H Chung

Evaluation of surface and build-up region dose for intensity-modulated radiation therapy in head and neck cancer.

Despite much development, there remains dosimetric uncertainty in the surface and build-up regions in intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment plans for head and neck cancers. Experiments were performed to determine the dosimetric discrepancies in the surface and build-up region between the treatment planning system (TPS) prediction and experimental measurement using radiochromic film. A head and neck compression film phantom was constructed from two semicylindrical solid water slabs. Treatment plans were generated using two commercial TPSs (PINNACLE3 and CORVUS) for two cases, one with a shallow (approximately 0.5 cm depth) target and another with a deep (approximately 6 cm depth) target. The plans were evaluated for a 54 Gy prescribed dose. For each case, two pieces of radiochromic film were used for dose measurement. A small piece of film strip was placed on the surface and another was inserted within the phantom. Overall, both TPSs showed good agreement with the measurement. For the shallow target case, the dose differences were within +/- 300 cGy (5.6% with respect to the prescribed dose) for PINNACLE3 and +/- 240 cGy (4.4%) for CORVUS in 90% of the region of interest. For the deep target case, the dose differences were +/- 350 (6.5%) for PINNACLE3 and +/- 260 cGy (4.8%) for CORVUS in 90% of the region of interest. However, it was found that there were significant discrepancies from the surface to about 0.2 cm in depth for both the shallow and deep target cases. It was concluded that both TPSs overestimated the surface dose for both shallow and deep target cases. The amount of overestimation ranges from 400 to 1000 cGy (approximately 7.4% to 18.5% with respect to the prescribed dose, 5400 cGy).

Evaluation of similarity measures for use in the intensity-based rigid 2D-3D registration for patient positioning in radiotherapy.

PURPOSE Rigid 2D-3D registration is an alternative to 3D-3D registration for cases where largely bony anatomy can be used for patient positioning in external beam radiation therapy. In this article, the authors evaluated seven similarity measures for use in the intensity-based rigid 2D-3D registration using a variation in Skerls similarity measure evaluation protocol. METHODS The seven similarity measures are partitioned intensity uniformity, normalized mutual information (NMI), normalized cross correlation (NCC), entropy of the difference image, pattern intensity (PI), gradient correlation (GC), and gradient difference (GD). In contrast to traditional evaluation methods that rely on visual inspection or registration outcomes, the similarity measure evaluation protocol probes the transform parameter space and computes a number of similarity measure properties, which is objective and optimization method independent. The variation in protocol offers an improved property in the quantification of the capture range. The authors used this protocol to investigate the effects of the downsampling ratio, the region of interest, and the method of the digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR) calculation [i.e., the incremental ray-tracing method implemented on a central processing unit (CPU) or the 3D texture rendering method implemented on a graphics processing unit (GPU)] on the performance of the similarity measures. The studies were carried out using both the kilovoltage (kV) and the megavoltage (MV) images of an anthropomorphic cranial phantom and the MV images of a head-and-neck cancer patient. RESULTS Both the phantom and the patient studies showed the 2D-3D registration using the GPU-based DRR calculation yielded better robustness, while providing similar accuracy compared to the CPU-based calculation. The phantom study using kV imaging suggested that NCC has the best accuracy and robustness, but its slow function value change near the global maximum requires a stricter termination condition for an optimization method. The phantom study using MV imaging indicated that PI, GD, and GC have the best accuracy, while NCC and NMI have the best robustness. The clinical study using MV imaging showed that NCC and NMI have the best robustness. CONCLUSIONS The authors evaluated the performance of seven similarity measures for use in 2D-3D image registration using the variation in Skerls similarity measure evaluation protocol. The generalized methodology can be used to select the best similarity measures, determine the optimal or near optimal choice of parameter, and choose the appropriate registration strategy for the end user in his specific registration applications in medical imaging.

