Search

Background and Purpose: To describe the clinical commissioning of an in-house artificial intelligence (AI) treatment planning platform for head-and-neck (HN) Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT)., Materials and Methods: The AI planning platform has three components: (1) a graphical user interface (GUI) is built within the framework of a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). The GUI allows AI models to run remotely on a designated workstation configured with GPU acceleration. (2) A template plan is automatically prepared involving both clinical and AI considerations, which include contour evaluation, isocenter placement, and beam/collimator jaw placement. (3) A well-orchestrated suite of AI models predicts optimal fluence maps, which are imported into TPS for dose calculation followed by an optional automatic fine-tuning. Six AI models provide flexible tradeoffs in parotid sparing and Planning Target Volume (PTV)-organ-at-risk (OAR) preferences. Planners could examine the plan dose distribution and make further modifications as clinically needed. The performance of the AI plans was compared to the corresponding clinical plans., Results: The average plan generation time including manual operations was 10-15  min per case, with each AI model prediction taking ∼1 s. The six AI plans form a wide range of tradeoff choices between left and right parotids and between PTV and OARs compared with corresponding clinical plans, which correctly reflected their tradeoff designs., Conclusion: The in-house AI IMRT treatment planning platform was developed and is available for clinical use at our institution. The process demonstrates outstanding performance and robustness of the AI platform and provides sufficient validation., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Background and Purpose: The efficacy of clinical trials and the outcome of patient treatment are dependent on the quality assurance (QA) of radiation therapy (RT) plans. There are two widely utilized approaches that include plan optimization guidance created based on patient-specific anatomy. This study examined these two techniques for dose-volume histogram predictions, RT plan optimizations, and prospective QA processes, namely the knowledge-based planning (KBP) technique and another first principle (FP) technique., Methods: This analysis included 60, 44, and 10 RT plans from three Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) multi-institutional trials: RTOG 0631 (Spine SRS), RTOG 1308 (NSCLC), and RTOG 0522 (H&N), respectively. Both approaches were compared in terms of dose prediction and plan optimization. The dose predictions were also compared to the original plan submitted to the trials for the QA procedure., Results: For the RTOG 0631 (Spine SRS) and RTOG 0522 (H&N) plans, the dose predictions from both techniques have correlation coefficients of >0.9. The RT plans that were re-optimized based on the predictions from both techniques showed similar quality, with no statistically significant differences in target coverage or organ-at-risk sparing. The predictions of mean lung and heart doses from both methods for RTOG1308 patients, on the other hand, have a discrepancy of up to 14 Gy., Conclusions: Both methods are valuable tools for optimization guidance of RT plans for Spine SRS and Head and Neck cases, as well as for QA purposes. On the other hand, the findings suggest that KBP may be more feasible in the case of inoperable lung cancer patients who are treated with IMRT plans that have spatially unevenly distributed beam angles., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Purpose: To characterize key plan quality metrics in multi-target stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plans treated using single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in comparison to dynamic conformal arc (DCA) plans treating single target. To investigate the feasibility of quality improvement in VMAT planning based on previous planning knowledge., Materials and Methods: 97 VMAT plans of multi-target and 156 DCA plans of single-target treated in 2017 at a single institution were reviewed. A total of 605 targets were treated with these SRS plans. The prescription dose was normalized to 20 Gy in all plans for this analysis. Two plan quality metrics, target conformity index (CI) and normal tissue volume receiving more than 12 Gy (V12Gy), were calculated for each target. The distribution of V12Gy per target was plotted as a function of the target volume. For multi-target VMAT plans, the number of targets being treated in the same plan and the distance between targets were calculated to evaluate their impact on V12Gy. VMAT plans that had a large deviation of V12Gy from the average level were re-optimized to determine the possibility of reducing the variation of V12Gy in VMAT planning., Results: Conformity index of multi-target VMAT plans were lower than that of DCA plans while the mean values of 12 Gy were comparable. The V12Gy for a target in VMAT plan did not show apparent dependence on the total number of targets or the distance between targets. The distribution of V12Gy exhibited a larger variation in VMAT plans compared to DCA plans. Re-optimization of outlier plans reduced V12 Gy by 33.9% and resulted in the V12Gy distribution in VMAT plans more closely resembling that of DCA plans., Conclusion: The benchmark data on key plan quality metrics were established for single-isocenter multi-target SRS planning. It is feasible to use this knowledge to guide VMAT planning and reduce high V12Gy outliers., (© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American.)

