Acceptance tests and quality control (QC) procedures for the clinical implementation of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using inverse planning and the sliding window technique: experience from five radiotherapy departments
- PMID: 12413675
- DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(02)00174-3
Acceptance tests and quality control (QC) procedures for the clinical implementation of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using inverse planning and the sliding window technique: experience from five radiotherapy departments
Abstract
Background and purpose: An increasing number of radiotherapy centres is now aiming for clinical implementation of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), but--in contrast to conventional treatment--no national or international guidelines for commissioning of the treatment planning system (TPS) and acceptance tests of treatment equipment have yet been developed. This paper bundles the experience of five radiotherapy departments that have introduced IMRT into their clinical routine.
Methods and materials: The five radiotherapy departments are using similar configurations since they adopted the commercially available Varian solution for IMRT, regarding treatment planning as well as treatment delivery. All are using the sliding window technique. Different approaches towards the derivation of the multileaf collimator (MLC) parameters required for the configuration of the TPS are described. A description of the quality control procedures for the dynamic MLC, including their respective frequencies, is given. For the acceptance of the TPS for IMRT multiple quality control plans were developed on a variety of phantoms, testing the flexibility of the inverse planning modules to produce the desired dose pattern as well as assessing the accuracy of the dose calculation. Regarding patient treatment verification, all five centres perform dosimetric pre-treatment verification of the treatment fields, be it on a single field or on a total plan procedure. During the actual treatment, the primary focus is on patient positioning rather than dosimetry. Intracavitary in vivo measurements were performed in special cases.
Result and conclusion: The configurational MLC parameters obtained through different methods are not identical for all centres, but the observed variations have shown to be of no significant clinical relevance. The quality control (QC) procedures for the dMLC have not detected any discrepancies since their initiation, demonstrating the reliability of the MLC controller. The development of geometrically simple QC plans to test the inverse planning, the dynamic MLC modules and the final dose calculation has proven to be useful in pointing out the need to remodel the single pencil beam scatter kernels in some centres. The final correspondence between calculated and measured dose was found to be satisfactory by all centres, for QC test plans as well as for pre-treatment verification of clinical IMRT fields. An intercomparison of the man hours needed per patient plan verification reveals a substantial variation depending on the type of measurements performed.
Copyright 2002 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Planning, delivery, and quality assurance of intensity-modulated radiotherapy using dynamic multileaf collimator: a strategy for large-scale implementation for the treatment of carcinoma of the prostate.Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997 Nov 1;39(4):863-73. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(97)00458-6. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997. PMID: 9369136
-
Dosimetric verification of inverse planned step and shoot multileaf collimator fields from a commercial treatment planning system.J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2002 Spring;3(2):97-109. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v3i2.2580. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2002. PMID: 11958650 Free PMC article.
-
IMAT-SIM: a new method for the clinical dosimetry of intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT).Med Phys. 2007 Jul;34(7):2759-73. doi: 10.1118/1.2739807. Med Phys. 2007. PMID: 17821983
-
Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with different combinations of treatment-planning systems and linacs: issues and how to detect them.Strahlenther Onkol. 2006 Aug;182(8):481-8. doi: 10.1007/s00066-006-1544-6. Strahlenther Onkol. 2006. PMID: 16896595 Review.
-
Intensity-modulated radiotherapy: current status and issues of interest.Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 Nov 15;51(4):880-914. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(01)01749-7. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001. PMID: 11704310 Review.
Cited by
-
Comprehensive characterisation of the IBA myQA SRS for SRS and SBRT patient specific quality assurance.Phys Eng Sci Med. 2024 Jan 18. doi: 10.1007/s13246-023-01370-0. Online ahead of print. Phys Eng Sci Med. 2024. PMID: 38236315
-
Application of a Comprehensive Treatment Planning Test for Credentialing Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy and RapidArc in a TrueBeam Linear Accelerator Setup.J Med Phys. 2023 Apr-Jun;48(2):204-209. doi: 10.4103/jmp.jmp_56_22. Epub 2023 Jun 29. J Med Phys. 2023. PMID: 37576093 Free PMC article.
-
Characterization of GafChromic EBT2 film dose measurements using a tissue-equivalent water phantom for a Theratron® Equinox Cobalt-60 teletherapy machine.PLoS One. 2022 Aug 19;17(8):e0271000. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271000. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35984784 Free PMC article.
-
AAPM MEDICAL PHYSICS PRACTICE GUIDELINE 5.b: Commissioning and QA of treatment planning dose calculations-Megavoltage photon and electron beams.J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Sep;23(9):e13641. doi: 10.1002/acm2.13641. Epub 2022 Aug 10. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022. PMID: 35950259 Free PMC article.
-
Predicting gamma evaluation results of patient-specific head and neck volumetric-modulated arc therapy quality assurance based on multileaf collimator patterns and fluence map features: A feasibility study.J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Jul;23(7):e13622. doi: 10.1002/acm2.13622. Epub 2022 May 18. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022. PMID: 35584035 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
