Patient-specific point dose measurement for IMRT monitor unit verification

被引:98
作者
Dong, L [1 ]
Antolak, J [1 ]
Salehpour, M [1 ]
Forster, K [1 ]
O'Neill, L [1 ]
Kendall, R [1 ]
Rosen, I [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas, MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Phys, Houston, TX 77030 USA
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS | 2003年 / 56卷 / 03期
关键词
IMRT; quality assurance; dose verification; radiation dosimetry; IMRT hybrid plan;
D O I
10.1016/S0360-3016(03)00197-4
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To review intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) monitor unit verification in a phantom for 751 clinical cases. Methods and Materials: A custom water-filled phantom was used to measure the integral dose with an ion chamber for patient-specific quality assurance. The Corvus IMRT planning system was used for all cases reviewed. The 751 clinical cases were classified into 9 treatment sites: central nervous system (27 cases), gastrointestinal (24 cases), genitourinary (447 cases), gynecologic (18 cases), head and neck (200 cases), hematology (12 cases), pediatric (3 cases), sarcoma (8 cases), and thoracic (12 cases). Between December 1998 and January 2002, 1591 measurements were made for these 751 IMRT quality assurance plans. Results: The mean difference (MD) in percent between the measurements and the calculations was + 0.37 % (with the measurement being slightly higher). The standard deviation (SD) was 1.7%, and the range of error was from -4.5% to 9.5%. The MD and SD were +0.49% and 1.4% for MIMiC treatments delivered in 2-cm mode (261 cases) and -0.33% and 2.7% for those delivered in I-cm mode (36 cases). Most treatments (420) were delivered using the step-and-shoot multileaf collimator with a 6-MV photon beam; the MD and SD were +0.31% and 1.8%, respectively. Among the 9 treatment sites, the prostate IMRT (in genitourinary site) was most consistent with the smallest SD (1.5%). There were 23 cases (3.1% of all cases) in which the measurement difference was greater than 3.5%; of those, 6 cases used the MIMiC in I-cm mode, and 14 of the cases were from the head-and-neck treatment site. Conclusion: IMRT monitor unit calculations from the Corvus planning system agreed within 3.5% with the point-dose ion chamber measurement in 97% of 751 cases representing 9 different treatment sites. A good consistency was observed across sites. (C) 2003 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:867 / 877
页数:11
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]   AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams [J].
Almond, PR ;
Biggs, PJ ;
Coursey, BM ;
Hanson, WF ;
Huq, MS ;
Nath, R ;
Rogers, DWO .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1999, 26 (09) :1847-1870
[2]   Theoretical considerations of monitor unit calculations for intensity modulated beam treatment planning [J].
Boyer, A ;
Xing, L ;
Ma, CM ;
Curran, B ;
Hill, R ;
Kania, A ;
Bleier, A .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1999, 26 (02) :187-195
[3]   Intensity-modulated radiotherapy: Current status and issues of interest [J].
Boyer, AL ;
Butler, EB ;
DiPetrillo, TA ;
Engler, MJ ;
Fraass, B ;
Grant, W ;
Ling, CC ;
Low, DA ;
Mackie, TR ;
Mohan, R ;
Purdy, JA ;
Roach, M ;
Rosenman, JG ;
Verhey, LJ ;
Wong, JW ;
Cumberlin, RL ;
Stone, H ;
Palta, JR .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2001, 51 (04) :880-914
[4]   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 [J].
Burman, C ;
Chui, CS ;
Kutcher, G ;
Leibel, S ;
Zelefsky, M ;
LoSasso, T ;
Spirou, S ;
Wu, QW ;
Yang, J ;
Stein, J ;
Mohan, R ;
Fuks, Z ;
Ling, CC .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1997, 39 (04) :863-873
[5]   Independent monitor unit calculation for intensity modulated radiotherapy using the MIMIC multileaf collimator [J].
Chen, Z ;
Xing, L ;
Nath, R .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2002, 29 (09) :2041-2051
[6]   A monitor unit verification calculation in intensity modulated radiotherapy as a dosimetry quality assurance [J].
Kung, JH ;
Chen, GTY ;
Kuchnir, FK .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2000, 27 (10) :2226-2230
[7]   Validation of a Monte Carlo dose calculation tool for radiotherapy treatment planning [J].
Li, JS ;
Pawlicki, T ;
Deng, J ;
Jiang, SB ;
Mok, E ;
Ma, CM .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2000, 45 (10) :2969-2985
[8]   Quantitative dosimetric verification of an IMRT planning and delivery system [J].
Low, DA ;
Mutic, S ;
Dempsey, JF ;
Gerber, RL ;
Bosch, WR ;
Perez, CA ;
Purdy, JA .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 1998, 49 (03) :305-316
[9]  
Pawlicki T, 2001, Med Dosim, V26, P157, DOI 10.1016/S0958-3947(01)00061-9
[10]  
SCHULZ J, 1983, MED PHYS, V10, P741