Purpose: This technical note aims to investigate the dosimetric impact of stray radiation on the Common Control Unit (CCU) of the IBA Blue Phantom 2 and the measured beam data., Methods: Three CCUs of the same model were used for the study. The primary test CCU was placed at five distances from the radiation beam central axis. At each distance, a set of depth dose and beam profiles for two open and two wedge fields were measured. The field sizes were 10 × 10 cm 2 and 30 × 30 cm 2 for the open fields, and 30 × 30 cm 2 and 15 × 15 cm 2 for the 30° and 60° wedges, respectively. The other two CCUs were used to cross check the data of the primary CCU. Assuming the effect of stray radiation on the data measured at the farthest reachable distance 4.5 m is negligible, the dosimetric impact of stray radiation on the CCU and consequently on the measured data can be extracted for analysis by comparing it with those measured at shorter distances., Results: The results of three CCUs were consistent. The dosimetric impact of stray radiation was greater for lower energies at larger field sizes. For open fields, the data variation was up to 4.5% for depth dose curves and 7.1% for beam profiles. For wedge fields, the data variation was up to 9.3% for depth dose curves and 10.6% for beam profiles. Moreover, for wedge field profiles in the wedge direction, they became flatter as the CCU was placed closer to the primary radiation beam, manifesting smaller wedge angles., Conclusion: The stray radiation added a uniform background noise on all measured data. The magnitude of the noise is inversely proportional to the square of the distance of the CCU to the primary radiation beam, approximately following the inverse square law., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Purpose: MRI-based treatment planning is a promising technique for liver stereotactic-body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment planning to improve target volume delineation and reduce radiation dose to normal tissues. MR geometric distortion, however, is a source of potential error in MRI-based treatment planning. The aim of this study is to investigate dosimetric uncertainties caused by MRI geometric distortion in MRI-based treatment planning for liver SBRT., Materials and Methods: The study was conducted using computer simulations. 3D MR geometric distortion was simulated using measured data in the literature. Planning MR images with distortions were generated by integrating the simulated 3D MR geometric distortion onto planning CT images. MRI-based treatment plans were then generated on the planning MR images with two dose calculation methods: (1) using original CT numbers; and (2) using organ-specific assigned CT numbers. Dosimetric uncertainties of various dose-volume-histogram parameters were determined as their differences between the simulated MRI-based plans and the original clinical CT-based plans for five liver SBRT cases., Results: The average simulated distortion for the five liver SBRT cases was 2.77 mm. In the case of using original CT numbers for dose calculation, the average dose uncertainties for target volumes and critical structures were <0.5 Gy, and the average target volume percentage at prescription dose uncertainties was 0.97%. In the case of using assigned CT numbers, the average dose uncertainties for target volumes and critical structures were <1.0 Gy, and the average target volume percentage at prescription dose uncertainties was 2.02%., Conclusions: Dosimetric uncertainties caused by MR geometric distortion in MRI-based liver SBRT treatment planning was generally small (<1 Gy) when the distortion is 3 mm., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education, and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8,000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: Must and Must Not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. Should and Should Not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances. Approved by AAPM Professional Council 3-31-2017 and Executive Committee 4-4-2017., (© 2017 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Purpose: TrueBeams equipped with the 40 × 30 cm 2 Electronic Portal Imaging Devices (EPIDs) are prone to image saturation at the image center when used with flattening filter free (FFF) photon energies. While cine imaging during treatment may not saturate because the beam is attenuated by the patient, the flood field calibration is affected when the standard calibration procedure is followed. Here, we describe the hardware and protocol to achieve improved image quality for this model of TrueBeam EPID., Materials & Methods: A stainless steel filter of uniform thickness was designed to have sufficient attenuation to avoid panel saturation. The cine imaging flood field calibration was acquired with the filter in place for the FFF energies under the standard calibration geometry (SID = 150 cm). Image quality during MV cine was assessed with & without the modified flood field calibration using a low contrast resolution phantom and an anthropomorphic phantom., Results: When the flood field is acquired without the filter in place, a pixel gain artifact is clearly present in the image center which may be mis-attributed to panel saturation in the subject image. At the image center, the artifact obscured all low contrast inserts and was also visible on the anthropomorphic phantom. Using the filter for flood field calibration eliminates the artifact., Conclusion: TrueBeams equipped with the 40 × 30 cm 2 IDU can utilize a modified flood field calibration procedure for FFF photon energies that improves image quality for cine MV imaging., (© 2017 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

