No abstract

No abstract

The authors have presented a method for making the Varian IAEA compliant 6 MV FFF phase space file of the TrueBeam linac compatible with BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc. After benchmarking the modified phase space against measurement, they have demonstrated its potential for use in MC based quality assurance of complex delivery techniques.

Introduction: We present a Trajectory-based Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (TVMAT) technique for Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) that takes advantage of a modern linacs ability to modulate dose rate and move the couch dynamically. In addition, we investigate the quality of the developed TVMAT method and the dosimetric accuracy of the technique. Methods: The main feature of the TVMAT technique is a standard beam trajectory formed by dynamic motion of the treatment couch and the linac gantry. The couch rotates slowly through 180 degrees while the gantry delivers radiation through continuous sweeps of the gantry. The number of partial arcs that constitute the trajectory can be varied between two and eight and as the number of partial arcs increases, the trajectory more finely samples 4p geometry. Along these trajectories, the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) and dose rate are optimized through an inverse planning framework. The TVMAT method was tested on ten cranial SRS patients who were previously treated with the Dynamic Conformal Arc (DCA) technique. The plans were compared with the DCA and a four-arc VMAT technique with regards to dose to the OAR, dose falloff, V12Gy, and V4Gy. Validation measurements were performed using ion-chamber and Gafchromic film. In addition, the trajectory-log files were analyzed and compared with the treatment plan beam data. Results: The TVMAT treatment plans were successfully delivered with a treatment time between 3-8 min which mostly depended on total cumulated dose. Ion chamber measurements had an average measured error of 1.1 AE 0.6% and a maximum value of 2.2% of the delivered dose. The 2%, 2 mm gamma pass rates for the film measurements were 96% or greater. In a preliminary comparison of ten patients who underwent SRS treatments with the DCA technique, the TVMAT and VMAT techniques were able to produce plans with comparable dose falloff and OAR doses, while achieving better dose conformality, V4Gy and V12Gy when compared to the original DCA plans. The improvement of the TVMAT plans were as follows (mean % improvement AE standard err): Conformity (10 AE 2%), V4 (20 AE 20%), V12 (27 AE 10%), volume weighted mean dose to organs at risk (13 AE 13%), homogeneity index (2 AE 2%) and falloff (4 AE 2%). Conclusion: We have developed and validated a trajectory-based dose delivery method which has dose distribution improvements while having a treatment time of 3-8 min. In addition, it has the potential for a simpler planning experience while maintaining an accurate delivery on the Varian Truebeam Linac.

A Monte Carlo (MC) validation of the vendor‐supplied Varian TrueBeam 6 MV flattened (6X) phase‐space file and the first implementation of the Siebers‐Keall MC MLC model as applied to the HD120 MLC (for 6X flat and 6X flattening filterfree (6X FFF) beams) are described. The MC model is validated in the context of VMAT patient‐specific quality assurance. The Monte Carlo commissioning process involves: 1) validating the calculated open‐field percentage depth doses (PDDs), profiles, and output factors (OF), 2) adapting the Siebers‐Keall MLC model to match the new HD120‐MLC geometry and material composition, 3) determining the absolute dose conversion factor for the MC calculation, and 4) validating this entire linac/MLC in the context of dose calculation verification for clinical VMAT plans. MC PDDs for the 6X beams agree with the measured data to within 2.0% for field sizes ranging from 2 × 2 to 40 × 40 cm2. Measured and MC profiles show agreement in the 50% field width and the 80%‐20% penumbra region to within 1.3 mm for all square field sizes. MC OFs for the 2 to 40 cm2 square fields agree with measurement to within 1.6%. Verification of VMAT SABR lung, liver, and vertebra plans demonstrate that measured and MC ion chamber doses agree within 0.6% for the 6X beam and within 2.0% for the 6X FFF beam. A 3D gamma factor analysis demonstrates that for the 6X beam, > 99% of voxels meet the pass criteria (3%/3 mm). For the 6X FFF beam, > 94% of voxels meet this criteria. The TrueBeam accelerator delivering 6X and 6X FFF beams with the HD120 MLC can be modeled in Monte Carlo to provide an independent 3D dose calculation for clinical VMAT plans. This quality assurance tool has been used clinically to verify over 140 6X and 16 6X FFF TrueBeam treatment plans.PACS number: 87.55.K‐