A Comparison between Portal Dosimetry and Mobius3D Results for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance in Radiotherapy

Kim, Sung Yeop; Park, Jaehyeon; Park, Jae Won; Yea, Ji Woon; Oh, Se An

doi:10.14316/pmp.2021.32.4.107

Cited by 1 publication

(5 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(2021) reported the gamma pass rates for Portal 3%/3 mm and Mobius3D 5%/3 mm to have a small difference of 1.1%. [ 15 ] In this current study, the mean differences between Mobius 5%/3 mm and Portal 3%/2 mm and Mobius 3%/3 mm and Portal 3%/2 mm in IMRT are 0.65% and 3.19%, respectively, suggesting a better agreement with Mobius 5%/3 mm. Furthermore, at P < 0.001, all relationships were found to be nonlinear with Pearson’s coefficients nearing 0.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 45%

“…also performed a similar study using a 3%/3 mm criterion with gamma pass rates ranging from 97.53% to 99.43% for two different linear accelerator units. [ 15 ]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…yielded similar values for Mobius3D at 5%/3 mm ranging from 96.45% to 99.32%. [ 15 ] In contrast, Lee et al . reported a mean gamma pass rate of 99.8% for Mobius 3%/3 mm in VMAT plans.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Mobius3D version 4.0 (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA) was used to perform comprehensive, model-based patient-specific QA using the CCC algorithm to recalculate doses based on CT data and treatment parameters (e.g., field sizes, gantry angles, couch settings, beam energy, monitor units [MU], and MLC patterns), instead of phantom-based measurements. [ 13 - 15 ] Dose distributions can be displayed in the transverse, coronal, and sagittal planes. [ 13 , 14 ] The system has in its archives datasets required to build a predefined model for linear accelerators, including percent depth dose points, beam profiles, off-axis ratios, and output factors.…”

Section: Aterials and M Ethodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[ 11 ] At present, the Mobius3D is mainly used as a secondary QA verification tool in a comprehensive patient-specific QA program. [ 9 , 15 ]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Assessment of the Dosimetric Performance of the Mobius3D against Portal Dose Measurements in Patient-specific Quality Assurance

Labagnoy,

Oonsiri,

Vimolnoch

et al. 2023

Journal of Medical Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The Mobius3D software addresses limitations lacking in measurement-based methods in patient-specific quality assurance (QA). The objective of this study was to validate its dosimetric performance against conventionally used portal dose measurements using gamma analysis and confidence limits. Materials and Methods: A total of 240 patient-specific QA plans for the Varian Halcyon linear accelerator were collected. The Mobius3D software was commissioned through beam data and plan verification. All plans underwent QA through the electronic portal imaging device, coupled with the Portal Dosimetry software, and the Mobius3D. Data were assessed using >95% gamma pass. Portal measurements were evaluated using 3%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm criteria, whereas Mobius3D was analyzed at 3%/3 mm and 5%/3 mm, at the 10% threshold. Results: Mobius 5%/3 mm mean gamma passes were 99.89% for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and 99.31% for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and correspondingly, the data for portal 3%/2 mm were 99.99% and 99.96%. The Mobius3D at 5%/3 mm can perform like Portal 3%/2 mm for VMAT plans at 0.1% difference, especially for head/neck and pelvic/abdominal cases. In IMRT-based treatments, at 0.7% difference in Mobius3D 5%/3 mm and Portal 3%/2 mm, the performance and error identification in IMRT plans should be applied more carefully due to the amount of failed plans, particularly the chest region. The confidence limits for VMAT plans for Portal 3%/2 mm and Mobius 5%/3 mm are 99.93% and 99.42%, respectively, while for IMRT plans are 99.69% and 97.43%, respectively. Conclusions: At a 5%/3 mm criterion, the Mobius3D may yield percentage gamma pass rates like measurements obtained by Portal Dosimetry 3%/3 mm and Portal Dosimetry 3%/2 mm. As the software is largely dependent on commissioned data, rigorous commissioning and a comprehensive QA program should be implemented.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 45%

“…also performed a similar study using a 3%/3 mm criterion with gamma pass rates ranging from 97.53% to 99.43% for two different linear accelerator units. [ 15 ]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…yielded similar values for Mobius3D at 5%/3 mm ranging from 96.45% to 99.32%. [ 15 ] In contrast, Lee et al . reported a mean gamma pass rate of 99.8% for Mobius 3%/3 mm in VMAT plans.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Aterials and M Ethodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[ 11 ] At present, the Mobius3D is mainly used as a secondary QA verification tool in a comprehensive patient-specific QA program. [ 9 , 15 ]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Assessment of the Dosimetric Performance of the Mobius3D against Portal Dose Measurements in Patient-specific Quality Assurance

Labagnoy,

Oonsiri,

Vimolnoch

et al. 2023

Journal of Medical Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Comparison between Portal Dosimetry and Mobius3D Results for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance in Radiotherapy

Cited by 1 publication

References 29 publications

Assessment of the Dosimetric Performance of the Mobius3D against Portal Dose Measurements in Patient-specific Quality Assurance

Assessment of the Dosimetric Performance of the Mobius3D against Portal Dose Measurements in Patient-specific Quality Assurance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About