Illustrated instructions for mechanical quality assurance of a medical linear accelerator.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop and test a set of illustrated instructions for effective training for mechanical quality assurance (QA) of medical linear accelerators (linac). METHODS: Illustrated instructions were created for mechanical QA and underwent several steps of review, testing, and refinement. Eleven testers with no recent QA experience were then recruited from our radiotherapy department (one student, two computational scientists, and eight dosimetrists). This group was selected because they have experience of radiation therapy but no preconceived ideas about how to do QA. The following parameters were progressively decalibrated on a Varian C-series linac: Group A = gantry angle, ceiling laser position, X1 jaw position, couch longitudinal position, physical graticule position (five testers); Group B = Group A + wall laser position, couch lateral and vertical position, collimator angle (three testers); Group C = Group B + couch angle, wall laser angle, and optical distance indicator (three testers). Testers were taught how to use the linac and then used the instructions to try to identify these errors. An experienced physicist observed each session, giving support on machine operation as necessary. RESULTS: Testers were able to follow the instructions. They determined gantry, collimator, and couch angle errors within 0.4°, 0.3°, and 0.9° of the actual changed values, respectively. Laser positions were determined within 1 mm and jaw positions within 2 mm. Couch position errors were determined within 2 mm and 3 mm for lateral/longitudinal and vertical errors, respectively. Accessory-positioning errors were determined within 1 mm. Optical distance indicator errors were determined within 2 mm when comparing with distance sticks and 6 mm when using blocks, indicating that distance sticks should be the preferred approach for inexperienced staff. CONCLUSIONS: Inexperienced users were able to follow these instructions and catch errors within the criteria suggested by AAPM TG-142 for linacs used for intensity-modulated radiation therapy. These instructions are, therefore, suitable for QA training.

Assessing respiration-induced tumor motion and internal target volume using four-dimensional computed tomography for radiotherapy of lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess three-dimensional tumor motion caused by respiration and internal target volume (ITV) for radiotherapy of lung cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Respiration-induced tumor motion was analyzed for 166 tumors from 152 lung cancer patients, 57.2% of whom had Stage III or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. All patients underwent four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) during normal breathing before treatment. The expiratory phase of 4DCT images was used as the reference set to delineate gross tumor volume (GTV). Gross tumor volumes on other respiratory phases and resulting ITVs were determined using rigid-body registration of 4DCT images. The association of GTV motion with various clinical and anatomic factors was analyzed statistically. RESULTS: The proportions of tumors that moved >0.5 cm along the superior-inferior (SI), lateral, and anterior-posterior (AP) axes during normal breathing were 39.2%, 1.8%, and 5.4%, respectively. For 95% of the tumors, the magnitude of motion was less than 1.34 cm, 0.40 cm, and 0.59 cm along the SI, lateral, and AP directions. The principal component of tumor motion was in the SI direction, with only 10.8% of tumors moving >1.0 cm. The tumor motion was found to be associated with diaphragm motion, the SI tumor location in the lung, size of the GTV, and disease T stage. CONCLUSIONS: Lung tumor motion is primarily driven by diaphragm motion. The motion of locally advanced lung tumors is unlikely to exceed 1.0 cm during quiet normal breathing except for small lesions located in the lower half of the lung.