Comparison of 2D and 3D gamma evaluation method in patient specific intensity-modulated radiotherapy quality assurance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20230854Keywords:
IMRT QA, 2D gamma, 3D gamma, PSQAAbstract
Background: In this study we have compared 2D and 3D gamma pass percentage for a variety of acceptance criteria for 40 step-and-shoot IMRT (intensity-modulated radiotherapy) plans.
Methods: Treatment planning was done for 40 patient including head and neck, abdomen and pelvis simulated on the Siemens Healthcare GmBH CT simulator with images of 3 mm slice thickness using treatment planning system (TPS) (Monaco Version 5.11.03, Elekta medical system) using Monte Carlo algorithm. The gamma evaluation was done using PTW VeriSoft 8.1 which allowed us to perform 2D and 3D gamma index calculation, slice-by-slice comparison of measured and calculated dose distributions, measured dose was compared against the calculated DICOMRT dose on the OCTAVIUS 3D phantom from TPS.
Results: The average 3D and 2D gamma passing in coronal planes were 96.61±0.45% and 96.27±0.78% for 5 mm/5% criteria, 93.74±4.17% and 91.9±4.88% for 3 mm/3% criteria, 85.83±7.58% and 82.41±8.06% for 2 mm/2% criteria and 62.8±9.42% and 59.18±9.52% for 1 mm/1% criteria respectively for all cases. The average gamma passing rate for 3D gamma analysis was 0.35%, 1.97 %, 3.97% and 5.78% higher when compared with 2D coronal planar analyses for 5 mm/5%, 3 mm/3%, 2 mm/2% and 1 mm/1% DTA criteria respectively.
Conclusions: It is concluded in the study that 3 D gamma passing rate is higher compared to 2D gamma passing for head and neck, abdomen and pelvis cases.
References
Wang X, Spirou S, Losassom T, Stein J, Chui CS, Mohan R. Dosimetric verification of intensity-modulated fields. Med Phys. 1996;23(3):317-27.
Low DA, Gerber RL, Mutic S, Purdy JA. Phantoms for IMRT dose distribution measurement and treatment verification Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;40(5):1231-5.
Xing L, Curran B, Hill R, Holmes T, Ma L, Forster KM, et al. Dosimetric verification of a commercial inverse planning system. Phys Med Biol. 1999;44(2):463-78.
Martens C, Wagter CD, Neve WD. The value of pin point ion chamber for characterization of small field segments used in intensity modulated radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 2000;45(9):2519-30.
IMRTCWG. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy: Current status and issues of interest. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51:880-914.
Dong L, Antolak J, Salehpour M, Forster K, Neill LO, Kendall R, et al. Patient specific point dose measurements for IMRT monitoring unit verification. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56(3):867-77.
Urso P, Lorusso R, Marzoli L, Corletto D, Imperiale P, Pepe A, et al. Practical application of Octavius® 4D: Characteristics and criticalities for IMRT and VMAT verification. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018;19(5):517-24.
Low DA, Harms WB, Mutic S, Purdy JA. A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. Med Phys. 1998;25(5):656-61.
Wu C, Hoiser KE, Beck KE, Radevic MB. On using 3D γ-analysis for IMRT and VMAT prêt reatment plan QA. Med Phys. 2012;39:3051-9.
Shukla AK, Oinam AS, Kumar S, Sandhu IS, Sharma SC. A calibration method for patient specific IMRT QA using a single therapy verification film. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2013;18(4):235-40.
Wendling M, Lambert LJ, McDermott LN, Smit EJ, Sonke J, Mijnheer BJ, et al. A fast algorithm for gamma evaluation in 3D. Med Phys. 2007;34(5):1647-54.
Boggula R, Birkner M, Lohr F, Steil V, Wenz F, Wertz H. Evaluation of a 2D detector array for patient-specific VMAT QA with different setups. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56(22):7163-77.
Poppe B, Blechschmidt A, Djouguela A, Kollhoff R, Rubach A, Willborn KC, et al. Two-dimensional ionizationchamber arrays for IMRT plan verification. Med Phys. 2006;33(4):1005-15.
Carrasco P, Jornet N, Latorre A, Eudaldo T, Ruiz A, Ribas M. 3D DVH-based metric analysis versus per-beam planar analysis in IMRT pretreatment verification. Med Phys. 2012;39(8):5040-9.
Jursinic, PA, Nelms BE. A 2-D diode array and analysis software for verification of intensity modulated radiation therapy delivery. Med Phys. 2003;30(5):870-9.
Rajasekaran D, Jeevanandam P, Sukumar P, Ranganathan A, Johnjothi S, Nagarajan V, et al. A study on correlation between 2D and 3D gamma evaluation metrics in patient-specific quality assurance for VMAT. Med Dosim. 2014;39(4):300-8.
Pulliam KB, Huang JY, Howell RM, Followill D, Bosca R, O'Daniel J, et al. Comparison of 2D and 3D gamma analyses. Med Phys. 2014;41(2):021710.
Yan G, Fox C, Liu C, Li JG. The extraction of true profiles for TPS commissioning and its impact on IMRT patient‐specific QA. Med Phys. 2008;35(8):3661-70.
Childress NL, Dong L, Rosen II. Rapid radiographic film calibration for IMRT verification using automated MLC fields. Med Phys. 2002;29(10):2384-90.