The purpose of this work was to evaluate the potential of a new transmission detector for real-time quality assurance of dynamic-MLC-based radiotherapy. The accuracy of detecting dose variation and static/dynamic MLC position deviations was measured, as well as the impact of the device on the radiation field (surface dose, transmission). Measured dose variations agreed with the known variations within 0.3%. The measurement of static and dynamic MLC position deviations matched the known deviations with high accuracy (0.7-1.2 mm). The absorption of the device was minimal (~ 1%). The increased surface dose was small (1%-9%) but, when added to existing collimator scatter effects could become significant at large field sizes (≥ 30 × 30 cm2). Overall the accuracy and speed of the device show good potential for real-time quality assurance., (© 2016 The Authors.)

We investigate the sensitivity of IMRT commissioning using the TG-119 C-shape phantom and credentialing with the IROC head and neck phantom to treatment planning system commissioning errors. We introduced errors into the various aspects of the commissioning process for a 6X photon energy modeled using the analytical anisotropic algorithm within a commercial treatment planning system. Errors were implemented into the various components of the dose calculation algorithm including primary photons, secondary photons, electron contamination, and MLC parameters. For each error we evaluated the probability that it could be committed unknowingly during the dose algorithm commissioning stage, and the probability of it being identified during the verification stage. The clinical impact of each commissioning error was evaluated using representative IMRT plans including low and intermediate risk prostate, head and neck, mesothelioma, and scalp; the sensitivity of the TG-119 and IROC phantoms was evaluated by comparing dosimetric changes to the dose planes where film measurements occur and change in point doses where dosimeter measurements occur. No commissioning errors were found to have both a low probability of detection and high clinical severity. When errors do occur, the IROC credentialing and TG 119 commissioning criteria are generally effective at detecting them; however, for the IROC phantom, OAR point-dose measurements are the most sensitive despite being currently excluded from IROC analysis. Point-dose measurements with an absolute dose constraint were the most effective at detecting errors, while film analysis using a gamma comparison and the IROC film distance to agreement criteria were less effective at detecting the specific commissioning errors implemented here.

This report describes the current state of flattening filter-free (FFF) radiotherapy beams implemented on conventional linear accelerators, and is aimed primarily at practicing medical physicists. The Therapy Emerging Technology Assessment Work Group of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) formed a writing group to assess FFF technology. The published literature on FFF technology was reviewed, along with technical specifications provided by vendors. Based on this information, supplemented by the clinical experience of the group members, consensus guidelines and recommendations for implementation of FFF technology were developed. Areas in need of further investigation were identified. Removing the flattening filter increases beam intensity, especially near the central axis. Increased intensity reduces treatment time, especially for high-dose stereotactic radiotherapy/radiosurgery (SRT/SRS). Furthermore, removing the flattening filter reduces out-of-field dose and improves beam modeling accuracy. FFF beams are advantageous for small field (e.g., SRS) treatments and are appropriate for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). For conventional 3D radiotherapy of large targets, FFF beams may be disadvantageous compared to flattened beams because of the heterogeneity of FFF beam across the target (unless modulation is employed). For any application, the nonflat beam characteristics and substantially higher dose rates require consideration during the commissioning and quality assurance processes relative to flattened beams, and the appropriate clinical use of the technology needs to be identified. Consideration also needs to be given to these unique characteristics when undertaking facility planning. Several areas still warrant further research and development. Recommendations pertinent to FFF technology, including acceptance testing, commissioning, quality assurance, radiation safety, and facility planning, are presented. Examples of clinical applications are provided. Several of the areas in which future research and development are needed are also indicated.

