4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evaluation of an EPID in vivo monitoring system using local and external independent audit measurements

      other

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          The aim of this work was to evaluate the SunCHECK PerFRACTION, the software for in vivo monitoring using EPID images.

          Materials/Methods

          First, the PerFRACTION ability to detect errors was investigated simulating two situations: (1) variation of LINAC output and (2) variation of the phantom thickness. An ionization chamber was used as reference to measure the introduced dose variations. Both tests used EPID in integrated mode (absolute dose). Second, EPID measurements in integrated mode were carried out during an independent Brazilian governmental audit that provided four phantoms and TLDs. PerFRACTION calculated the absolute dose on EPID plane, and it compared with predicted calculated dose for every delivered plan. The dose deviations reported using PerFRACTION were compared with dose deviations reported by the independent audit. Third, an end‐to‐end test using a heterogeneous phantom was performed. A VMAT plan with EPID in cine mode was delivered. PerFRACTION calculated the mean dose on CBCT using EPID information and log files. The calculated doses at four different points were compared with ionization chambers measurements.

          Results

          About the first test, the largest difference found was 1.2%. Considering the audit results, the variations detected by TLD measurements and by PerFRACTION dose calculation on EPID plane were close: 12 points had variations less than 2%, 2 points with variation between 2% and 3%, and 2 points with deviations greater than 3% (max 3.7%). The end‐to‐end tests using a heterogeneous phantom achieved dose deviation less than 1.0% in the water‐equivalent region. In the mimicking lung region, the deviations were higher (max 7.3%), but in accordance with what is expected for complex situations.

          Conclusion

          The tests results indicate that PerFRACTION dose calculations in different situations have good agreement with standard measurements. Action levels were suggested for absolute dose on EPID plane as well as 3D dose calculation on CBCT using PerFRACTION.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Quality control quantification (QCQ): a tool to measure the value of quality control checks in radiation oncology.

          To quantify the error-detection effectiveness of commonly used quality control (QC) measures.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dosimetric validation of the anisotropic analytical algorithm for photon dose calculation: fundamental characterization in water.

            In July 2005 a new algorithm was released by Varian Medical Systems for the Eclipse planning system and installed in our institute. It is the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) for photon dose calculations, a convolution/superposition model for the first time implemented in a Varian planning system. It was therefore necessary to perform validation studies at different levels with a wide investigation approach. To validate the basic performances of the AAA, a detailed analysis of data computed by the AAA configuration algorithm was carried out and data were compared against measurements. To better appraise the performance of AAA and the capability of its configuration to tailor machine-specific characteristics, data obtained from the pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm implemented in Eclipse were also added in the comparison. Since the purpose of the paper is to address the basic performances of the AAA and of its configuration procedures, only data relative to measurements in water will be reported. Validation was carried out for three beams: 6 MV and 15 MV from a Clinac 2100C/D and 6 MV from a Clinac 6EX. Generally AAA calculations reproduced very well measured data, and small deviations were observed, on average, for all the quantities investigated for open and wedged fields. In particular, percentage depth-dose curves showed on average differences between calculation and measurement smaller than 1% or 1 mm, and computed profiles in the flattened region matched measurements with deviations smaller than 1% for all beams, field sizes, depths and wedges. Percentage differences in output factors were observed as small as 1% on average (with a range smaller than +/-2%) for all conditions. Additional tests were carried out for enhanced dynamic wedges with results comparable to previous results. The basic dosimetric validation of the AAA was therefore considered satisfactory.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Challenges in credentialing institutions and participants in advanced technology multi-institutional clinical trials.

              The Radiological Physics Center (RPC) has functioned continuously for 38 years to assure the National Cancer Institute and the cooperative groups that institutions participating in multi-institutional trials can be expected to deliver radiation treatments that are clinically comparable to those delivered by other institutions in the cooperative groups. To accomplish this, the RPC monitors the machine output, the dosimetry data used by the institutions, the calculation algorithms used for treatment planning, and the institutions' quality control procedures. The methods of monitoring include on-site dosimetry review by an RPC physicist and a variety of remote audit tools. The introduction of advanced technology clinical trials has prompted several study groups to require participating institutions and personnel to become credentialed, to ensure their familiarity and capability with techniques such as three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, stereotactic body radiotherapy, and brachytherapy. The RPC conducts a variety of credentialing activities, beginning with questionnaires to evaluate an institution's understanding of the protocol and their capabilities. Treatment-planning benchmarks are used to allow the institution to demonstrate their planning ability and to facilitate a review of the accuracy of treatment-planning systems under relevant conditions. The RPC also provides mailable anthropomorphic phantoms to verify tumor dose delivery for special treatment techniques. While conducting these reviews, the RPC has amassed a large amount of data describing the dosimetry at participating institutions. Representative data from the monitoring programs are discussed, and examples are presented of specific instances in which the RPC contributed to the discovery and resolution of dosimetry errors.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                samuel.avelino@vittaradioterapia.com.br
                Journal
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                10.1002/(ISSN)1526-9914
                ACM2
                Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1526-9914
                10 November 2022
                December 2022
                : 23
                : 12 ( doiID: 10.1002/acm2.v23.12 )
                : e13822
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] VITTA Radiotherapy Center Brasília‐DF Brazil
                [ 2 ] Department of Radiation Oncology Stephenson Cancer Center University of Oklahoma Oklahoma City United States
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Samuel Ramalho Avelino, VITTA Radiotherapy Center, SHLS 716, Conjunto A, Lote 1, Brasília‐DF 70390‐906, Brazil.

                Email: samuel.avelino@ 123456vittaradioterapia.com.br

                Article
                ACM213822
                10.1002/acm2.13822
                9797176
                36356260
                2cff995a-bdc1-4ad5-96c6-a210191d5c58
                © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 26 August 2022
                : 08 March 2003
                : 18 September 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 4, Pages: 10, Words: 5989
                Categories
                Technical Note
                Technical Notes
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                December 2022
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.2.3 mode:remove_FC converted:28.12.2022

                epid,in vivo dosimetry,quality assurance
                epid, in vivo dosimetry, quality assurance

                Comments

                Comment on this article