商用二次剂量检查软件的调试和磁共振引导线性加速器自适应工作流程的临床实施。

IF 0.7 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Journal of Medical Physics Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-24 DOI:10.4103/jmp.jmp_150_24
José Alejandro Rojas-López, Alexis Cabrera-Santiago, Jorge Ramiro Corral-Beltrán, Albin Ariel García-Andino
{"title":"商用二次剂量检查软件的调试和磁共振引导线性加速器自适应工作流程的临床实施。","authors":"José Alejandro Rojas-López, Alexis Cabrera-Santiago, Jorge Ramiro Corral-Beltrán, Albin Ariel García-Andino","doi":"10.4103/jmp.jmp_150_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to report the commissioning the secondary dose calculation software ThinkQA (TQA) for an magnetic resonance-guided linear accelerator (MR-linac).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Medical Physics Practice Guideline 5.a. (MPPG5a) tests, and dose in inhomogeneities, beam profiles, and depth dose curves were calculated and compared between Monaco and TQA. Five intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans (anal, abdominal, head and neck, prostate, and lung), based on TG-244 guidelines were evaluated varying the gamma criteria. Furthermore, the initial and adapted plans for the first session for 17 patients in different anatomical regions were calculated in TQA using different gamma criteria. For five patients, six measurements were made at different fractions using ArcCheck and compared with TQA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of tests met the tolerances defined in the MPPG5a with the exception of dose profiles (>10%), and large multileaf collimator-shaped fields with extensive blocking (>2%). For the IMRT plans, tight criteria such as 2%/2 mm may not be suitable for all scenarios. Thus, we adopt a reasonable 3%/2 mm without compromising the quality of the plan that included significant high-to-low-density interfaces. It is observed that, the values obtained for clinical cases are in the range from 94.6% to 99.8% (TQA), 97.0% to 99.6% (ArcCheck), except in a prostate case with 87.8% (TQA) and 99.3% (ArcCheck).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We commissioned TQA as a secondary dose calculation for MR-linac and we introduced it clinically for adaptive treatment workflow using 3%/2 mm with 95% as tolerance limit and 90% as action limit.</p>","PeriodicalId":51719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Physics","volume":"50 1","pages":"20-29"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12005651/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Commissioning of a Commercial Secondary Dose Check Software and Clinical Implementation for the Magnetic Resonance-guided Linear Accelerator Adaptive Workflow.\",\"authors\":\"José Alejandro Rojas-López, Alexis Cabrera-Santiago, Jorge Ramiro Corral-Beltrán, Albin Ariel García-Andino\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jmp.jmp_150_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to report the commissioning the secondary dose calculation software ThinkQA (TQA) for an magnetic resonance-guided linear accelerator (MR-linac).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Medical Physics Practice Guideline 5.a. (MPPG5a) tests, and dose in inhomogeneities, beam profiles, and depth dose curves were calculated and compared between Monaco and TQA. Five intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans (anal, abdominal, head and neck, prostate, and lung), based on TG-244 guidelines were evaluated varying the gamma criteria. Furthermore, the initial and adapted plans for the first session for 17 patients in different anatomical regions were calculated in TQA using different gamma criteria. For five patients, six measurements were made at different fractions using ArcCheck and compared with TQA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of tests met the tolerances defined in the MPPG5a with the exception of dose profiles (>10%), and large multileaf collimator-shaped fields with extensive blocking (>2%). For the IMRT plans, tight criteria such as 2%/2 mm may not be suitable for all scenarios. Thus, we adopt a reasonable 3%/2 mm without compromising the quality of the plan that included significant high-to-low-density interfaces. It is observed that, the values obtained for clinical cases are in the range from 94.6% to 99.8% (TQA), 97.0% to 99.6% (ArcCheck), except in a prostate case with 87.8% (TQA) and 99.3% (ArcCheck).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We commissioned TQA as a secondary dose calculation for MR-linac and we introduced it clinically for adaptive treatment workflow using 3%/2 mm with 95% as tolerance limit and 90% as action limit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51719,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Physics\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"20-29\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12005651/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_150_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_150_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是报道用于磁共振引导直线加速器(MR-linac)的二次剂量计算软件ThinkQA (TQA)的调试。方法:医学物理实践指南5.a。(MPPG5a)试验,计算和比较摩纳哥和TQA在不均匀性、光束剖面和深度剂量曲线中的剂量。根据TG-244指南评估了五种强度调制放疗(IMRT)计划(肛门、腹部、头颈部、前列腺和肺部),并改变了伽马标准。此外,在TQA中使用不同的伽玛标准计算了17例不同解剖区域患者的初始和调整计划。对5名患者,使用ArcCheck在不同分数下进行6次测量,并与TQA进行比较。结果:除剂量谱(>为10%)和大面积遮挡的大多叶准直形场(>为2%)外,大多数试验均满足MPPG5a中定义的公差。对于IMRT计划,严格的标准,如2%/ 2mm可能不适合所有情况。因此,我们采用了合理的3%/ 2mm,而不影响计划的质量,包括重要的高低密度接口。观察到,临床病例的取值范围为94.6% ~ 99.8% (TQA), 97.0% ~ 99.6% (ArcCheck),前列腺病例的取值范围为87.8% (TQA)和99.3% (ArcCheck)。结论:我们将TQA作为MR-linac的二次剂量计算,并将其引入临床,采用3%/ 2mm, 95%为耐受极限,90%为作用极限的适应性治疗流程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Commissioning of a Commercial Secondary Dose Check Software and Clinical Implementation for the Magnetic Resonance-guided Linear Accelerator Adaptive Workflow.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to report the commissioning the secondary dose calculation software ThinkQA (TQA) for an magnetic resonance-guided linear accelerator (MR-linac).