Dose variations with varying calculation grid size in head and neck IMRT

Ever since the advent and development of treatment planning systems, the uncertainty associated with calculation grid size has been an issue. Even to this day, with highly sophisticated 3D conformal and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning systems (TPS), dose uncertainty due to grid size is still a concern. A phantom simulating head and neck treatment was prepared from two semi-cylindrical solid water slabs and a radiochromic film was inserted between the two slabs for measurement. Plans were generated for a 5,400 cGy prescribed dose using Philips Pinnacle(3) TPS for two targets, one shallow ( approximately 0.5 cm depth) and one deep ( approximately 6 cm depth). Calculation grid sizes of 1.5, 2, 3 and 4 mm were considered. Three clinical cases were also evaluated. The dose differences for the varying grid sizes (2 mm, 3 mm and 4 mm from 1.5 mm) in the phantom study were 126 cGy (2.3% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription), 248.2 cGy (4.6% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription) and 301.8 cGy (5.6% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription), respectively for the shallow target case. It was found that the dose could be varied to about 100 cGy (1.9% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription), 148.9 cGy (2.8% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription) and 202.9 cGy (3.8% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription) for 2 mm, 3 mm and 4 mm grid sizes, respectively, simply by shifting the calculation grid origin. Dose difference with a different range of the relative dose gradient was evaluated and we found that the relative dose difference increased with an increase in the range of the relative dose gradient. When comparing varying calculation grid sizes and measurements, the variation of the dose difference histogram was insignificant, but a local effect was observed in the dose difference map. Similar results were observed in the case of the deep target and the three clinical cases also showed results comparable to those from the phantom study.

High-precision GAFCHROMIC EBT film-based absolute clinical dosimetry using a standard flatbed scanner without the use of a scanner non-uniformity correction

To report a study of the use of GAFCHROMIC EBT radiochromic film (RCF) digitized with a commercially available flatbed document scanner for accurate and reliable all‐purpose two‐dimensional (2D) absolute dosimetry within a clinical environment. We used a simplified methodology that yields high‐precision dosimetry measurements without significant postirradiation correction. The Epson Expression 1680 Professional scanner and the Epson Expression 10000XL scanner were used to digitize the films. Both scanners were retrofitted with light‐diffusing glass to minimize the effects of Newton rings. Known doses were delivered to calibration films. Flat and wedge fields were irradiated with variable depth of solid water and 5 cm back scatter solid water. No particular scanner nonuniformity effect corrections or significant post‐scan image processing were carried out. The profiles were compared with CC04 ionization chamber profiles. The depth dose distribution was measured at a source‐to‐surface distance (SSD) of 100 cm with a field size of 10×10 cm2. Additionally, 22 IMRT fields were measured and evaluated using gamma index analysis. The overall accuracy of RCF with respect to CC04 was found to be 2%–4%. The overall accuracy of RCF was determined using the absolute mean of difference for all flat and wedge field profiles. For clinical IMRT fields, both scanners showed an overall gamma index passing rate greater than 90%. This work demonstrated that EBT films, in conjunction with a commercially available flatbed scanner, can be used as an accurate and precise absolute dosimeter. Both scanners showed that no significant scanner nonuniformity correction is necessary for accurate absolute dosimetry using the EBT films for field sizes smaller than or equal to 15×15 cm2. PACS number: 87.53.Bn

Feasibility of using two-dimensional array dosimeter for in vivo dose reconstruction via transit dosimetry

Two‐dimensional array dosimeters are commonly used to perform pretreatment quality assurance procedures, which makes them highly desirable for measuring transit fluences for in vivo dose reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to determine if an in vivo dose reconstruction via transit dosimetry using a 2D array dosimeter was possible. To test the accuracy of measuring transit dose distribution using a 2D array dosimeter, we evaluated it against the measurements made using ionization chamber and radiochromic film (RCF) profiles for various air gap distances (distance from the exit side of the solid water slabs to the detector distance; 0 cm, 30 cm, 40 cm, 50 cm, and 60 cm) and solid water slab thicknesses (10 cm and 20 cm). The backprojection dose reconstruction algorithm was described and evaluated. The agreement between the ionization chamber and RCF profiles for the transit dose distribution measurements ranged from ‐0.2%~ 4.0% (average 1.79%). Using the backprojection dose reconstruction algorithm, we found that, of the six conformal fields, four had a 100% gamma index passing rate (3%/3 mm gamma index criteria), and two had gamma index passing rates of 99.4% and 99.6%. Of the five IMRT fields, three had a 100% gamma index passing rate, and two had gamma index passing rates of 99.6% and 98.8%. It was found that a 2D array dosimeter could be used for backprojection dose reconstruction for in vivo dosimetry. PACS number: 87.55.N‐

An analytical formalism to calculate phantom scatter factors for flattening filter free (FFF) mode photon beams

