Sensitivity Study to Evaluate the Dosimetric Impact of Off-Axis Ratio Profiles Misalignment on TomoTherapy Second Dose Validation

Abstract

Accurate dose planning and delivery are very important in the intensity modulated radiation therapy. For helical TomoTherapy dose validation, a TomoTherapy second check software, called MU-Tomo, has been developed using archived patient documents, initial coordinates and planned dose of the point of calculation, and common dosimetric functions. Based on this software, sensitivity studies on 50 patient cases have been evaluated to show the impact of off-axis ratio profile misalignment on point dose calculation. Off-axis ratio is defined as the dose profile normalized to its maximum dose value. Sensitivity studies were done for three scenarios: oscillating the fluctuation regions of two off-axis profiles, shifting the profiles, and rotating the profiles. The result of the oscillation trial is linear along the change of longitudinal off-axis ratio (OARy), while oscillating the lateral off-axis ratio (OARx) has little influence on the dose calculation. For shifting, the variation in the percentage difference from the non-shifting value is about 15 times larger in OARy modification than in OARx modification. Rotating OARx by ±6° gave less than 1.5% ± 0.20% difference compared to the non-rotating value. Rotating OARy by ±1° changes the result more than 5% ± 2.69%. Therefore, for helical TomoTherapy dose validation, commissioned OARy profiles are more sensitive than OARx to oscillation, shifting and rotating. As a result, different tolerances for OARx and OARy may be required for annual quality assurance.

Keywords

TomoTherapy Second check Independent dose calculation Geometric uncertainties Sensitivity Off-axis ratio profile.

References

Mackie

T. R.

Holmes

Swerdloff

Reckwerdt

Deasy

J. O.

Yang

Paliwal

Kinsella

, TOMOTHERAPY — A new concept for the delivery of dynamic conformal radiotherapy. Med Phys 20, 1709–1719 (1993).

Mackie

T. R.

, History of tomotherapy. Phys Med Biol 51, 427–453 (2006).

Mackie

T. R.

Kapatoes

Ruchala

W. G.

Olivera

Forrest

Tome

Welsh

Jeraj

Harari

Reckwerdt

Paliwal

Ritter

Keller

Fowler

Mehta

Image guidance for precise conformal radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56, 89–105 (2003).

Yang

J. N.

Mackie

T. R.

Reckwerdt

Deasy

J. O.

Thomadsen

B. R.

Investigation of tomotherapy beam delivery. Med Phys 24, 425–436 (1997).

Beavis

A. W.

Is tomotherapy the future of IMRT?

Br J Radiol 77, 285–295 (2004).

Zacarias

Balog

Mills

Radiation shielding design of a new tomotherapy facility. Health Phys 91, 289–295 (2006).

Craig

Battista

Van Dyk

Limitations of a convolution method for modeling geometric uncertainties in radiation therapy. I. The effect of shift invariance. Med Phys 30, 2001–2011 (2003).

Craig

Battista

Van Dyk

Limitations of a convolution method for modeling geometric uncertainties in radiation therapy. II. The effect of a finite number of fractions. Med Phys 30, 2012–2020 (2003).

Jaffray

D. A.

Yan

Wong

J. W.

Managing geometric uncertainty in conformal intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Semin Radiat Oncol 9, 4–19 (1999).

10.

Low

D. A.

Zhu

X. R.

Purdy

J. A.

Soderstrom

The influence of angular misalignment on fixed-portal intensity modulated radiation therapy. Med Phys , 24, 1123–1139 (1997).

11.

Lin

S. H.

Sugar

Teslow

McNutt

Saleh

Song

D. Y.

Comparison of daily couch shifts using MVCT (TomoTherapy) and B-mode ultrasound (BAT system) during prostate radiotherapy. Technol Cancer Res T 7, 279–285 (2008).

12.

Lin

Shi

C. Y.

Eng

Swanson

Fuss

Papanikolaou

Evaluation of inter-fractional setup shifts for site-specific helical tomotherapy treatments. Technol Cancer Res T 8, 115–122 (2009).

13.

Sheng

Chow

Hunter

Larner

Read

Is daily computed tomography image guidance necessary for nasal cavity and nasopharyngeal radiotherapy? An investigation based on helical tomotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 9, 36–46 (2008).

14.

F. C.

Shi

C. Y.

Crownover

Swanson

Papanikolaou

Dosimetric impacts of gantry angle misalignment on prostate cancer treatment using helical tomotherapy. Technol Cancer Res T 7, 287–293 (2008).

15.