A recent publication indicated that the patient anatomical feature (PAF) model was capable of predicting optimal objectives based on past experience. In this study, the benefits of IMRT optimization using PAF-predicted objectives as guidance for prostate were evaluated. Three different optimization methods were compared.1) Expert Plan: Ten prostate cases (16 plans) were planned by an expert planner using conventional trial-and-error approach started with institutional modified OAR and PTV constraints. Optimization was stopped at 150 iterations and that plan was saved as Expert Plan. 2) Clinical Plan: The planner would keep working on the Expert Plan till he was satisfied with the dosimetric quality and the final plan was referred to as Clinical Plan. 3) PAF Plan: A third sets of plans for the same ten patients were generated fully automatically using predicted DVHs as guidance. The optimization was based on PAF-based predicted objectives, and was continued to 150 iterations without human interaction. DMAX and D98% for PTV, DMAX for femoral heads, DMAX, D10cc, D25%/D17%, and D40% for bladder/rectum were compared. Clinical Plans are further optimized with more iterations and adjustments, but in general provided limited dosimetric benefits over Expert Plans. PTV D98% agreed within 2.31% among Expert, Clinical, and PAF plans. Between Clinical and PAF Plans, differences for DMAX of PTV, bladder, and rectum were within 2.65%, 2.46%, and 2.20%, respectively. Bladder D10cc was higher for PAF but &lt; 1.54% in general. Bladder D25% and D40% were lower for PAF, by up to 7.71% and 6.81%, respectively. Rectum D10cc, D17%, and D40% were 2.11%, 2.72%, and 0.27% lower for PAF, respectively. DMAX for femoral heads were comparable (&lt; 35 Gy on average). Compared to Clinical Plan (Primary + Boost), the average optimization time for PAF plan was reduced by 5.2 min on average, with a maximum reduction of 7.1min. Total numbers of MUs per plan for PAF Plans were lower than Clinical Plans, indicating better delivery efficiency. The PAF-guided planning process is capable of generating clinical-quality prostate IMRT plans with no human intervention. Compared to manual optimization, this automatic optimization increases planning and delivery efficiency, while maintainingplan quality.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of dose calculation accuracy and the use of an intermediate dose calculation step during the optimization of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning on the final plan quality for lung cancer patients. This study included replanning for 11 randomly selected free-breathing lung IMRT plans. The original plans were optimized using a fast pencil beam convolution algorithm. After optimization, the final dose calculation was performed using the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA). The Varian Treatment Planning System (TPS) Eclipse v11, includes an option to perform intermediate dose calculation during optimization using the AAA. The new plans were created using this intermediate dose calculation during optimization with the same planning objectives and dose constraints as in the original plan. Differences in dosimetric parameters for the planning target volume (PTV) dose coverage, organs-at-risk (OARs) dose sparing, and the number of monitor units (MU) between the original and new plans were analyzed. Statistical significance was determined with a p-value of less than 0.05. All plans were normalized to cover 95% of the PTV with the prescription dose. Compared with the original plans, the PTV in the new plans had on average a lower maximum dose (69.45 vs. 71.96Gy, p = 0.005), a better homogeneity index (HI) (0.08 vs. 0.12, p = 0.002), and a better conformity index (CI) (0.69 vs. 0.59, p = 0.003). In the new plans, lung sparing was increased as the volumes receiving 5, 10, and 30 Gy were reduced when compared to the original plans (40.39% vs. 42.73%, p = 0.005; 28.93% vs. 30.40%, p = 0.001; 14.11%vs. 14.84%, p = 0.031). The volume receiving 20 Gy was not significantly lower (19.60% vs. 20.38%, p = 0.052). Further, the mean dose to the lung was reduced in the new plans (11.55 vs. 12.12 Gy, p = 0.024). For the esophagus, the mean dose, the maximum dose, and the volumes receiving 20 and 60 Gy were lower in the new plans than in the original plans (17.91 vs. 19.24 Gy, p = 0.004; 57.32vs. 59.81 Gy, p = 0.020; 39.34% vs. 41.59%, p = 0.097; 12.56%vs. 15.35%, p = 0.101). For the heart, the mean dose, the maximum dose, and the volume receiving 40 Gy were also lower in new plans (11.07 vs. 12.04 Gy, p = 0.007; 56.41 vs. 57.7 Gy, p = 0.027; 7.16% vs. 9.37%, p= 0.012). The maximum dose to the spinal cord in the new plans was significantly lower than in the original IMRT plans (29.1 vs. 31.39Gy, p = 0.014). Difference in MU between the IMRT plans was not significant (1216.90 vs. 1198.91, p = 0.328). In comparison to the original plans, the number of iterations needed to meet the optimization objectives in the new plans was reduced by a factor of 2 (2-3 vs. 5-6 iterations). Further, optimization was 30% faster corresponding to an average time savings of 10-15 min for the reoptimized plans. Accuracy of the dose calculation algorithm during optimization has an impact on planning efficiency, as well as on the final plan dosimetric quality. For lung IMRT treatment planning, utilizing the intermediate dose calculation during optimization is feasible for dose homogeneity improvement of the PTV and for improvement of optimization efficiency.

