Can a commercially available EPID dosimetry system detect small daily patient setup errors for cranial IMRT/SRS?

Emmelyn S. Hsieh, Katherine S Hansen, Michael S Kent, Sanjeev Saini, Sonja Dieterich

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if the Sun Nuclear PerFRACTION electronic portal imager device dosimetry software would be able to detect setup errors in a clinical setting and would be able to correctly identify the direction in which the setup error was introduced. Methods and materials: A 7-field intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plan for a centrally located tumor was developed for 1 phantom and 5 canine cadaver heads. Systematic setup errors were introduced by manually moving the treatment couch by 1, 3, and 5 mm in each translational direction to assess stereotactic radiation surgery (SRS), IMRT, and 3-dimensional (3D) treatment tolerances after the initial alignment was performed. An angular setup error of 5° yaw was also assessed. The delivered treatment fluence was automatically imported in the PerFRACTION software and compared with the baseline fluence. Results: In the canine phantom, a 5-mm shift was undetected by gamma analysis, and up to a 2-cm shift had to be introduced for the gamma pass rate of 3%/3 mm to fall below a 95% pass rate criterion. The same 5-mm shift using 3% difference caused the pass rates for 2 fields to drop below the 95% tolerance. For each respective translational shift, the affected beam angles were consistent across the cadaver heads and correlated with the direction of translational shift. The best field pass rate, worst field pass rate, and average pass rate across all 7 fields was analyzed to develop clinical guidance on parameter settings for SRS, IMRT, and 3D tolerances. Conclusions: PerFRACTION 2-dimensional mode successfully detected setup errors outside the systematic error tolerance for SRS, IMRT, and 3D when an appropriate analysis metric and pass/fail criteria was implemented. Our data confirm that percent difference may be more sensitive in detecting plan failure than gamma analysis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPractical Radiation Oncology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jun 28 2016

Fingerprint

Radiotherapy
Radiation
Cadaver
Canidae
Software
Head
Yaws
Radiation Tolerance
Solar System
Therapeutics
Equipment and Supplies
Direction compound
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{43519ec885564d20ba57ef1c9e925872,
title = "Can a commercially available EPID dosimetry system detect small daily patient setup errors for cranial IMRT/SRS?",
abstract = "Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if the Sun Nuclear PerFRACTION electronic portal imager device dosimetry software would be able to detect setup errors in a clinical setting and would be able to correctly identify the direction in which the setup error was introduced. Methods and materials: A 7-field intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plan for a centrally located tumor was developed for 1 phantom and 5 canine cadaver heads. Systematic setup errors were introduced by manually moving the treatment couch by 1, 3, and 5 mm in each translational direction to assess stereotactic radiation surgery (SRS), IMRT, and 3-dimensional (3D) treatment tolerances after the initial alignment was performed. An angular setup error of 5° yaw was also assessed. The delivered treatment fluence was automatically imported in the PerFRACTION software and compared with the baseline fluence. Results: In the canine phantom, a 5-mm shift was undetected by gamma analysis, and up to a 2-cm shift had to be introduced for the gamma pass rate of 3{\%}/3 mm to fall below a 95{\%} pass rate criterion. The same 5-mm shift using 3{\%} difference caused the pass rates for 2 fields to drop below the 95{\%} tolerance. For each respective translational shift, the affected beam angles were consistent across the cadaver heads and correlated with the direction of translational shift. The best field pass rate, worst field pass rate, and average pass rate across all 7 fields was analyzed to develop clinical guidance on parameter settings for SRS, IMRT, and 3D tolerances. Conclusions: PerFRACTION 2-dimensional mode successfully detected setup errors outside the systematic error tolerance for SRS, IMRT, and 3D when an appropriate analysis metric and pass/fail criteria was implemented. Our data confirm that percent difference may be more sensitive in detecting plan failure than gamma analysis.",
author = "Hsieh, {Emmelyn S.} and Hansen, {Katherine S} and Kent, {Michael S} and Sanjeev Saini and Sonja Dieterich",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "28",
doi = "10.1016/j.prro.2016.12.005",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Practical Radiation Oncology",
issn = "1879-8500",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Can a commercially available EPID dosimetry system detect small daily patient setup errors for cranial IMRT/SRS?

