Curvature correction factors for the independent verification of monitor units of electron treatment plans calculated in Eclipse.

Electron beam dosimetry is sensitive to the surface contour of the patient. Over 10% difference between Treatment Planning System (TPS) and independent monitor-unit (IMU) calculations have been reported in the literature. Similar results were observed in our clinic between Radformation ClearCalc IMU and Eclipse TPS electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithm (v.16.1). This paper presents data measured under 3D printed spherical and cylindrical phantoms to validate the eMC algorithm in the presence of curved geometries. Measurements were performed with multiple detectors and compared to calculations made in Eclipse for the 6, 9 and 12 MeV electron energies. This data is used to create curvature correction factors (CCFs), defined as the ratio of the detector reading with the curved-surface phantom to a flat phantom at the same depth. The mean difference between the TPS calculated and measured CCFs using the NACP, Diode E, microSilicon, and microDiamond detectors were 1.3, 0.9, 0.7 and 0.7% respectively, with maximum differences of 4.5, 2.3, 1.9, and 1.8% respectively. Applying CCFs to previous failing patient IMU calculations improved agreement to the TPS. CCFs were implemented in our clinic for patient-specific IMU calculations with the assistance of a ESAPI script.

Assessing focal spot alignment in clinical linear accelerators: a comprehensive evaluation with triplet phantoms.

A fundamental parameter to evaluate the beam delivery precision and stability on a clinical linear accelerator (linac) is the focal spot position (FSP) measured relative to the collimator axis of the radiation head. The aims of this work were to evaluate comprehensive data on FSP acquired on linacs in clinical use and to establish the ability of alternative phantoms to detect effects on patient plan delivery related to FSP. FSP measurements were conducted using a rigid phantom holding two ball-bearings at two different distances from the radiation source. Images of these ball-bearings were acquired using the electronic portal imaging device (EPID) integrated with each linac. Machine QA was assessed using a radiation head-mounted PTW STARCHECK phantom. Patient plan QA was investigated using the SNC ArcCHECK phantom positioned on the treatment couch, irradiated with VMAT plans across a complete 360° gantry rotation and three X-ray energies. This study covered eight Elekta linacs, including those with 6 MV, 18 MV, and 6 MV flattening-filter-free (FFF) beams. The largest range in the FSP was found for 6 MV FFF. The FSP of one linac, retrofitted with 6 MV FFF, displayed substantial differences in FSP compared to 6 MV FFF beams on other linacs, which all had FSP ranges less than 0.50 mm and 0.25 mm in the lateral and longitudinal directions, respectively. The PTW STARCHECK phantom proved effective in characterising the FSP, while the SNC ArcCHECK measurements could not discern FSP-related features. Minor variations in FSP may be attributed to adjustments in linac parameters, component replacements necessary for beam delivery, and the wear and tear of various linac components, including the magnetron and gun filament. Consideration should be given to the ability of any particular phantom to detect a subsequent impact on the accuracy of patient plan delivery.

Beam focal spot intrafraction motion and gantry angle dependence: A study of Varian linac focal spot alignment.

The characteristics of the focal spot of the linear accelerator (linac) play a role in determining the resulting dose distribution within the patient, and hence probability of treatment success. A direct measurement of focal spot position is not recommended by AAPM Task Group 142, but factors influenced by focal spot position, such as beam symmetry and isocentre position, are. Traditional methods of measuring focal spot position are time consuming and can only be performed at gantry 0°. The presented method has been proposed using a phantom of novel design to accurately measure the position of the focal spot relative to the collimator's axis of rotation (CAX) at any gantry angle, and to measure the intra-fraction movement of the focal spot relative to the mean position during treatment. The method was reproducible to within 0.012 mm/0.029 mm (mean/max) for the three Varian linacs tested. The focal spot position was shown to deviate from the CAX by up to 0.386 mm during gantry rotation. The focal spot position was more unstable at the start of treatment, with the worst performing linac having an initial displacement of up to 0.15 mm from its mean position before stabilizing to within 0.01 mm after 3 s. The method proposed is a beneficial addition to the quality assurance (QA) schedule of any clinic, allowing quick determination of source position and movement at any gantry angle. Measurement of focal spot allows the possibility of fine-tuning the electron beam steering system to improve the standard of the photon beam and of stereotactic treatments.