The purpose of this study was to compare dosimetric parameters of treatment plans among four techniques for preoperative single-fraction partial breast radiotherapy in order to select an optimal treatment technique. The techniques evaluated were noncoplanar 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT), noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRTNC), coplanar IMRT (IMRTCO), and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The planning CT scans of 16 patients in the prone position were used in this study, with the single-fraction prescription doses of 15 Gy for the first eight patients and 18 Gy for the remaining eight patients. Six (6) MV photon beams were designed to avoid the heart and contralateral breast. Optimization for IMRT and VMAT was performed to reduce the dose to the skin and normal breast. All plans were normalized such that 100% of the prescribed dose covered greater than 95% of the clinical target volume (CTV) consisting of gross tumor volume (GTV) plus 1.5 cm margin. Mean homogeneity index (HI) was the lowest (1.05 ± 0.02) for 3D CRT and the highest (1.11 ± 0.04) for VMAT. Mean conformity index (CI) was the lowest (1.42 ± 0.32) for IMRTNC and the highest (1.60 ± 0.32) for VMAT. Mean of the maximum point dose to skin was the lowest (73.7 ± 11.5%) for IMRTNC and the highest (86.5 ± 6.68%) for 3D CRT. IMRTCO showed very similar HI, CI, and maximum skin dose to IMRTNC (differences &lt;1%). The estimated mean treatment delivery time, excluding the time spent for patient positioning and imaging, was 7.0 ± 1.0, 8.3 ± 1.1, 9.7 ± 1.0, and 11.0 ± 1.5min for VMAT, IMRTCO, IMRTNC and 3D CRT, respectively. In comparison of all four techniques for preoperative single-fraction partial breast radiotherapy, we can conclude that noncoplanar or coplanar IMRT were optimal in this study as IMRT plans provided homogeneous and conformal target coverage, skin sparing, and relatively short treatment delivery time.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the sliced body volume (SBV) as a respiratory surrogate by comparing with the real-time position management (RPM) in phantom and patient cases. Using the SBV surrogate, breathing signals were extracted from unsorted 4D CT images of a motion phantom and 31 cancer patients (17 lung cancers, 14 abdominal cancers) and were compared to those clinically acquired using the RPM system. Correlation coefficient (R), phase difference (D), and absolute phase difference (D(A)) between the SBV-derived breathing signal and the RPM signal were calculated. 4D CT reconstructed based on the SBV surrogate (4D CT(SBV)) were compared to those clinically generated based on RPM (4D CT(RPM)). Image quality of the 4D CT were scored (S(SBV) and S(RPM), respectively) from 1 to 5 (1 is the best) by experienced evaluators. The comparisons were performed for all patients, and for the lung cancer patients and the abdominal cancer patients separately. RPM box position (P), breathing period (T), amplitude (A), period variability (V(T)), amplitude variability (V(A)), and space-dependent phase shift (F) were determined and correlated to S(SBV). The phantom study showed excellent match between the SBV-derived breathing signal and the RPM signal (R = 0.99, D= -3.0%, D(A) = 4.5%). In the patient study, the mean (± standard deviation (SD)) R, D, D(A), T, V(T), A, V(A), and F were 0.92 (± 0.05), -3.3% (± 7.5%), 11.4% (± 4.6%), 3.6 (± 0.8) s, 0.19 (± 0.10), 6.6 (± 2.8) mm, 0.20 (± 0.08), and 0.40 (± 0.18) s, respectively. Significant differences in R and D(A) (p = 0.04 and 0.001, respectively) were found between the lung cancer patients and the abdominal cancer patients. 4D CT(RPM) slightly outperformed 4D CT(SBV): the mean (± SD) S(RPM) and S(SBV) were 2.6 (± 0.6) and 2.9 (± 0.8), respectively, for all patients, 2.5 (± 0.6) and 3.1 (± 0.8), respectively, for the lung cancer patients, and 2.6 (± 0.7) and 2.8 (± 0.9), respectively, for the abdominal cancer patients. The difference between S(RPM) and S(SBV) was insignificant for the abdominal patients (p = 0.59). F correlated moderately with S(SBV) (r = 0.72). The correlation between SBV-derived breathing signal and RPM signal varied between patients and was significantly better in the abdomen than in the thorax. Space-dependent phase shift is a limiting factor of the accuracy of the SBV surrogate.

