• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• v.46 no.2
• /
• pp.48-57
• /
• 2021

Background: In this study, the complexities of step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans in magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy systems were evaluated. Materials and Methods: Overall, 194 verification plans from the abdomen, prostate, and breast sites were collected using a ⁶⁰Co-based ViewRay radiotherapy system (ViewRay Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA). Various plan complexity metrics (PCMs) were calculated for each verification plan, including the modulation complexity score (MCS), plan-averaged beam area (PA), plan-averaged beam irregularity, plan-averaged edge (PE), plan-averaged beam modulation, number of segments, average area among all segments (AA/Seg), and total beam-on time (TBT). The plan deliverability was quantified in terms of gamma passing rates (GPRs) with a 1 mm/2% criterion, and the Pearson correlation coefficients between GPRs and various PCMs were analyzed. Results and Discussion: For the abdomen, prostate, and breast groups, the average GPRs with the 1 mm/2% criterion were 77.8 ± 6.0%, 79.8 ± 4.9%, and 84.7 ± 7.3%; PCMs were 0.263, 0.271, and 0.386; PAs were 15.001, 18.779, and 35.683; PEs were 1.575, 1.444, and 1.028; AA/Segs were 15.37, 19.89, and 36.64; and TBTs were 18.86, 19.33, and 5.91 minutes, respectively. The various PCMs, i.e., MCS, PA, PE, AA/Seg, and TBT, showed statistically significant Pearson correlation coefficients of 0.416, 0.627, -0.541, 0.635, and -0.397, respectively, with GPRs. Conclusion: The area-related metrics exhibited strong correlations with GPRs. Moreover, the AA/Seg metric can be used to estimate the IMRT plan accuracy without beam delivery in the ⁶⁰Co-based ViewRay radiotherapy system.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.190-196
• /
• 2017

For the $ViewRay^{(R)}$ system (ViewRay Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA) which is representative of magnetic resonance (MR) guided radiotherapy machine, it is important to evaluate effectiveness of AAPM's TG-51 protocol and the effect of the magnetic field on absolute dosimetry. In order to measure the absolute dose, MR-compatible chamber and water phantom system manufactured in this study were used. The materials of the water phantom system were plastic of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and non-ferrous materials. Due to the inherent feature of the $ViewRay^{(R)}$, all Co-60 sources are not located at gantry angle of $0^{\circ}$ while being located at gantry angle of $90^{\circ}$. For this reason, absolute dosimetry was performed based on the measurements in solid water phantom (SWP) and water which determine the SWP to water correction factor. For evaluation of output constancy with gantry angle, measurements were made with ionization chamber inserted in cylindrical water-equivalent phantom. For measured doses in water, the values of dose deviation according to a reference dose of 200 cGy for Head 1, Head 2 and Head 3 were -0.27%, -0.45% and -0.22%, respectively. For measured doses in SWP, the values of dose deviation according to a reference dose of 200 cGy for Head 1, Head 2 and Head 3 were -1.91%, -2.07% and -1.84%, respectively. All values of dose measured in SWP tended to be less than those measured in water by -1.63%. With the reference gantry angles of $0^{\circ}$ and $90^{\circ}$, the maximum values of deviation for Head 1, Head 2 and Head 3 were 0.48%, 1.06% and 0.40%, respectively. The measurement agreement is within the range of results obtainable for conventional treatment machines. The low strength of the magnetic field does not affect dose measurements. Using the SWP to water correction factor, absolute doses for $ViewRay^{(R)}$ system can be measured.

• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• v.44 no.4
• /
• pp.149-155
• /
• 2019

Background: Magnetic resonance (MR) image guided radiation therapy system, enables real time MR guided radiotherapy (RT) without additional radiation exposure to patients during treatment. However, MR image lacks electron density information required for dose calculation. Image fusion algorithm with deformable registration between MR and computed tomography (CT) was developed to solve this issue. However, delivered dose may be different due to volumetric changes during image registration process. In this respect, synthetic CT generated from the MR image would provide more accurate information required for the real time RT. Materials and Methods: We analyzed 1,209 MR images from 16 patients who underwent MR guided RT. Structures were divided into five tissue types, air, lung, fat, soft tissue and bone, according to the Hounsfield unit of deformed CT. Using the deep learning model (U-NET model), synthetic CT images were generated from the MR images acquired during RT. This synthetic CT images were compared to deformed CT generated using the deformable registration. Pixel-to-pixel match was conducted to compare the synthetic and deformed CT images. Results and Discussion: In two test image sets, average pixel match rate per section was more than 70% (67.9 to 80.3% and 60.1 to 79%; synthetic CT pixel/deformed planning CT pixel) and the average pixel match rate in the entire patient image set was 69.8%. Conclusion: The synthetic CT generated from the MR images were comparable to deformed CT, suggesting possible use for real time RT. Deep learning model may further improve match rate of synthetic CT with larger MR imaging data.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.169-174
• /
• 2016

