Analyzation of the local confidence limits for IMRT and VMAT based on AAPM TG119 report

Zhang, Jun; Jiang, Dean; Liu, Hui; Shen, Jiemin; Wang, Dajiang; Cheng, Chen; Xie, Conghua; Zhi-min, Cao

doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2019.06.001

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The CL of FF and FFF photon beams were less than 5.35%, which were below 6.3. Kadam A. et al [17] , Zhang et al [13] and Kaviarasu et al [19] obtained the same result as ours. The CL recommended by TG 119 was 12.4.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analyzing the Treatment Delivery Accuracy of the uRT Treatment Planning System and uRT-Linac 506C by Use of AAPM TG 119 Test Cases

Jiang¹,

Wang²,

Shen³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to investigate accuracy of the United Imaging Healthcare's uRT treatment planning system (uRT-TPS), by creating AAPM TG 119 test plans with respectively IMRT and VMAT techniques by homogeneous and heterogeneous phantom. Materials and MethodsThe plans were delivered to the homogeneous and heterogeneous phantom using the United Imaging Healthcare's uRT-Linac 506C. The overall dose calculation accuracy by uRT-TPS with Collapsed Cone Convolution (CC) and Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm was measured and analyzed by creating IMRT and VMAT plans for the 5 test geometries specified in TG 119, by using two kinds of beams FF photon beam and FFF photon beam. The point doses were measured with a Farmer type ion chamber and the fluences were measured with films respectively. Results The result of position accuracy was shown that the worst position accuracy is 0.36 mm and the repeated positioning accuracy of MLC field location was less than 0.25mm. The symmetry deviation of MLC was less than 0.08mm. In this study, the CLs of sMLC, dMLC and VMAT plans with FF photon beams were 2.74%, 2.12%, and 1.36% respectively. As for FFF photon beams, they were 3.76%, 2.14% and 2.90% respectively, whereas the counterpart CL specified in TG119 were 4.5% for the high dose regions and 4.7% for OAR regions. The CLs of Gamma Passing rates for sMLC, dMLC and VMAT plans were 4.59%, 5.35% and 2.15% for FF beam mode, and were 1.82%, 6.12% and 4.82% for FFF beam mode. For the heterogeneous phantom, the maximum deviation is 2.35% for CC and 2.63% for MC algorithm respectively.Conclusion Based on this analysis which were performed in accordance with the TG 119 recommendations, it is evident that the URT treatment planning system and URT-Linac 506C have commissioned IMRT and VMAT techniques with adequate accuracy. and all uRT_TPS treatment plans were recognized as clinically acceptable.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…The CL recommended by TG 119 was 12.4. While our γ passing rates for test cases were lower than those of studies by Zhang et al [13] Our results were similar to Kadam and Sharma's data, [17] and all of us tested single technology and single energy (IMRT, 6 MV). Kaviarasu et al [18] reported similar results to ours.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Analyzing the Treatment Delivery Accuracy of the uRT Treatment Planning System and uRT-Linac 506C by Use of AAPM TG 119 Test Cases

Jiang¹,

Wang²,

Shen³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Location FF FFF SMLC DMLC Burst Mode uArc SMLC DMLC Burst Mode uArc Multitarget Isocenter -0.22% 0.27% -0.96% -1.64% -0.73% 1.02% -1.41% 2.10% Multitarget 4 cm superior to isocenter -0.41% -0.41% -0.49% -1.90% -0.61% 2.39% -0.48% -0.73% Multitarget 4 cm inferior to isocenter -0.81% 0.18% 1.95% -1.66% -1.04% 1.56% 0.08% -1.15% Prostate Isocenter -2.58% -0.03% -0.06% 0.73% -1.00% could not achieve the goal (<1000) set by TG 119 protocol, just like the other nine institutes, which were same with Zhang et al (13) . Meanwhile, all other parameters have been achieved following TG119 protocol in our clinic.…”