Ngwa

Meeks

S. L.

Kupelian

P. A.

Schnarr

Langen

K. M.

Validation of a computational method for assessing the impact of intra-fraction motion on helical tomotherapy plans. Phys Med Biol 54, 6611–6621 (2009).

16.

Ayyangar

K. M.

Nizin

P. S.

Saw

C. B.

Gearheart

Shen

Enke

C. A.

Independent dose calculations for the corvus MLC IMRT. Med Dosim 26, 135–141 (2001).

17.

Ayyangar

K. M.

Saw

C. B.

Gearheart

Shen

Thompson

Independent calculations to validate monitor units from ADAC treatment planning system. Med Dosim 28, 79–83 (2003).

18.

Ayyangar

K. M.

Saw

C. B.

Shen

Enke

C. A.

Nizin

P. S.

Independent dose calculations for the PEACOCK System. Med Dosim 26, 29–35 (2001).

19.

Beck

Berndt

An algorithm for independent verification of Gamma Knife (TM) treatment plans. Med Phys 31, 2780–2784 (2004).

20.

Chen

Xing

Nath

Independent monitor unit calculation for intensity modulated radiotherapy using the MIMIC multileaf collimator. Med Phys 29, 2041–2051 (2002).

21.

Chen

X. G.

Yue

N. J.

Chen

W. M.

Saw

C. B.

Heron

D. E.

Stefanik

Antemann

Huq

M. S.

A dose verification method using a monitor unit matrix for dynamic IMRT on Varian linear accelerators. Phys Med Biol 50, 5641–5652 (2005).

22.

Lorenz

Killoran

J. H.

Wenz

Zygmanski

An independent dose calculation algorithm for MLC-based stereotactic radiotherapy. Med Phys 34, 1605–1614 (2007).

23.

Lorenz

Nalichowski

Rosca

Killoran

Wenz

Zygmanski

An independent dose calculation algorithm for MLC-based radiotherapy including the spatial dependence of MLC transmission. Phys Med Biol 53, 557–573 (2008).

24.

Luo

J. S.

Price

R. A.

Chen

L. L.

Yang

Fan

J. J.

Chen

Z. Q.

McNeeley

C. M.

Monte Carlo based IMRT dose verification using MLC log files and R/V outputs. Med Phys 33, 2557–2564 (2006).

25.

Yang

Xing

J. G.

Palta

Chen

Luxton

Boyer

Independent dosimetric calculation with inclusion of head scatter and MLC transmission for IMRT. Med Phys 30, 2937–2947 (2003).

26.

Zhu

J. G.

Yin

F. F.

Kim

J. H.

Point dose verification for intensity modulated radiosurgery using Clarkson's method. Med Phys 30, 2218–2221 (2003).

27.

Jansen

W. P. A.

Dirkx

M. L. P.

Heijmen

B. J. M.

Independent 3D dose calculation as part of an overall individualized dosimetric QA protocol for IMRT. Radiother Oncol 68, 36–36 (2003).

28.

Edimo

Clermont

Kwato

M. G.

Vynckier

Evaluation of a commercial VMC++ Monte Carlo based treatment planning system for electron beams using EGSnrc/BEAMnrc simulations and measurements. Phys Medica 25, 111–121 (2009).

29.

Kumada

Nakamura

Komeda

Matsumura

Development of a new multi-modal Monte-Carlo radiotherapy planning system. Appl Radiat Isotopes 67, 118–121 (2009).

30.

Kumar

Sharma

S. D.

Vijaykumar

Deshpande

Sharma

Vandana

Philomena

Chilkulwar

R. H.

A dose verification method for high-dose-rate brachytherapy treatment plans. J Cancer Res Ther 4, 173–177 (2008).

31.

Mukumoto

Tsujii

Saito

Yasunaga

Takegawa

Yamamoto

Numasaki

Teshima

A Preliminary Study of In-House Monte Carlo Simulations: An Integrated Monte Carlo Verification System. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 75, 571–579 (2009).

32.

Pisaturo

Moeckli

Mirimanoff

R. O.

Bochud

F. O.

A Monte Carlo-based procedure for independent monitor unit calculation in IMRT treatment plans. Phys Med Biol 54, 4299–4310 (2009).

33.

Tsai

J.-S.

Engler

M. J.

Liu

Quasi-independent monitor unit calculation for intensity modulated sequential tomotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 3, 135–153 (2002).

34.

Gibbons

J. P.

Smith

Cheek

Rosen

Independent calculation of dose from a helical TomoTherapy unit. J Appl Clin Med Phys 10, 103–119 (2009).

35.

ICRU:ICRU Report 29, Dose specifications for reporting external beam therapy with photons and electrons. Bethesda, MD, International Committee on Radiation Units and Measurements (1978).