Interinstitutional beam model portability study in a mixed vendor environment

Frigo, Sean P.; Ohrt, J.; Suh, Yelin; Balter, Peter A

doi:10.1002/acm2.13445

J Applied Clin Med Phys

2021

DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13445

|View full text |Cite

Interinstitutional beam model portability study in a mixed vendor environment

Sean P. Frigo

J. Ohrt

Yelin Suh

et al.

Abstract: A 6 MV flattened beam model for a Varian TrueBeamSTx c‐arm treatment delivery system in RayStation, developed and validated at one institution, was implemented and validated at another institution. The only parameter value adjustments were to accommodate machine output at the second institution. Validation followed MPPG 5.a. recommendations, with particular attention paid to IMRT and VMAT deliveries. With this minimal adjustment, the model passed validation across a broad spectrum of treatment plans, measureme… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Commissioning and validation of a single photon beam model in RayStation for multiple matched Elekta Linacs

Su,

Huang,

Miles

et al. 2024

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeA single treatment planning system (TPS) model for matched linacs provides flexible clinical workflows from patient treatment to intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) quality assurance (QA) measurement. Since general guidelines for building a single TPS model and its validation for matched linacs are not well established, we present our RayStation photon TPS modeling strategy for matched Elekta VersaHD linacs.MethodThe four linacs installed from 2013 to 2020 were matched in terms of Percent Depth Dose (PDD), profile, output factor and wedge factors for 6‐MV, 10‐MV, 15‐MV, and 6‐MV‐FFF, and maintained following TG‐142 recommendations until RayStation commissioning. The RayStation single model was built to represent all four linacs within the tolerance limits recommended by MPPG‐5.a. The comprehensive validation tests were performed for one linac following MPPG‐5.a and TG‐119 guidelines, and spot checks for the other three. Our TPS modeling/validation method was evaluated by re‐analyzing the previous 103 patient‐specific IMRT/volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) QA measurements with the calculated planar doses by the single model in comparison with the analysis results using four individual Pinnacle TPS models.ResultsFor all energies, our single model PDDs were within 1% agreement of the four‐linac commissioning measurements. The MPPG‐5.a validation tests from 5.1 through 7.5 and all TG‐119 measurements passed within the recommended tolerance limits. The IMRT QA results (mean ± standard deviation) for RayStation single model versus Pinnacle individual models were 98.9% ± 1.3% and 98.0% ± 1.4% for 6‐MV, 99.9% ± 0.1% and 99.1% ± 1.9% for 10‐MV, and 98.2% ± 1.3% and 97.9% ± 1.8% for 6‐MV‐FFF, respectively.ConclusionWe successfully built and validated a single photon beam model in RayStation for four Elekta Linacs. The proposed new validation methods were proven to be both efficient and effective.

show abstract

Commissioning and validation of a single photon beam model in RayStation for multiple matched Elekta Linacs

Su,

Huang,

Miles

et al. 2024

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Portability of IMRT QA between matched linear accelerators

Barraclough,

Labby,

Frigo

2024

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo determine if patient‐specific IMRT quality assurance can be measured on any matched treatment delivery system (TDS) for patient treatment delivery on another.MethodsThree VMAT plans of varying complexity were created for each available energy for head and neck, SBRT lung, and right chestwall anatomical sites. Each plan was delivered on three matched Varian TrueBeam TDSs to the same Scandidos Delta4 Phantom+ diode array with only energy‐specific device calibrations. Dose distributions were corrected for TDS output and then compared to TPS calculations using gamma analysis. Round‐robin comparisons between measurements from each TDS were also performed using point‐by‐point dose difference, median dose difference, and the percent of point dose differences within 2% of the mean metrics.ResultsAll plans had more than 95% of points passing a gamma analysis using 3%/3 mm criteria with global normalization and a 20% threshold when comparing measurements to calculations. The tightest gamma analysis criteria where a plan still passed > 95% were similar across delivery systems—within 0.5%/0.5 mm for all but three plan/energy combinations. Median dose deviations in measurement‐to‐measurement comparisons were within 0.7% and 1.0% for global and local normalization, respectively. More than 90% of the point differences were within 2%.ConclusionA set of plans spanning available energies and complexity levels were delivered by three matched TDSs. Comparisons to calculations and between measurements showed dose distributions delivered by each TDS using the same DICOM RT‐plan file meet tolerances much smaller than typical clinical IMRT QA criteria. This demonstrates each TDS is modeled to a similar accuracy by a common class (shared) beam model. Additionally, it demonstrates that dose distributions from one TDS show small differences in median dose to the others. This is an important validation component of the common beam model approach, allowing for operational improvements in the clinic.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Interinstitutional beam model portability study in a mixed vendor environment

Cited by 2 publications

References 19 publications

Commissioning and validation of a single photon beam model in RayStation for multiple matched Elekta Linacs

Commissioning and validation of a single photon beam model in RayStation for multiple matched Elekta Linacs

Portability of IMRT QA between matched linear accelerators

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About