea-sured as a function of gantry angle as part of a comprehensive quality assurance (QA) program for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). It is also ideal that such a QA program has the ability to relate MLC positional accuracy to patient-specific dosimetry in order to determine the clinical significance of any detected MLC errors. In this work we propose a method to verify individual MLC trajectories during VMAT deliveries for use as a routine linear accelerator QA tool. We also extend this method to reconstruct the 3D patient dose in the treatment planning sys-tem based on the measured MLC trajectories and the original DICOM plan file. The method relies on extracting MLC positions from EPID images acquired at 8.41fps during clinical VMAT deliveries. A gantry angle is automatically tagged to each image in order to obtain the MLC trajectories as a function of gantry angle. This analysis was performed for six clinical VMAT plans acquired at monthly intervals for three months. The measured trajectories for each delivery were compared to the MLC positions from the DICOM plan file. The maximum mean error detected was 0.07 mm and a maximum root-mean-square error was 0.8 mm for any leaf of any delivery. The sensitivity of this system was characterized by introducing random and systematic MLC errors into the test plans. It was demonstrated that the system is capable of detecting random and systematic errors on the range of 1-2mm and single leaf calibration errors of 0.5 mm. The methodology developed in the work has potential to be used for efficient routine linear accelerator MLC QA and pretreatment patient-specific QA and has the ability to relate measured MLC positional errors to 3D dosimetric errors within a patient volume.

Investigation on the performance of dedicated radiotherapy positioning devices for MR scanning for prostate planning.

The purpose of this study was to investigate performance of the couch and coil mounts designed for MR-simulation prostate scanning using data from ten volunteers. Volunteers were scanned using the standard MR scanning protocol with the MR coil directly strapped on the external body and the volunteer lying on the original scanner table. They also were scanned using a MR-simulation table top and pelvic coil mounts. MR images from both setups were compared in terms of body contour variation and image quality effects within particular organs of interest. Six-field conformal plans were generated on the two images with assigned bulk density for dose calculation. With the MR-simulation devices, the anterior skin deformation was reduced by up to 1.7 cm. The hard tabletop minimizes the posterior body deformation which can be up to 2.3 cm on the standard table, depending on the weight of volunteer. The image signal-to-noise ratio reduced by 14% and 25% on large field of view (FOV) and small FOV images, respectively, after using the coil mount; the prostate volume contoured on two images showed difference of 1.05 ± 0.66 cm3. The external body deformation caused a mean dose reduction of 0.6 ± 0.3 Gy, while the coverage reduced by 22% ± 13% and 27% ± 6% in V98 and V100, respectively. A dedicated MR simulation setup for prostate radiotherapy is essential to ensure the agreement between planning anatomy and treatment anatomy. The image signal was reduced after applying the coil mount, but no significant effect was found on prostate contouring.

An investigation of gantry angle data accuracy for cine-mode EPID images acquired during arc IMRT.

EPID images acquired in cine mode during arc therapy have inaccurate gantry angles recorded in their image headers. In this work, methods were developed to assess the accuracy of the gantry potentiometer for linear accelerators. As well, assessments of the accuracy of other, more accessible, sources of gantry angle information (i.e., treatment log files, analysis of EPID image headers) were investigated. The methods used in this study are generally applicable to any linear accelerator unit, and have been demonstrated here with Clinac/Trilogy systems. Gantry angle data were simultaneously acquired using three methods: i) a direct gantry potentiometer measurement, ii) an incremental rotary encoder, and iii) a custom-made radiographic gantry-angle phantom which produced unique wire intersections as a function of gantry angle. All methods were compared to gantry angle data from the EPID image header and the linac MLC DynaLog file. The encoder and gantry-angle phantom were used to validate the accuracy of the linac's potentiometer. The EPID image header gantry angles and the DynaLog file gantry angles were compared to the potentiometer. The encoder and gantry-angle phantom mean angle differences with the potentiometer were 0.13° ± 0.14° and 0.10°± 0.30°, respectively. The EPID image header angles analyzed in this study were within ± 1° of the potentiometer angles only 35% of the time. In some cases, EPID image header gantry angles disagreed by as much as 3° with the potentiometer. A time delay in frame acquisition was determined using the continuous acquisition mode of the EPID. After correcting for this time delay, 75% of the header angles, on average, were within ± 1° of the true gantry angle, compared to an average of only 35% without the correction. Applying a boxcar smoothing filter to the corrected gantry angles further improved the accuracy of the header-derived gantry angles to within ± 1° for almost all images (99.4%). An angle accuracy of 0.11° ± 0.04° was determined using a point-by-point comparison of the gantry angle data in the MLC DynaLog file and the potentiometer data. These simple correction methods can be easily applied to individual treatment EPID images in order to more accurately define the gantry angle.