Phantom Scatter Factors, Sp in the Khan formalism (Khan et al 1980 J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 6 745-51) describe medium-induced changes in photon-beam intensity as a function of size of the beam. According to the British Journal of Radiology, Supplement 25, megavoltage phantom scatter factors are invariant as a function of photon-beam energy. However, during the commissioning of an accelerator with flattening filter free (FFF) photon beams (Varian TrueBeam(TM) 6-MV FFF and 10-MV FFF), differences were noted in phantom scatter between the filtered beams and FFF-mode beams. The purpose of this work was to evaluate this difference and provide an analytical formalism to explain the phantom scatter differences between FFF-mode and the filtered mode. An analytical formalism was devised to demonstrate the source of phantom scatter differences between the filtered and the FFF-mode beams. The reason for the differences in the phantom scatter factors between the filtered and the FFF-mode beams is hypothesized to be the non-uniform beam profiles of the FFF-mode beams. The analytical formalism proposed here is based on this idea, taking the product of the filtered phantom scatter factors and the ratio of the off-axis ratio between the FFF-mode and the filtered beams. All measurements were performed using a Varian TrueBeam(TM) linear accelerator with photon energies of 6-MV and 10-MV in both filtered and FFF-modes. For all measurements, a PTW Farmer type chamber and a Scanditronix CC04 cylindrical ionization were used. The in-water measurements were made at depth dose maximum and 100 cm source-to-axis distance. The in-air measurements were done at 100 cm source-to-axis distance with appropriate build-up cap. From these measurements, the phantom scatter factors were derived for the filtered beams and the FFF-mode beams for both energies to be evaluated against the phantoms scatter factors calculated using the proposed algorithm. For 6-MV, the difference between the measured and the calculated FFF-mode phantom scatter factors ranged from -0.34% to 0.73%. The average per cent difference was -0.17% (1σ = 0.25%). For 10-MV, the difference ranged from -0.19% to 0.24%. The average per cent difference was -0.17% (1σ = 0.13%). An analytical formalism was presented to calculate the phantom scatter factors for FFF-mode beams using filtered phantom scatter factors as a basis. The overall differences between measurements and calculations were within ± 0.5% for 6-MV and ± 0.25% for 10-MV.

A new paradigm of IMRT plan evaluation with uncertainty volume histogram

In intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), it is common to compare different treatment plans and choose the optimal one. Current plan evaluation methods include side-by-side dose comparisons with isodose lines and dose-volume histograms (DVHs). In these approaches, possible discrepancy between planned dose and delivered dose is not taken into account. Considering each plan may cause different amount of errors, it is possible that the chosen plan may raise more errors than others resulting in worse outcome than expected. In this study, we propose to include dose uncertainty analysis as a part of plan evaluation. Assuming the Gaussian distribution, we have developed an uncertainty prediction model using dose level and dose gradient at points of interest with categorizing the uncertainties into two parts: non-space-oriented and space-oriented. Uncertainty-volume histogram (UVH) can be constructed from 3-D uncertainty distribution obtained by the uncertainty model. For the target or any critical organ at risk, a plan that shows less risky UVH may be preferable in terms of dose uncertainty. Three patients (2 head and neck cases and 1 prostate case) were selected and three different treatment plans for each patient were made with 95% of target volume being covered by prescribed dose. The UVHs for each organ and planning target volume (PTV) were calculated and compared each other. In addition, the isodose lines with 95% confidence interval were generated. It offered better plan evaluation for organs at risk by highlighting possibly toxic regions. It is considered that the uncertainty model can bring a new paradigm of plan evaluation in which UVHs are calculated and analyzed so that users can avoid choosing a plan of high risk.

Evaluation of dose variation to normal and critical structures for lung hypofractionated stereotactic body radiation therapy