AU - Hsieh, Emmelyn S.

AU - Hansen, Katherine S

AU - Kent, Michael S

AU - Saini, Sanjeev

AU - Dieterich, Sonja

PY - 2016/6/28

Y1 - 2016/6/28

N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if the Sun Nuclear PerFRACTION electronic portal imager device dosimetry software would be able to detect setup errors in a clinical setting and would be able to correctly identify the direction in which the setup error was introduced. Methods and materials: A 7-field intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plan for a centrally located tumor was developed for 1 phantom and 5 canine cadaver heads. Systematic setup errors were introduced by manually moving the treatment couch by 1, 3, and 5 mm in each translational direction to assess stereotactic radiation surgery (SRS), IMRT, and 3-dimensional (3D) treatment tolerances after the initial alignment was performed. An angular setup error of 5° yaw was also assessed. The delivered treatment fluence was automatically imported in the PerFRACTION software and compared with the baseline fluence. Results: In the canine phantom, a 5-mm shift was undetected by gamma analysis, and up to a 2-cm shift had to be introduced for the gamma pass rate of 3%/3 mm to fall below a 95% pass rate criterion. The same 5-mm shift using 3% difference caused the pass rates for 2 fields to drop below the 95% tolerance. For each respective translational shift, the affected beam angles were consistent across the cadaver heads and correlated with the direction of translational shift. The best field pass rate, worst field pass rate, and average pass rate across all 7 fields was analyzed to develop clinical guidance on parameter settings for SRS, IMRT, and 3D tolerances. Conclusions: PerFRACTION 2-dimensional mode successfully detected setup errors outside the systematic error tolerance for SRS, IMRT, and 3D when an appropriate analysis metric and pass/fail criteria was implemented. Our data confirm that percent difference may be more sensitive in detecting plan failure than gamma analysis.

AB - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if the Sun Nuclear PerFRACTION electronic portal imager device dosimetry software would be able to detect setup errors in a clinical setting and would be able to correctly identify the direction in which the setup error was introduced. Methods and materials: A 7-field intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plan for a centrally located tumor was developed for 1 phantom and 5 canine cadaver heads. Systematic setup errors were introduced by manually moving the treatment couch by 1, 3, and 5 mm in each translational direction to assess stereotactic radiation surgery (SRS), IMRT, and 3-dimensional (3D) treatment tolerances after the initial alignment was performed. An angular setup error of 5° yaw was also assessed. The delivered treatment fluence was automatically imported in the PerFRACTION software and compared with the baseline fluence. Results: In the canine phantom, a 5-mm shift was undetected by gamma analysis, and up to a 2-cm shift had to be introduced for the gamma pass rate of 3%/3 mm to fall below a 95% pass rate criterion. The same 5-mm shift using 3% difference caused the pass rates for 2 fields to drop below the 95% tolerance. For each respective translational shift, the affected beam angles were consistent across the cadaver heads and correlated with the direction of translational shift. The best field pass rate, worst field pass rate, and average pass rate across all 7 fields was analyzed to develop clinical guidance on parameter settings for SRS, IMRT, and 3D tolerances. Conclusions: PerFRACTION 2-dimensional mode successfully detected setup errors outside the systematic error tolerance for SRS, IMRT, and 3D when an appropriate analysis metric and pass/fail criteria was implemented. Our data confirm that percent difference may be more sensitive in detecting plan failure than gamma analysis.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85015794130&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85015794130&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.prro.2016.12.005

DO - 10.1016/j.prro.2016.12.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 28336480

AN - SCOPUS:85015794130

JO - Practical Radiation Oncology

JF - Practical Radiation Oncology

SN - 1879-8500

ER -