SU‐FF‐T‐245: Improvement of QA Pass‐Rate in IMRT Patient Specific QA Using MapCHECK

C. Yang, T. Liu, H. Zhou, J. Cui, Julian R Perks, Robin L Stern, J. Purdy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To demonstrate the improvement in IMRT patient specific quality assurance (QA) by considering a more accurate absolute dose calibration in MapCHECK, machine hardware characteristics and modification in beam modeling in treatment planning system (TPS). Method and Materials: MapCHECK, a 2D diode array system, was used in our routine IMRT patient specific QA on Elekta Synergy S LINAC with Beam Modulator (BM). To explore the absolute dose calibration in MapCHECK, dose at 10 cm water equivalent depth under same reference conditions was calculated for a 6 MV beam for both MapCHECK phantom (CT scanned MapCHECK with 8 cm solid water buildup) and a water phantom (50×50×50 cm3) by Pinnacle TPS, then was compared to each other. 2D dose measurements using film and MapCHECK for 4×4 and 16×16 cm2 were compared with water tank measurements to evaluate the field asymmetry. Results: (1) A 2% systematic difference has been detected in MapCHECK absolute dose calibration. If the QA plan is generated on a solid water phantom rather than on the scanned MapCHECK plus buildup, the pass‐rate can be improved by 1–2%. (2) Accounting for the asymmetric field in superior‐inferior direction associated with beam modulator design, a collimator rotation by 90 degrees in original patient IMRT plans can improve QA pass‐rate by up to 10%. (3) After reducing the source size in Pinnacle TPS beam model to better describe the penumbra, the pass‐rate increased several percent. Comparing QA results before and after implementing steps 1 through 3 in our clinical practice, the pass‐rate increased from 94.7%±2.5%(SD) to 98.6%±2.5%(SD) averaged over 28 patient QAs in each group. Conclusions: By correcting the systematic error in MapCHECK absolute dose calibration, rotating collimator by 90 degrees in patient plans and using a smaller source size in Pinnacle beam model, QA pass‐rate has been significantly improved.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2577
Number of pages1
JournalMedical Physics
Volume36
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009

Fingerprint

Quality Improvement
Calibration
Water
varespladib methyl
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

SU‐FF‐T‐245 : Improvement of QA Pass‐Rate in IMRT Patient Specific QA Using MapCHECK. / Yang, C.; Liu, T.; Zhou, H.; Cui, J.; Perks, Julian R; Stern, Robin L; Purdy, J.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 36, No. 6, 2009, p. 2577.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1d27f3fa488d4bc1bb4068771e257d37,
title = "SU‐FF‐T‐245: Improvement of QA Pass‐Rate in IMRT Patient Specific QA Using MapCHECK",
abstract = "Purpose: To demonstrate the improvement in IMRT patient specific quality assurance (QA) by considering a more accurate absolute dose calibration in MapCHECK, machine hardware characteristics and modification in beam modeling in treatment planning system (TPS). Method and Materials: MapCHECK, a 2D diode array system, was used in our routine IMRT patient specific QA on Elekta Synergy S LINAC with Beam Modulator (BM). To explore the absolute dose calibration in MapCHECK, dose at 10 cm water equivalent depth under same reference conditions was calculated for a 6 MV beam for both MapCHECK phantom (CT scanned MapCHECK with 8 cm solid water buildup) and a water phantom (50×50×50 cm3) by Pinnacle TPS, then was compared to each other. 2D dose measurements using film and MapCHECK for 4×4 and 16×16 cm2 were compared with water tank measurements to evaluate the field asymmetry. Results: (1) A 2{\%} systematic difference has been detected in MapCHECK absolute dose calibration. If the QA plan is generated on a solid water phantom rather than on the scanned MapCHECK plus buildup, the pass‐rate can be improved by 1–2{\%}. (2) Accounting for the asymmetric field in superior‐inferior direction associated with beam modulator design, a collimator rotation by 90 degrees in original patient IMRT plans can improve QA pass‐rate by up to 10{\%}. (3) After reducing the source size in Pinnacle TPS beam model to better describe the penumbra, the pass‐rate increased several percent. Comparing QA results before and after implementing steps 1 through 3 in our clinical practice, the pass‐rate increased from 94.7{\%}±2.5{\%}(SD) to 98.6{\%}±2.5{\%}(SD) averaged over 28 patient QAs in each group. Conclusions: By correcting the systematic error in MapCHECK absolute dose calibration, rotating collimator by 90 degrees in patient plans and using a smaller source size in Pinnacle beam model, QA pass‐rate has been significantly improved.",
author = "C. Yang and T. Liu and H. Zhou and J. Cui and Perks, {Julian R} and Stern, {Robin L} and J. Purdy",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1118/1.3181721",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "36",
pages = "2577",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - SU‐FF‐T‐245

T2 - Improvement of QA Pass‐Rate in IMRT Patient Specific QA Using MapCHECK

AU - Yang, C.