PURPOSE To quantify the dose received by normal and critical structures during lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) when registered to tumor or bone. METHODS AND MATERIALS Sixteen patients with lung cancer receiving a total dose of 50 Gy in 4fractions for lung SBRT were retrospectively studied. Cone-beam computed tomography (CT) was performed for all fractions, and the images obtained were registered with planning CT with respect tosoft tissue for target localization. Isocenter shifts were determined for each fraction from differences between the bony and tumor alignments; doses were then recalculated based on the new isocenters and summed over all 4 fractions to compare against the planned normal and critical tissue dose. The normal and critical structures evaluated were total and ipsilateral lung, spinal cord, and esophagus. The first data collected were isocenter coordinate shifts in all 3 Cartesian coordinates for both tumor andbony alignments. The second were the dose differences to the normal and critical structures fromthe planned and recalculated doses for alignment based on the tumor. RESULTS The study showed that while the maximum isocenter coordinate shifts in any direction couldbe as much as 1.60 cm, the normal and critical structure dose variations between the original plans and the simulated plans showed almost no change. The mean volume of total lung that receivedat least 20Gy difference for total lung and ipsilateral lung were 0.01% and -0.04%, respectively. For the esophagus, spinal cord, and heart the maximum and mean dose differences were 0.25 Gy and -0.04 Gy, -0.08 Gy and -0.02 Gy, and 0.02 Gy and 0.05 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Target localization using daily cone-beam CT with soft tissue registration was appropriate for minimizing the dose to the normal and critical structures without the need to re-plan due to the changes in the tumor position. For tumors located close to a critical structure, daily cone-beam CT is recommended to determine the appropriate isocenter shifts.

SU‐E‐T‐46: M.D. Anderson Prostate Seed Implant Dose Calculator

Purpose: To develop a prostate seed implant dose calculator for conducting independent verification of Variseed (Varian Medical, Palo Alto, CA) brachytherapytreatment planning system (TPS). Methods: AAPM TG 43 based formalism was used in our method to compute point doses for prostate implant seeds commissioned in Variseed 8.0®. We have investigated four different isotope seeds, I125(Model 6711, 9011), Cs131(Model Cs‐1) and Pd103(Model 200) in this work. Three distinct Methods: point source model using anisotropy factors, line source model using anisotropy factors, and line source model using anisotropy functions were used to develop in‐house dose calculator software. The dose calculator accounts for source strength, geometric dose fall off, attenuation, scatter and time, but does not consider any heterogeneous corrections. Source data parameters obtained from customer technical bulletins were input into both the Variseed TPS and our calculator. Spline and non oscillatory, seed specific fit functions to parameterize dose distribution for these seeds was evaluated for our software. These functions were then imported into the dose calculator to compute point doses as a function of radial distance from various seeds. The functions developed for our modeling were selectively chosen to account for self absorption from the seeds housing. The doses obtained by our secondary dose verification software were then compared against Variseed8.0® computed doses to clinically relevant radial distances. The dose calculator software has been packaged into a GUI module and is currently being tested for its robustness. Results: A good agreement (within 3% for 5 cm radial distance) for the isotopes studied is observed between the TPS and our calculator. Conclusions: We have validated Variseed computed point doses by using our dose calculator. Within all uncertainties as described within TG‐43, our results have been found to be in good agreement between our system and TPS.

SU‐E‐T‐536: Is BJR Supplement #25 Recommendation for Megavoltage Energy Independent Scatter Factor Still Valid for Flattening Filter Free Photon Beams?

PURPOSE In the process of measuring and validating fundamental dosimetry data prior to the clinical use of a treatment unit, it is prudent to compare measurements with previously published equivalent data. During the commissioning of an accelerator with flattening filter free (FFF) photon beams (Varian True Beam 6 MV FFF and 10 MV FFF) we compared measured Phantom Scatter Factors (Sp) with the Normalized Peak Scatter Factors (NPSFs) from the British Journal of Radiology Supplement 25 (BJR #25). The purpose of this work was to determine whether the energy independent NPSFs BJR#25 are valid for comparison with FFF photon beams. METHODS All measurements were performed using a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator with photon energies of 6-MV, 6-MV FFF and 10-MV FFF modes. For all measurements, a Scanditronix CC04 ionization chamber was used. Both water and in-air measurements were made to obtain NPSFs normalized to the 10 × 10 cm2 field size. For measurements in water, the chamber was positioned at 100 cm source-to-axis distance at the depth of dose maximum. For in-air measurements, the chamber was positioned at 100 cm source-to-axis distance with appropriate build-up cap. From BJR #25, NPSFs were obtained for comparison with the measurements. RESULTS The NPSF agreement between the 6-MV and 6-MV FFF with the BJR#25 were all within ±0.5%. The agreement ranged from 0.996 to 1.004 and 0.995 to 1.002 for 6-MV and 6-MV FFF, respectively. We also found that 10-MV FFF showed very similar trend. CONCLUSIONS The scatter factors reported in BJR #25 are valid for comparison for 6-MV, 6-MV FFF, and 10-MV. Additional investigation is needed to further understand the dosimetric characteristics of FFF mode.