Section: Casesupporting

confidence: 65%

“…The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group (TG) 119 states that the Radiological Physics Center findings strongly suggest that IMRT systems may be incorrectly commissioned (12) . The AAPM has therefore published guidelines for IMRT commissioning, specifically Task Group 119 (TG 119) (12,13) . In order to establish the tolerance limits, AAPM TG 119 defined the test cases and compared the results of multiple institutions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing the performance of the URT treatment planning system and URT-Linac 506C for flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter free (FFF) photon beams of Monte Carlo algorithm by use of AAPM TG 119 test cases

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has replaced 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) because of its capacity to deliver a more conformal dose to the target and to spare normal structures. This helps the oncologist to escalate the dose to the tumor volume. It can improve the cure rate of cancer and better protect the organs at risk. A lot of scholars have reported that Intensity-modulated radiation therapy has an advantage over three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) (1,2) . IMRT plans can be delivered by use of a static multi-leaf collimator (SMLC) and a dynamic multi-leaf collimator (DMLC)

show abstract

“… 3 Therefore, it is important to ensure the consistency of each radiotherapy position when performing radiotherapy for head and neck tumours based on TOMO technology. 15 In order to ensure the accurate positioning of the tumour, the patient’s jaw bone should be fixed before radiotherapy to ensure the implementation of precise and efficacious treatment. 16 Therefore, to ensure the repeatability and accuracy of the radiotherapy position during TOMO treatment, and to ensure the timeous monitoring of the oral mucosa and glandular secretion status of patients with the head and neck tumour, the applicant designed a clinical trial based on the patent of ‘a radiotherapy oral fixation and parameter collection device’ (Patent Number: ZL201921877986.5).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiotherapy for head and neck tumours using an oral fixation and parameter acquisition device and TOMO technology: a randomised controlled study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionRadiotherapy has become one of the main methods used for the treatment of malignant tumours of the head and neck. Spiral tomographic intensity-modulated radiotherapy has the many advantages of precision radiotherapy, which puts forward high requirements for postural reproducibility and accuracy. We will aim to ensure that the accurate positioning of the tumour will reduce the side effects of radiotherapy caused by positioning errors. We will design and implement this clinical trial using the patent of ‘a radiotherapy oral fixation and parameter acquisition device (patent number: ZL201921877986.5)’.Methods and analysisThis will be a randomised, controlled, prospective study with 120 patients with head and neck tumours. Using the random number table method, a random number sequence will be generated, and the patients will be enrolled in the experimental group (oral fixation device) and the control group (conventional fixation) in a 2:1 ratio. The primary outcome will be the progression-free survival time after the treatment. Secondary outcomes will include the oral mucosal reaction and the quality of life. Follow-ups will be carried out according to the plan. This is V.1.0 of protocol on 1 April 2021. The recruitment process for this clinical trial commenced on 1 May 2021, and will end on 1 October 2022.Ethics and disseminationThe trial received ethical approval from Medical Ethics Committee of Liaoning Provincial Cancer Hospital (number 20210131X). The final results will be presented at a scientific conference and published in a peer-reviewed journal in accordance with the journal’s guidelines.Trial registration numberChiCTR2100045096.

show abstract

Analyzation of the local confidence limits for IMRT and VMAT based on AAPM TG119 report

Cited by 8 publications

References 26 publications

Analyzing the Treatment Delivery Accuracy of the uRT Treatment Planning System and uRT-Linac 506C by Use of AAPM TG 119 Test Cases

Analyzing the Treatment Delivery Accuracy of the uRT Treatment Planning System and uRT-Linac 506C by Use of AAPM TG 119 Test Cases

Analyzing the performance of the URT treatment planning system and URT-Linac 506C for flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter free (FFF) photon beams of Monte Carlo algorithm by use of AAPM TG 119 test cases

Radiotherapy for head and neck tumours using an oral fixation and parameter acquisition device and TOMO technology: a randomised controlled study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About