A survey of modulated radiotherapy use in Australia &amp; New Zealand in 2015

Barber, Jeffrey; Vial, P; White, Paul A.; Menzies, N.; Deshpande, Shrikant; Bromley, Regina; Bennie, Nick; Yau, Shan; Harrison, K.G.

doi:10.1007/s13246-017-0590-y

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most common form of PSQA involves the comparison of TPS dose calculations with 2D or 3D dose measurements . The gamma evaluation method (also known as gamma analysis, or gamma index analysis), developed by Low et al is widely used to compare such measurements .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of dose comparison techniques for patient‐specific quality assurance in radiation therapy

Tang

Cassim

et al. 2019

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeGamma evaluation is the most commonly used technique for comparison of dose distributions for patient‐specific pretreatment quality assurance in radiation therapy. Alternative dose comparison techniques have been developed but not widely implemented. This study aimed to compare and evaluate the performance of several previously published alternatives to the gamma evaluation technique, by systematically evaluating a large number of patient‐specific quality assurance results.MethodsThe agreement indices (or pass rates) for global and local gamma evaluation, maximum allowed dose difference (MADD) and divide and conquer (D&C) techniques were calculated using a selection of acceptance criteria for 429 patient‐specific pretreatment quality assurance measurements. Regression analysis was used to quantify the similarity of behavior of each technique, to determine whether possible variations in sensitivity might be present.ResultsThe results demonstrated that the behavior of D&C gamma analysis and MADD box analysis differs from any other dose comparison techniques, whereas MADD gamma analysis exhibits similar performance to the standard global gamma analysis. Local gamma analysis had the least variation in behavior with criteria selection. Agreement indices calculated for 2%/2 mm and 2%/3 mm, and 3%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm were correlated for most comparison techniques.ConclusionRadiation oncology treatment centers looking to compare between different dose comparison techniques, criteria or lower dose thresholds may apply the results of this study to estimate the expected change in calculated agreement indices and possible variation in sensitivity to delivery dose errors.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…%GP can be used by the users to establish or apply action levels. Surveys of PSQA practices have reported that ∆D and DTA criteria of 3%/3 mm are the most frequently used …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of dose comparison techniques for patient‐specific quality assurance in radiation therapy

Tang

Cassim

et al. 2019

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The 3% ΔD criterion was selected in this study because it is widely used, in combination with a range of Δd values, but the use of 3% as a ΔD criterion is not universal. Similarly, GAI values of 100% and 95% were selected as examples of extreme and commonly‐used PSQA action levels, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ΔD of 3% was chosen for this work because it is very widely recommended and used. Recent surveys suggested that 3%/3 mm are currently the most commonly used gamma evaluation criteria, and the AAPM's task group report on IMRT commissioning (TG‐119) used 3%/3 mm and the AAPM's more recent task group report on modulated radiotherapy quality assurance (TG‐218) recommended 3%/2 mm. Investigations of cranial and extra‐cranial stereotactic radiotherapy have reported the use of 3%/2 mm, 3%/1.5 mm, 3%/1 mm and 3%/0.3 mm criteria.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Technical note: A modified gamma evaluation method for dose distribution comparisons

Kairn

Trapp

et al. 2019

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose In this work we have developed a novel method of dose distribution comparison, the inverse gamma (IG) evaluation, by modifying the commonly used gamma evaluation method. Methods The IG evaluation calculates the gamma criteria (dose difference criterion, ΔD, or distance‐to‐agreement criterion, Δd) that are needed to achieve a predefined pass rate or gamma agreement index (GAI). In‐house code for evaluating IG with a fixed ΔD of 3% was developed using Python (v3.5.2) and investigated using treatment plans and measurement data from 25 retrospective patient specific quality assurance tests (53 individual arcs). Results It was found that when the desired GAI was set to 95%, approximately three quarters of the arcs tested were able to achieve Δd within 1 mm (mean Δd: 0.7 ± 0.5 mm). The mean Δd required in order for all points to pass the gamma evaluation (i.e., GAI = 100%) was 4.5 ± 3.1 mm. The possibility of evaluating IG by fixing the Δd or ΔD/Δd, instead of fixing the ΔD at 3%, was also investigated. Conclusion The IG method and its indices have the potential to be implemented clinically to quantify the minimum dose and distance criteria based on a specified GAI. This method provides additional information to augment standard gamma evaluation results during patient specific quality assurance testing of individual treatment plans. The IG method also has the potential to be used in retrospective audits to determine an appropriate set of local gamma criteria and action levels based on a cohort of patient specific quality assurance plans.

show abstract

‘Is the technology essential or emerging?’ Ways to keep radiation therapy curriculum agile amid rapidly advancing technology

Short

Giles

2022

J of Medical Radiation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advancing technology in radiation therapy can significantly influence clinical practice and improvement of patient outcomes. In the process, innovations in technology require that changes to clinical practice are adopted within education settings. This commentary aims to describe the uptake of new technology and ways that academics provide an up‐to‐date curriculum when today's innovation is tomorrow's contemporary practice.

show abstract

A survey of modulated radiotherapy use in Australia & New Zealand in 2015

Cited by 13 publications

References 24 publications

Analysis of dose comparison techniques for patient‐specific quality assurance in radiation therapy

Analysis of dose comparison techniques for patient‐specific quality assurance in radiation therapy

Technical note: A modified gamma evaluation method for dose distribution comparisons

‘Is the technology essential or emerging?’ Ways to keep radiation therapy curriculum agile amid rapidly advancing technology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About