DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Quality Assurance of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Using the Dynalog Files

다이나로그 파일을 이용한 부피세기조절회전치료의 정도관리

  • Kang, Dong-Jin (Department of Radiation Oncology, Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital) ;
  • Jung, Jae-Yong (Department of Radiation Oncology, Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital) ;
  • Shin, Young-Joo (Department of Radiation Oncology, Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital) ;
  • Min, Jung-Whan (The Shingu University College of Korea) ;
  • Kim, Yon-Lae (Department of Radiologic Technology, Choonhae College of Health Sciences) ;
  • Yang, Hyung-jin (Department of Physics, Korea University)
  • 강동진 (인제대학교 상계백병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 정재용 (인제대학교 상계백병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 신영주 (인제대학교 상계백병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 민정환 (신구대학교 방사선과) ;
  • 김연래 (춘해보건대학교 방사선과) ;
  • 양형진 (고려대학교 의용과학대학원)
  • Received : 2016.07.29
  • Accepted : 2016.11.28
  • Published : 2016.12.31

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of beam delivery QA software using the MLC dynalog file, about the VMAT plan with AAPM TG-119 protocol. The Clinac iX with a built-in 120 MLC was used to acquire the MLC dynalog file be imported in MobiusFx(MFX). To establish VMAT plan, Oncentra RTP system was used target and organ structures were contoured in Im'RT phantom. For evaluation of dose distribution was evaluated by using gamma index, and the point dose was evaluated by using the CC13 ion chamber in Im'RT phantom. For the evaluation of point dose, the mean of relative error between measured and calculated value was $1.41{\pm}0.92%$(Target) and $0.89{\pm}0.86%$(OAR), the confidence limit were 3.21(96.79%, Target) and 2.58(97.42%, OAR). For the evaluation of dose distribution, in case of $Delta^{4PT}$, the average percentage of passing rate were $99.78{\pm}0.2%$(3%/3 mm), $96.86{\pm}1.76%$(2%/2 mm). In case of MFX, the average percentage of passing rate were $99.90{\pm}0.14%$(3%/3 mm), $97.98{\pm}1.97%$(2%/2 mm), the confidence limits(CL) were in case of $Delta^{4PT}$ 0.62(99.38%, 3%/3 mm), 6.6(93.4%, 2%/2 mm), in case of MFX, 0.38(99.62%, 3%/3 mm), 5.88(94.12%, 2%/2 mm). In this study, we performed VMAT QA method using dynamic MLC log file compare to binary diode array chamber. All analyzed results were satisfied with acceptance criteria based on TG-119 protocol.

본 연구에서는 미국의학물리학회 TG-119 보고서를 통해 본 원에 도입된 다이나로그 파일을 이용한 정도관리 소프트웨어(MobiusFx, MFX)로 부피세기조절회전치료의 정도관리를 시행하였다. 본 원의 치료계획장치를 이용해서 각각의 치료계획을 수립하였고, 절대선량은 표적 및 위험장기에서 전리함을 이용해 측정하였으며, 상대선량분포는 반도체검출기배열($Delta^{4PT}$)과 정도관리 소프트웨어(MFX)를 사용하여 측정하였다. 절대선량 평가에서 점 선량을 측정하였다. 표적과 위험장기에서 평균 선량 오차율은 각각 $1.41{\pm}0.92%$, $0.89{\pm}0.86%$였다. 점 선량 평가의 신뢰도를 나타내는 95% 신뢰한계는 각각 표적에서 3.21(96.79%), 위험장기에서 2.58(97.42%)로, 보고서에서 제시한 허용기준인 표적에서 4.5(95.50%), 위험장기에서 4.7(95.30%) 이내에 모두 만족하였다. 상대선량 평가는 선량 분포를 이용하여 감마지표 분석법으로 분석하였다. 정도관리 소프트웨어와 반도체검출기 배열의 평균 감마지표 통과율은 3%/3 mm의 허용기준에서 $99.90{\pm}0.14%$, $99.78{\pm}0.20%$였고, 2%/2 mm의 허용기준에서는 $97.98{\pm}1.97%$, $96.86{\pm}1.76%$로 나타났다. 감마지표 통과율의 신뢰도를 나타내는 95% 신뢰한계는 허용기준 3%/3 mm에서 정도관리 소프트웨어와 반도체 검출기배열 각각 0.38(99.62%)과 0.62(99.38%)였고 2%/2 mm에서는 5.88(94.12%)과 6.60(93.40%)으로 보고서에서 제시한 허용기준인 표적과 위험장기에서 7.0(93.0%) 이내에 만족함을 확인하였다. 따라서 이번 연구를 통해 본 원의 정도관리 소프트웨어가 부피세기조절회전치료의 정도 관리 시스템으로서 간편하고 편리한 유용한 도구로 임상에 응용할 수 있을 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Masi L, Casamassima F, Doro R, Francescon P: Quality assurance of volumetric modulated arc therapy: evaluation and comparison of different dosimetric systems. Med Phys, 38(2), 612-621, 2011 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3533900
  2. Ezzell GA, Burmeister JW, Dogan N, et al.: IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119. Med Phys, 36(11), 5359-5373, 2009 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3238104
  3. Young yih Han: Review on the Quality Assuarance for Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy. PROGRESS in MEDICAL PHYSICS, 24(4), 213-219, 2013 https://doi.org/10.14316/pmp.2013.24.4.213
  4. Quan J, Lee L, Liu W, et al.: Dose reconstruction for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using cone-beam CT and dynamic log files. Phys Med Biol, 55, 3597-3610, 2010 https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/55/13/002
  5. Chen Q, Chen M, Lu W: Ultrafast convolution/superposition using tabulated and exponential kernels on GPU. Med Phys, 38(3), 1150-1161, 2010 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3551996
  6. Oncentra Master Plan physics and algorithm documentation, Nucletron, Netherlands, 2011
  7. MobiusFX ONE MINUTE IMRT QA, MOBIUS MEDICAL SYSTEM, Houston, TX, 2015
  8. Chen Q, Chen M, Lu W: Ultra fast convolution/ superposition using tabulated and exponential kernels on GPU. Med Phys, 38, 1150-1161, 2010
  9. $Delta^{4PT}Getting$ started, Scandidos, Sweden, 2010
  10. Low DA, Dempsey JF: Evaluation of the gamma dose distribution comparison method. Med Phys, 30(9), 2455-2464, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1598711
  11. Francisco CH, Silvia VC: A Probability approach to the study on uncertainty effects on gamma index evaluations in radiation therapy. Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine, 2011(2011), 10, 2011
  12. The Patient Specific QA of IMRT and VMAT Through tha AAPM Task Group Report 119. Journal of radiological science and technology, 35(3), 255-263, 2012
  13. R. R. Reynolds, H. Johnston, A. Pompos, et al: INITIAL EXPERIENCE WITH VMAT PLAN AND DELIVERY VERIFICATION USING A DICOM-RT FRAMEWORK AND LINAC DELIVERY LOG FILES. AAPM 2014 Poster, 2014