A commissioning protocol for portal imaging-based radiotherapy in vivo dosimetry systems

IF 3.4 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Marco Esposito , Riccardo Baldoni , Evy Bossuyt , Sara Bresciani , Catharine H Clark , Matthew Jones , Stephen Kry , Joseph Perry , Jeroen van de Kamer , Dirk Verellen , Nuria Jornet
{"title":"A commissioning protocol for portal imaging-based radiotherapy in vivo dosimetry systems","authors":"Marco Esposito ,&nbsp;Riccardo Baldoni ,&nbsp;Evy Bossuyt ,&nbsp;Sara Bresciani ,&nbsp;Catharine H Clark ,&nbsp;Matthew Jones ,&nbsp;Stephen Kry ,&nbsp;Joseph Perry ,&nbsp;Jeroen van de Kamer ,&nbsp;Dirk Verellen ,&nbsp;Nuria Jornet","doi":"10.1016/j.phro.2024.100666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Purpose</h3><div>With the availability of commercial electronic portal imaging detector-based in vivo dosimetry (EPID-based IVD) solutions, many radiotherapy departments are adopting this technology. However, comprehensive commissioning guidance is lacking. This study aims to provide a protocol for testing the accuracy and sensitivity of EPID-based IVD systems.</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>The protocol was tested across four institutions using two different systems. Accuracy was evaluated with homogeneous slab phantoms using different square regular fields, and clinical plans in a CIRS lung phantom. Multiple forward and back-projected algorithm implementations were assessed for different energies. Sensitivity analysis in the lung phantom examined responses to setup errors, anatomical variations, and delivery errors.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In homogeneous phantoms, over 85 % of pixels passed the 5 %/2mm gamma criteria, except for the 2x2 cm<sup>2</sup> field. In the lung phantom, all systems and implementations achieved over 95 %-pixel pass rates at the 2 %/2mm criterion for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. For conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) plans, one system implementation showed poor accuracy, with over 90 % agreement only at the 5 %/2mm criterion. Considering all systems and implementations, average sensitivity and specificity for CRT plans ranged from 0.92 and 0.42 (at 2 %/2mm) to 0.71 and 0.52 (at 5 %/2mm), while for VMAT plans ranged from 0.41 and 0.81 (at 2 %2mm) to 0.37 and 0.81 (at 5 %/2mm).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>We successfully developed a protocol to commission EPID IDV systems. It was found that not all systems and implementations achieved satisfactory accuracy and sensitivity, emphasising the need for thorough commissioning and benchmarking.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36850,"journal":{"name":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","volume":"32 ","pages":"Article 100666"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631624001362","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Purpose

With the availability of commercial electronic portal imaging detector-based in vivo dosimetry (EPID-based IVD) solutions, many radiotherapy departments are adopting this technology. However, comprehensive commissioning guidance is lacking. This study aims to provide a protocol for testing the accuracy and sensitivity of EPID-based IVD systems.

Material and methods

The protocol was tested across four institutions using two different systems. Accuracy was evaluated with homogeneous slab phantoms using different square regular fields, and clinical plans in a CIRS lung phantom. Multiple forward and back-projected algorithm implementations were assessed for different energies. Sensitivity analysis in the lung phantom examined responses to setup errors, anatomical variations, and delivery errors.

Results

In homogeneous phantoms, over 85 % of pixels passed the 5 %/2mm gamma criteria, except for the 2x2 cm2 field. In the lung phantom, all systems and implementations achieved over 95 %-pixel pass rates at the 2 %/2mm criterion for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. For conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) plans, one system implementation showed poor accuracy, with over 90 % agreement only at the 5 %/2mm criterion. Considering all systems and implementations, average sensitivity and specificity for CRT plans ranged from 0.92 and 0.42 (at 2 %/2mm) to 0.71 and 0.52 (at 5 %/2mm), while for VMAT plans ranged from 0.41 and 0.81 (at 2 %2mm) to 0.37 and 0.81 (at 5 %/2mm).

Conclusion

We successfully developed a protocol to commission EPID IDV systems. It was found that not all systems and implementations achieved satisfactory accuracy and sensitivity, emphasising the need for thorough commissioning and benchmarking.
基于门户成像的放射治疗体内剂量测定系统调试协议
背景和目的随着基于电子门户成像探测器的体内剂量测定(EPID-based IVD)商用解决方案的推出,许多放射治疗部门正在采用这种技术。然而,目前还缺乏全面的调试指导。本研究旨在为测试基于 EPID 的 IVD 系统的准确性和灵敏度提供一个方案。使用不同方形规则场的均质平板模型和 CIRS 肺部模型中的临床计划对准确性进行了评估。针对不同的能量评估了多种正向和反向投影算法的实施情况。在肺部模型中进行的灵敏度分析检查了对设置误差、解剖变化和传输误差的反应。结果在均质模型中,除 2x2 平方厘米场外,超过 85% 的像素通过了 5%/2mm 伽马标准。在肺部模型中,对于容积调制弧治疗(VMAT)计划,所有系统和实施方案在 2%/2mm 标准下的像素通过率均超过 95%。对于适形放射治疗(3DCRT)计划,一种系统的实施显示出较低的准确性,仅在 5%/2mm 标准下的一致性超过 90%。考虑到所有系统和实施情况,CRT计划的平均灵敏度和特异度分别为0.92和0.42(2%/2mm时)至0.71和0.52(5%/2mm时),而VMAT计划的平均灵敏度和特异度分别为0.41和0.81(2%/2mm时)至0.37和0.81(5%/2mm时)。我们发现,并非所有的系统和实施方案都能达到令人满意的准确度和灵敏度,这就强调了进行全面调试和基准测试的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology Physics and Astronomy-Radiation
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
18.90%
发文量
93
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信