Mattia Grusio
Catholic University of the Sacred Heart
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Mattia Grusio.
Medical Physics | 2014
Andrea Fidanzio; Andrea Porcelli; L. Azario; Francesca Greco; Savino Cilla; Mattia Grusio; M. Balducci; Vincenzo Valentini; Angelo Piermattei
PURPOSE Results about the feasibility of a method for quasi real time in vivo dosimetry (IVD) at the isocenter point for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are here reported. The method is based on correlations between the EPID signal and the dose on the beam central axis. Moreover, the γ-analysis of EPID images was adopted to verify off-axis reproducibility of fractionated plan delivery. METHODS An algorithm to reconstruct in vivo the isocenter dose, D(iso), for RapidArc treatments has been developed. 20 VMAT plans, optimized with two opposite arcs, for prostate, pancreas, and head treatments have been delivered by a Varian linac both to a conic PMMA phantom with elliptical section and to patients. The ratios R between reconstructed D(iso) and the planned doses were determined for phantom and patient irradiations adopting an acceptance criterion of ±5%. In total, 40 phantom checks and 400 patient checks were analyzed. Moreover, 3% and 3 mm criteria were adopted for portal image γ-analysis to assess patient irradiation reproducibility. RESULTS The average ratio R, between reconstructed and planned doses for the PMMA phantom irradiations was equal to 1.007 ± 0.024. When the IVD method was applied to the 20 patients, the average R ratio was equal to 1.003 ± 0.017 and 96% of the tests were within the acceptance criteria. The portal image γ-analysis supplied 88% of the tests within the pass rates γ(mean) ≤ 0.4 and P(γ<1) ≥ 98%. All the warnings were understood comparing the CT and the cone beam CT images and in one case a patients setup error was detected and corrected for the successive fractions. CONCLUSIONS This preliminary experience suggests that the method is able to detect dosimetric errors in quasi real time at the end of the therapy session. The authors intend to extend this procedure to other pathologies with the integration of in-room imaging verification by cone beam CT.
Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment | 2016
Mariateresa Russo; Angelo Piermattei; Francesca Greco; L. Azario; Lucia Clara Orlandini; Sergio Zucca; Savino Cilla; Sebastiano Menna; Mattia Grusio; L Chiatti; Andrea Fidanzio
Purpose: This work reports the extension of a semiempirical method based on the correlation ratios to convert electronic portal imaging devices transit signals into in vivo doses for the step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy Siemens beams. The dose reconstructed at the isocenter point Diso, compared to the planned dose, Diso,TPS, and a γ-analysis between 2-dimensional electronic portal imaging device images obtained day to day, seems to supply a practical method to verify the beam delivery reproducibility. Method: The electronic portal imaging device images were obtained by the superposition of many segment fields, and the algorithm for the Diso reconstruction for intensity-modulated radiotherapy step and shoot was formulated using a set of simulated intensity-modulated radiotherapy beams. Moreover, the in vivo dose-dedicated software was integrated with the record and verify system of the centers. Results: Three radiotherapy centers applied the in vivo dose procedure at 30 clinical intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatments, each one obtained with 5 or 7 beams, and planned for patients undergoing radiotherapy for prostatic tumors. Each treatment beam was checked 5 times, obtaining 900 tests of the ratios R = Diso/Diso,TPS. The average R value was equal to 1.002 ± 0.056 (2 standard deviation), while the mean R value for each patient was well within 5%, once the causes of errors were removed. The γ-analysis of the electronic portal imaging device images, with 3% 3 mm acceptance criteria, showed 90% of the tests with Pγ < 1 ≥ 95% and γmean ≤ 0.5. The off-tolerance tests were found due to incorrect setup or presence of morphological changes. This preliminary experience shows the great utility of obtaining the in vivo dose results in quasi real time and close to the linac, where the radiotherapy staff may immediately spot possible causes of errors. The in vivo dose procedure presented here is one of the objectives of a project, for the development of practical in vivo dose procedures, financially supported by the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare.
Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment | 2018
M.D. Falco; S. Giancaterino; Andrea De Nicola; N. Adorante; Ramon Gimenez De Lorenzo; Monica Di Tommaso; Annamaria Vinciguerra; Marianna Trignani; Francesca Perrotti; A. Allajbej; Andrea Fidanzio; Francesca Greco; Mattia Grusio; Domenico Genovesi; Angelo Piermattei
Purpose: The aim of the in vivo dosimetry, during the fractionated radiation therapy, is the verification of the correct dose delivery to patient. Nowadays, in vivo dosimetry procedures for photon beams are based on the use of the electronic portal imaging device and dedicated software to elaborate electronic portal imaging device images. Methods: In total, 8474 in vivo dosimetry tests were carried out for 386 patients treated with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and volumetric modulated arc therapy techniques, using the SOFTDISO. SOFTDISO is a dedicated software that uses electronic portal imaging device images in order to (1) calculate the R index, that is, the ratio between daily reconstructed dose and the planned one at isocenter and (2) perform a γ-like analysis between the signals, S, of a reference electronic portal imaging device image and that obtained in a daily fraction. It supplies 2 indexes, the percentage γ% of points with γ < 1 and the mean γ value, γmean. In γ-like analysis, the pass criteria for the signals agreement ΔS% and distance to agreement Δd have been selected based on the clinical experience and technology used. The adopted tolerance levels for the 3 indexes were fixed in 0.95 ≤ R ≤ 1.05, γ% ≥ 90%, and γmean ≤ 0.5. Results: The results of R ratio, γ-like, and a visual inspection of these data reported on a monitor screen permitted to individuate 2 classes of errors (1) class 1 that included errors due to inadequate standard quality controls and (2) class 2, due to patient morphological changes. Depending on the technique and anatomical site, a maximum of 18% of tests had at least 1 index out of tolerance; once removed the causes of class-1 errors, almost all patients (except patients with 4 lung and 2 breast cancer treated with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy) presented mean indexes values ( R ¯ , γ ¯ %, and γ ¯ mean ) within tolerance at the end of treatment course. Class-2 errors were found in some patients. Conclusions: The in vivo dosimetry procedure with SOFTDISO resulted easily implementable, able to individuate errors with a limited workload.
PLOS ONE | 2018
Jie Li; Angelo Piermattei; Pei Wang; Shengwei Kang; Mingyong Xiao; Bin Tang; Xiongfei Liao; Xin Xin; Mattia Grusio; Lucia Clara Orlandini
High conformal techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy are widely used in overloaded radiotherapy departments. In vivo dosimetric screening is essential in this environment to avoid important dosimetric errors. This work examines the feasibility of introducing in vivo dosimetry (IVD) checks in a radiotherapy routine. The causes of dosimetric disagreements between delivered and planned treatments were identified and corrected during the course of treatment. The efficiency of the corrections performed and the added workload needed for the entire procedure were evaluated. The IVD procedure was based on an electronic portal imaging device. A total of 3682 IVD tests were performed for 147 patients who underwent head and neck, abdomen, pelvis, breast, and thorax radiotherapy treatments. Two types of indices were evaluated and used to determine if the IVD tests were within tolerance levels: the ratio R between the reconstructed and planned isocentre doses and a transit dosimetry based on the γ-analysis of the electronic portal images. The causes of test outside tolerance level were investigated and corrected and IVD test was repeated during subsequent fraction. The time needed for each step of the IVD procedure was registered. Pelvis, abdomen, and head and neck treatments had 10% of tests out of tolerance whereas breast and thorax treatments accounted for up to 25%. The patient setup was the main cause of 90% of the IVD tests out of tolerance and the remaining 10% was due to patient morphological changes. An average time of 42 min per day was sufficient to monitor a daily workload of 60 patients in treatment. This work shows that IVD performed with an electronic portal imaging device is feasible in an overloaded department and enables the timely realignment of the treatment quality indices in order to achieve a patient’s final treatment compliant with the one prescribed.
Physica Medica | 2014
Savino Cilla; L. Azario; Francesca Greco; Andrea Fidanzio; Andrea Porcelli; Mattia Grusio; G. Macchia; A.G. Morganti; Daniela Meluccio; Angelo Piermattei
Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing | 2010
Angelo Piermattei; Andrea Fidanzio; Savino Cilla; Francesca Greco; L. Azario; Domenico Sabatino; Mattia Grusio; Mariella Cozzolino; Vincenzo Fusco
Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research Section A-accelerators Spectrometers Detectors and Associated Equipment | 2015
Angelo Piermattei; Savino Cilla; L. Azario; Francesca Greco; Mariateresa Russo; Mattia Grusio; Luisa Orlandini; Andrea Fidanzio
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2018
M.D. Falco; S. Giancaterino; A. De Nicola; N. Adorante; R. Gimenez De Lorenzo; M. Di Tommaso; Annamaria Vinciguerra; Marianna Trignani; A. Allajbej; Francesca Greco; Mattia Grusio; A. Piermattei; D. Genovesi
Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing | 2018
Angelo Piermattei; Francesca Greco; Mattia Grusio; S. Menna; L. Azario; Gerardina Stimato; Elisa Placidi; S. Teodoli; Savino Cilla; Andrea Porcelli; L. Alberico; Andrea Fidanzio
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2017
S. Giancaterino; M.D. Falco; A. De Nicola; N. Adorante; M. Di Tommaso; Marianna Trignani; A. Allajbej; Francesca Perrotti; D. Genovesi; Francesca Greco; Mattia Grusio; A. Piermattei