AU - Liu, T.

AU - Zhou, H.

AU - Cui, J.

AU - Perks, Julian R

AU - Stern, Robin L

AU - Purdy, J.

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Purpose: To demonstrate the improvement in IMRT patient specific quality assurance (QA) by considering a more accurate absolute dose calibration in MapCHECK, machine hardware characteristics and modification in beam modeling in treatment planning system (TPS). Method and Materials: MapCHECK, a 2D diode array system, was used in our routine IMRT patient specific QA on Elekta Synergy S LINAC with Beam Modulator (BM). To explore the absolute dose calibration in MapCHECK, dose at 10 cm water equivalent depth under same reference conditions was calculated for a 6 MV beam for both MapCHECK phantom (CT scanned MapCHECK with 8 cm solid water buildup) and a water phantom (50×50×50 cm3) by Pinnacle TPS, then was compared to each other. 2D dose measurements using film and MapCHECK for 4×4 and 16×16 cm2 were compared with water tank measurements to evaluate the field asymmetry. Results: (1) A 2% systematic difference has been detected in MapCHECK absolute dose calibration. If the QA plan is generated on a solid water phantom rather than on the scanned MapCHECK plus buildup, the pass‐rate can be improved by 1–2%. (2) Accounting for the asymmetric field in superior‐inferior direction associated with beam modulator design, a collimator rotation by 90 degrees in original patient IMRT plans can improve QA pass‐rate by up to 10%. (3) After reducing the source size in Pinnacle TPS beam model to better describe the penumbra, the pass‐rate increased several percent. Comparing QA results before and after implementing steps 1 through 3 in our clinical practice, the pass‐rate increased from 94.7%±2.5%(SD) to 98.6%±2.5%(SD) averaged over 28 patient QAs in each group. Conclusions: By correcting the systematic error in MapCHECK absolute dose calibration, rotating collimator by 90 degrees in patient plans and using a smaller source size in Pinnacle beam model, QA pass‐rate has been significantly improved.

AB - Purpose: To demonstrate the improvement in IMRT patient specific quality assurance (QA) by considering a more accurate absolute dose calibration in MapCHECK, machine hardware characteristics and modification in beam modeling in treatment planning system (TPS). Method and Materials: MapCHECK, a 2D diode array system, was used in our routine IMRT patient specific QA on Elekta Synergy S LINAC with Beam Modulator (BM). To explore the absolute dose calibration in MapCHECK, dose at 10 cm water equivalent depth under same reference conditions was calculated for a 6 MV beam for both MapCHECK phantom (CT scanned MapCHECK with 8 cm solid water buildup) and a water phantom (50×50×50 cm3) by Pinnacle TPS, then was compared to each other. 2D dose measurements using film and MapCHECK for 4×4 and 16×16 cm2 were compared with water tank measurements to evaluate the field asymmetry. Results: (1) A 2% systematic difference has been detected in MapCHECK absolute dose calibration. If the QA plan is generated on a solid water phantom rather than on the scanned MapCHECK plus buildup, the pass‐rate can be improved by 1–2%. (2) Accounting for the asymmetric field in superior‐inferior direction associated with beam modulator design, a collimator rotation by 90 degrees in original patient IMRT plans can improve QA pass‐rate by up to 10%. (3) After reducing the source size in Pinnacle TPS beam model to better describe the penumbra, the pass‐rate increased several percent. Comparing QA results before and after implementing steps 1 through 3 in our clinical practice, the pass‐rate increased from 94.7%±2.5%(SD) to 98.6%±2.5%(SD) averaged over 28 patient QAs in each group. Conclusions: By correcting the systematic error in MapCHECK absolute dose calibration, rotating collimator by 90 degrees in patient plans and using a smaller source size in Pinnacle beam model, QA pass‐rate has been significantly improved.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024817820&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024817820&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.3181721

DO - 10.1118/1.3181721

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85024817820

VL - 36

SP - 2577

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 6

ER -