American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) task group (TG) 142 has recently published a report to update recommendations of the AAPM TG 40 report and add new recommendations concerning medical accelerators in the era of image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT). The recommendations of AAPM TG 142 on IGRT are timely. In our institute, we established a comprehensive imaging QA program on a medical accelerator based on AAPM TG 142 and implemented it successfully. In this paper, we share our one-year experience and performance evaluation of an OBI capable linear accelerator, Novalis Tx, per TG 142 guidelines.

Target localization using single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and planar imaging is being investigated for guiding radiation therapy delivery. Previous studies on SPECT-based localization have used computer-simulated or hybrid images with simulated tumors embedded in disease-free patient images where the tumor position is known and localization can be calculated directly. In the current study, localization was studied using scanner-acquired images. Five fillable spheres were placed in a whole body phantom. Sphere-to-background 99mTc radioactivity was 6:1. Ten independent SPECT scans were acquired with a Trionix Triad scanner using three detector trajectories: left lateral 180°, 360°, and right lateral 180°. Scan time was equivalent to 4.5 min. Images were reconstructed with and without attenuation correction. True target locations were estimated from 12 hr SPECT and CT images. From the 12 hr SPECT scan, 45 sets of orthogonal planar images were used to assess target localization; total acquisition time per set was equivalent to 4.5min. A numerical observer localized the center of the targets in the 4.5 min SPECT and planar images. SPECT-based localization errors were compared for the different detector trajectories. Across the four peripheral spheres, and using optimal iteration numbers and postreconstruction smoothing, means and standard deviations in localization errors were 0.90 ± 0.25 mm for proximal 180° trajectories, 1.31 ± 0.51 mm for 360° orbits, and 3.93 ± 1.48 mm for distal 180° trajectories. This rank order in localization performance is predicted by target attenuation and distance from the target to the collimator. For the targets with mean localization errors &lt; 2 mm, attenuation correction reduced localization errors by 0.15 mm on average. The improvement from attenuation correction was 1.0 mm on average for the more poorly localized targets. Attenuation correction typically reduced localization errors, but for well-localized targets, the detector trajectory generally had a larger effect. Localization performance was found to be robust to iteration number and smoothing. Localization was generally worse using planar images as compared with proximal 180° and 360° SPECT scans. Using a proximal detector trajectory and attenuation correction, localization errors were within 2 mm for the three superficial targets, thus supporting the current role in biopsy and surgery, and demonstrating the potential for SPECT imaging inside radiation therapy treatment rooms.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy of motion tracking and radiation delivery control of integrated gating systems on a Novalis Tx system. The study was performed on a Novalis Tx system, which is equipped with Varian Real-time Position Management (RPM) system, and BrainLAB ExacTrac gating systems. In this study, the two systems were assessed on accuracy of both motion tracking and radiation delivery control. To evaluate motion tracking, two artificial motion profiles and five patients' respiratory profiles were used. The motion trajectories acquired by the two gating systems were compared against the references. To assess radiation delivery control, time delays were measured using a single-exposure method. More specifically, radiation is delivered with a 4 mm diameter cone within the phase range of 10%-45% for the BrainLAB ExacTrac system, and within the phase range of 0%-25% for the Varian RPM system during expiration, each for three times. Radiochromic films were used to record the radiation exposures and to calculate the time delays. In the work, the discrepancies were quantified using the parameters of mean and standard deviation (SD). Pearson's product-moment correlational analysis was used to test correlation of the data, which is quantified using a parameter of r. The trajectory profiles acquired by the gating systems show good agreement with those reference profiles. A quantitative analysis shows that the average mean discrepancies between BrainLAB ExacTrac system and known references are 1.5 mm and 1.9 mm for artificial and patient profiles, with the maximum motion amplitude of 28.0 mm. As for the Varian RPM system, the corresponding average mean discrepancies are 1.1 mm and 1.7 mm for artificial and patient profiles. With the proposed single-exposure method, the time delays are found to be 0.20 ± 0.03 seconds and 0.09 ± 0.01 seconds for BrainLAB ExacTrac and Varian RPM systems, respectively. The results indicate the systems can track motion and control radiation delivery with reasonable accuracy. The proposed single-exposure method has been demonstrated to be feasible in measuring time delay efficiently.