Methods: The Medical Physics Practice Guideline 5.a. (MPPG5a) tests, and dose in inhomogeneities, beam profiles, and depth dose curves were calculated and compared between Monaco and TQA. Five intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans (anal, abdominal, head and neck, prostate, and lung), based on TG-244 guidelines were evaluated varying the gamma criteria. Furthermore, the initial and adapted plans for the first session for 17 patients in different anatomical regions were calculated in TQA using different gamma criteria. For five patients, six measurements were made at different fractions using ArcCheck and compared with TQA.

Results: The majority of tests met the tolerances defined in the MPPG5a with the exception of dose profiles (>10%), and large multileaf collimator-shaped fields with extensive blocking (>2%). For the IMRT plans, tight criteria such as 2%/2 mm may not be suitable for all scenarios. Thus, we adopt a reasonable 3%/2 mm without compromising the quality of the plan that included significant high-to-low-density interfaces. It is observed that, the values obtained for clinical cases are in the range from 94.6% to 99.8% (TQA), 97.0% to 99.6% (ArcCheck), except in a prostate case with 87.8% (TQA) and 99.3% (ArcCheck).

Conclusion: We commissioned TQA as a secondary dose calculation for MR-linac and we introduced it clinically for adaptive treatment workflow using 3%/2 mm with 95% as tolerance limit and 90% as action limit.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Physics
Journal of Medical Physics RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
55
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS is the official journal of Association of Medical Physicists of India (AMPI). The association has been bringing out a quarterly publication since 1976. Till the end of 1993, it was known as Medical Physics Bulletin, which then became Journal of Medical Physics. The main objective of the Journal is to serve as a vehicle of communication to highlight all aspects of the practice of medical radiation physics. The areas covered include all aspects of the application of radiation physics to biological sciences, radiotherapy, radiodiagnosis, nuclear medicine, dosimetry and radiation protection. Papers / manuscripts dealing with the aspects of physics related to cancer therapy / radiobiology also fall within the scope of the journal.
×
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