Is it still necessary to perform measured based pre-treatment patient-specific QA for SRS HyperArc treatments?

PURPOSE: The Mobius3D system was validated as a modern secondary check dosimetry system. In particular, our objective has been to assess the suitability of the M3D as pre-treatment patient-specific Quality Assurance (QA) tool for Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) HyperArc (HA) treatments. We aimed to determine whether Mobius3D could safely replace the measurements-based patient-specific QA for this type of treatment. METHODS: 30 SRS HA treatment plans for brain were selected. The dose distributions, calculated by Mobius and our routinely used algorithm (AcurosXB v.15.6), were compared using gamma analysis index and DVH parameters based on the patient's CT dataset. All 30 plans were then delivered across the ionization chamber in a homogeneous phantom and the measured dose was compared with both M3D and TPS calculated one. The plans were delivered and verified in terms of PSQA using the electronic portal imaging device (EPID) with Portal Dosimetry (PD) and myQA SRS (IBA Dosimetry) detector. Plans that achieved a global gamma passing rate (GPR) ≥ 97% based on 2%/2 mm criteria, with both Mobius3D and the conventional methods were evaluated acceptable. Finally, we assessed the capability of the M3D system to detect errors related to the position of the Multi-Leaf Collimator (MLC) in comparison to the analyzed measurement-based systems. RESULTS: No relevant differences were observed in the comparison between the dose calculated on the CT-dataset by M3D and the TPS. Observed discrepancies are imputable to different used algorithms, but no discrepancies related to goodness of plans have been found. Average differences between calculated (M3D and TPS) vs measured dose with ionization chamber were 2.5% (from 0.41% to 3.2%) and 1.81% (from 0.66% to 2.65%), for M3D and TPS, respectively. All plans passed with a gamma passing rate > 97% using conventional PSQA methods with a gamma criterion of 2% dose difference and 2 mm distance-to-agreement. The average gamma passing rate for the M3D system was determined to be 99.4% (from 97.3% to 100%). Results from this study also demonstrated Mobius has better error detectability than conventional measurement-based systems. CONCLUSION: Our study shows Mobius3D could be a suitable alternative to conventional measured based QA methods for SRS HyperArc treatments.

Organ dose in CT: Comparison between measurements and computational methods.

PURPOSE: This study aims to compare two methods for the organ dose evaluation in computed tomography (CT) in the head- and thorax regions: an experimental method, using radiochromic films, and a computational one, using a commercial software. METHODS: Gafchromic® XR-QA2 and EBT-3 were characterized in terms of energetic, angular, and irradiation configurations dependence. Two free-in-air irradiation calibration configurations were employed using a CT scanner: with the sensitive surface of the film orthogonal (OC) and parallel (PC) to the beam axis. Different dose-response curves were obtained by varying the irradiation configurations and the beam quality (BQ). Subsequently, films were irradiated within an anthropomorphic phantom using CT-thorax and -head protocols, and the organ dose values obtained were compared with those provided by the commercial software. RESULTS: At different configurations, an unchanged dose response was achieved with EBT-3, while a dose response of 15% was obtained with XR-QA2. By varying BQ, XR-QA2 showed a different response below 10%, while EBT-3 showed a variation below 5% for dose values >20 mGy. For films irradiation angle equal to 90°, the normalized to 0° relative response was 41% for the XR-QA2 model and 83% for the EBT-3 one. Organ dose values obtained with EBT-3 for both configurations and with XR-QA2 for OC were in agreement with the DW values, showing percentage discrepancies of less than 25%. CONCLUSIONS: The obtained results showed the potential of EBT-3 in CT patient dosimetry since the lower angular dependence, compared to XR-QA2, compensates for low sensitivity in the diagnostic dose range.

HyperArcTM Dosimetric Validation for Multiple Targets Using Ionization Chamber and RT-100 Polymer Gel.

Multiple brain metastases single-isocenter stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatment is increasingly employed in radiotherapy department. Before its use in clinical routine, it is recommended to perform end-to-end tests. In this work, we report the results of five HyperArcTM treatment plans obtained by both ionization chamber (IC) and polymer gel. The end-to-end tests were performed using a water equivalent Mobius Verification PhantomTM (MVP) and a 3D-printed anthropomorphic head phantom PseudoPatient® (PP) (RTsafe P.C., Athens, Greece); 2D and 3D dose distributions were evaluated on the PP phantom using polymer gel (RTsafe). Gels were read by 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Comparison between calculated and measured distributions was performed using gamma index passing rate evaluation by different criteria (5% 2 mm, 3% 2 mm, 5% 1 mm). Mean point dose differences of 1.01% [min −0.77%−max 2.89%] and 0.23% [min 0.01%−max 2.81%] were found in MVP and PP phantoms, respectively. For each target volume, the obtained results in terms of gamma index passing rate show an agreement >95% with 5% 2 mm and 3% 2 mm criteria for both 2D and 3D distributions. The obtained results confirmed that the use of a single isocenter for multiple lesions reduces the treatment time without compromising accuracy, even in the case of target volumes that are quite distant from the isocenter.

SBRT/SRS patient-specific QA using GAFchromicTM EBT3 and FilmQATM Pro software.

The aim of this work is to verify the potential use of GAFchromicTM EBT3 and FILMQATM pro software for patient specific quality assurance (QA) for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment plans in clinical routine use. In particular, encephalic, pulmonary and lymph node treatments plans were selected for this study. The agreement between the calculated and measured dose distributions were evaluated in terms of ɣ index with 3%3mm, 2%2mm, 1.5%1.5mm and 3%1.5mm criteria. The obtained results were then compared to the routine pre-treatment verification method which uses electronic portal imaging device (EPID) and EPIQA analysis software. EBT3-FilmQA method results show a mean ɣ index passing rate >95% with 2%1.5mm analysis criteria and an improvement of about 7% compared with EPID-EPIQA method results.

A feasibility dosimetric study on prostate cancer : are we ready for a multicenter clinical trial on SBRT?

PURPOSE: The Italian Association of Medical Physics (AIFM) started a working group dedicated to stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment. In this work, we performed a multicenter planning study on patients who were candidates for SBRT in the treatment of prostate cancer with the aim of evaluating the dosimetric consistency among the different hospitals. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fourteen centers were provided the contours of 5 patients. Plans were performed following the dose prescription and constraints for organs at risk (OARs) of a reference paper. The dose prescription was 35 Gy in five fractions for the planning target volume (PTV). Different techniques were used (3D-CRT, fixed-Field IMRT, VMAT, CyberKnife). Plans were compared in terms of dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters. Furthermore, the median DVH was calculated and one patient was re-planned. RESULTS: A total of 70 plans were compared. The maximum dose to the body was 107.9 ± 4.5 % (range 101.5-116.3 %). Dose at 98 % (D98 %) and mean dose to the clinical target volume (CTV) were 102.0 ± 0.9 % (global range 101.1-102.9 %) and 105.1 ± 0.6 % (range 98.6-124.6 %). Similar trends were found for D95 % and mean dose to the PTV. Important differences were found in terms of the homogeneity index. Doses to OARs were heterogeneous. The subgroups with the same treatment planning system showed differences comparable to the differences of the whole group. In the re-optimized plans, DVH differences among institutes were reduced and OAR sparing improved. CONCLUSION: Important dosimetric differences with possible clinical implications, in particular related to OARs, were found. Replanning allowed a reduction in the OAR dose and decreased standard deviations. Multicenter clinical trials on SBRT should require a preplanning study to standardize the optimization procedure.