Dosimetry in kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is a challenge due to the limitation of physical measurements. To address this, we used a Monte Carlo (MC) method to estimate the CT dose index (CTDI) and the dose length product (DLP) for a commercial CBCT system. As Dixon and Boone showed that CTDI concept can be applicable to both CBCT and conventional CT, we evaluated weighted CT dose index (CTDI(w)) and DLP for a commercial CBCT system. Two extended CT phantoms were created in our BEAMnrc/EGSnrc MC system. Before the simulations, the beam collimation of a Varian On-Board Imager (OBI) system was measured with radiochromic films (model: XR-QA). The MC model of the OBI X-ray tube, validated in a previous study, was used to acquire the phase space files of the full-fan and half-fan cone beams. Then, DOSXYZnrc user code simulated a total of 20 CBCT scans for the nominal beam widths from 1 cm to 10 cm. After the simulations, CBCT dose profiles at center and peripheral locations were extracted and integrated (dose profile integral, DPI) to calculate the CTDI per each beam width. The weighted cone-beam CTDI (CTDI(w,l)) was calculated from DPI values and mean CTDI(w,l) (CTDI(w,l)) and DLP were derived. We also evaluated the differences of CTDI(w) values between MC simulations and point dose measurements using standard CT phantoms. In results, it was found that CTDI(w,600) was 8.74 ± 0.01 cGy for head and CTDI(w,900) was 4.26 ± 0.01 cGy for body scan. The DLP was found to be proportional to the beam collimation. We also found that the point dose measurements with standard CT phantoms can estimate the CTDI within 3% difference compared to the full integrated CTDI from the MC method. This study showed the usability of CTDI as a dose index and DLP as a total dose descriptor in CBCT scans.

A positioning QA procedure for Varian's 2D/2D (kV/MV) and 3D/3D (planCT/CBCT) matching was developed. The procedure was to check: (1) the coincidence of on-board imager (OBI), portal imager (PI), and cone beam CT (CBCT)'s isocenters (digital graticules) to a linac's isocenter (to a pre-specified accuracy); (2) that the positioning difference detected by 2D/2D (kV/MV) and 3D/3D(planCT/CBCT) matching can be reliably transferred to couch motion. A cube phantom with a 2 mm metal ball (bb) at the center was used. The bb was used to define the isocenter. Two additional bbs were placed on two phantom surfaces in order to define a spatial location of 1.5 cm anterior, 1.5 cm inferior, and 1.5 cm right from the isocenter. An axial scan of the phantom was acquired from a multislice CT simulator. The phantom was set at the linac's isocenter (lasers); either AP MV/R Lat kV images or CBCT images were taken for 2D/2D or 3D/3D matching, respectively. For 2D/2D, the accuracy of each device's isocenter was obtained by checking the distance between the central bb and the digital graticule. Then the central bb in orthogonal DRRs was manually moved to overlay to the off-axis bbs in kV/MV images. For 3D/3D, CBCT was first matched to planCT to check the isocenter difference between the two CTs. Manual shifts were then made by moving CBCT such that the point defined by the two off-axis bbs overlay to the central bb in planCT. (PlanCT can not be moved in the current version of OBI1.4.) The manual shifts were then applied to remotely move the couch. The room laser was used to check the accuracy of the couch movement. For Trilogy (or Ix-21) linacs, the coincidence of imager and linac's isocenter was better than 1 mm (or 1.5 mm). The couch shift accuracy was better than 2 mm.

The electron Monte Carlo (eMC) dose calculation algorithm of the Eclipse treatment planning system is based heavily upon Monte Carlo simulation of the linac head and modeling of the linac beam characteristics with minimal measurement of beam data. Commissioning of the eMC algorithm on multiple identical linacs provided a unique opportunity to systematically evaluate the algorithm with actual measurements of clinically relevant beam and dose parameters. In this study, measured and eMC calculated dose distributions were compared both along and perpendicular to electron beam direction for electron energy/applicator/depth combination using measurement data from four Varian 21EX CLINAC linear accelerator (Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, CA). Cutout factors for sizes down to 3 x 3 cm were also compared. Comparisons between the measurement and the eMC calculated values show that the R90, R80, R50, and R10 values mostly agree within 3 mm. Measure and Calculated bremsstrahlung dose Dx correlates well statistically although eMC calculated Dx values are consistently smaller than the measured, with maximum discrepancy of 1% for the 20 MeV electron beams. Surface dose agrees mostly within 2%. Field width and penumbra agree mostly within 3mm. Calculation grid size is found to have a significant effect on the dose calculation. A grid size of 5 mm can produce erroneous dose distributions. Using a grid size of 2.5 mm and a 3% accuracy specified for the eMC to stop calculation iteration, the absolute output agrees with measurements within 3% for field sizes of 5 x 5 cm or larger. For cutout of 3 x 3 cm, however, the output disagreement can reach 8%. Our result indicate that eMC algorithm in Eclipse provides acceptable agreement with measurement data for most clinical situations. Calculation grid size of 2.5 mm or smaller is recommended.

Purpose: To investigate the effect of the marker placement on the correlation relationship between the motions of external markers and the internal target under different breathing patterns for several lung cancer patients., Method and Material: To monitor and record simultaneous motions of internal target and associated surrogate markers during respiratory gated radiotherapy, an infrared camera system synchronized with a medical simulator was installed in our institute. Multiple external markers were placed on the patients' chest wall with proper geometrical arrangement in closely monitoring the motion of skin near tumor. The motion signals of three breathing sessions (free breathing, breath-holding, and free breathing after breath-holding) were recorded and the quality of correlation between them was analyzed. For a single marker motion, its correlation with the internal target was analyzed using cross-covariance function. For the multiple markers, their correlation with the internal target was analyzed based on additive model., Result: Seven patients undergoing radiotherapy with right upper or middle lobe lesions were enrolled in this study. Statistic analysis based on the internal-external motion signals shows that the effect of marker location on the quality of its correlation with the internal target is varied from patient to patient. There was no specific marker location where consistently demonstrated superior quality of correlation with the internal target motion over three breathing sessions for all patients. As the composite surrogate signal which was generated from the motions of multiple external markers was used to correlate the internal target motion, significant improvement of the quality of correlation was achieved., Conclusion: The correlation of external marker to the internal target could be influenced by several factors such as patient population, marker locations, and breathing patterns, considerably. The quality of correlation and predictability to the internal target furnished by a single external marker is inferior to that of the composite signal generated from multiple external markers. The use of composite signal shows great potential in improving the predictability of internal target motion and presents an effective way to track tumor more accurately.

In inverse planning for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), the dose specification and related weighting factor of an objective function for involved organs is usually predefined by a single value and then iteratively optimized, subject to a set of dose-volume constraints. Because the actual dose distribution is essentially non-uniform and considerably affected by the geometric shape and distribution of the anatomic structures involved, the spatial information regarding those structures should be incorporated such that the predefined parameter distribution is made to approach the clinically expected distribution. Ideally, these parameter distributions should be predefined on a voxel basis in a manual method. However, such an approach is too time-consuming to be feasible in routine use. In the present study, we developed a computer-aided method to achieve the goal described above, producing a non-uniform parameter distribution based on spatial information about the anatomic structures involved. The method consists of two steps: Use distance transformation technique to calculate the distance distribution of the structures. Based on the distance distribution, produce the parameter distribution via a function guided by prior knowledge. We use two simulated cases to examine the effectiveness of the method. The results indicate that application of a non-uniform parameter distribution produced by distance transformation clearly improves dose-sparing of critical organs without compromising dose coverage of the planning target.

Introduction: Although flat-panel based X-ray imaging has been well tested in diagnostic radiology, its use as an image-guided-radiotherapy (IGRT) system in a treatment room is new and requires systematic assessment., Materials and Methods: BrainLab Novalis IGRT system was used for this study. It consists of two floor mounted kV X-ray tubes projecting obliquely into two flat-panel detectors mounted on the ceiling. The system automatically fuses the 2D localization images with 3D simulation CT image to provide positioning guidance. The following characteristics of the system were studied: (1) Coincidence of the isocenters between the IGRT and Linac; (2) Image quality; (3) Exposure; (4) Linearity, uniformity and repeatability., Results: (1) Localization accuracy and coincidence of the isocenters between the IGRT and Linac was better than 1-mm. (2) The spatial resolution was quantified using the relative modulation-transfer-function with f50=0.7-0.9 lp/mm. The variation of contrast-noise-ratio with technical settings was measured. (3) The maximal exposure of an image was less than 95 mR. An empirical relation between the exposure and the X-ray technical setting was derived. (4) The linearity, uniformity and repeatability of the system generally meet the requirements., Conclusion: The system can be safely and reliably used as a target localization device.