The aim of this study is to investigate the delivery accuracy of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans in the two-headed mode of the ViewRay$^{TM}$ system in comparison with that of the normal operation treatment plan of the machine. For this study, a total of eight IMRT plans and corresponding verification plans were generated (four head and neck, two liver, and two prostate IMRT plans). The delivered dose distributions were measured using ArcCHECK$^{TM}$ with the insertion of an ionization chamber. We measured the delivered dose distributions in three-headed mode (normal operation of the machine), two-headed mode with head 1 disabled, two-headed mode with head 2 disabled, and two-headed mode with head 3 disabled. Therefore, a total of four measurements were performed for each IMRT plan. The global gamma passing rates (3%/3 mm) in three-headed mode, head 1 disabled, head 2 disabled, and head 3 disabled were $99.9{\pm}0.1%$, $99.8{\pm}0.3%$, $99.6{\pm}0.7%$, and $99.7{\pm}0.4%$, respectively. The difference in the gamma passing rates of the three- and two-headed modes was insignificant. With 2%/2 mm, the rates were $96.6{\pm}3.6%$, $97.2{\pm}3.5%$, $95.7{\pm}6.2%$, and $95.5{\pm}4.3%$, respectively. Between three-headed mode and head 3 disabled, a statistically significant difference was observed with a p-value of 0.02; however, the difference was minimal (1.1%). The chamber readings showed differences of approximately 1% between three- and two-headed modes, which were minimal. Therefore, the treatment plan delivery in the two-headed mode of the ViewRay$^{TM}$ system seems accurate and robust.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.193-200
• /
• 2015

The aim of this study is to present commissioning results of the ViewRay system. We verified safety functions of the ViewRay system. For imaging system, we acquired signal to noise ratio (SNR) and image uniformity. In addition, we checked spatial integrity of the image. Couch movement accuracy and coincidence of isocenters (radiation therapy system, imaging system and virtual isocneter) was verified. Accuracy of MLC positioing was checked. We performed reference dosimetry according to American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 51 (TG-51) in water phantom for head 1 and 3. The deviations between measurements and calculation of percent depth dose (PDD) and output factor were evaluated. Finally, we performed gamma evaluations with a total of 8 IMRT plans as an end-to-end (E2E) test of the system. Every safety system of ViewRay operated properly. The values of SNR and Uniformity met the tolerance level. Every point within 10 cm and 17.5 cm radii about the isocenter showed deviations less than 1 mm and 2 mm, respectively. The average couch movement errors in transverse (x), longitudinal (y) and vertical (z) directions were 0.2 mm, 0.1 mm and 0.2 mm, respectively. The deviations between radiation isocenter and virtual isocenter in x, y and z directions were 0 mm, 0 mm and 0.3 mm, respectively. Those between virtual isocenter and imaging isocenter were 0.6 mm, 0.5 mm and 0.2 mm, respectively. The average MLC positioning errors were less than 0.6 mm. The deviations of output, PDDs between mesured vs. BJR supplement 25, PDDs between measured and calculated and output factors of each head were less than 0.5%, 1%, 1% and 2%, respectively. For E2E test, average gamma passing rate with 3%/3 mm criterion was $99.9%{\pm}0.1%$.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.208-214
• /
• 2015

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of low magnetic field on dose distribution in the partial-breast irradiation (PBI). Eleven patients with an invasive early-stage breast carcinoma were treated prospectively with PBI using 38.5 Gy delivered in 10 fractions using the $ViewRay^{(R)}$ system. For each of the treatment plans, dose distribution was calculated with magnetic field and without magnetic field, and the difference between dose and volume for each organ were evaluated. For planning target volume (PTV), the analysis included the point minimum ($D_{min}$), maximum, mean dose ($D_{mean}$) and volume receiving at least 90% ($V_{90%}$), 95% ($V_{95%}$) and 107% ($V_{107%}$) of the prescribed dose, respectively. For organs at risk (OARs), the ipsilateral lung was analyzed with $D_{mean}$ and the volume receiving 20 Gy ($V_{20\;Gy}$), and the contralateral lung was analyzed with only $D_{mean}$. The heart was analyzed with $D_{mean}$, $D_{max}$, and $V_{20\;Gy}$, and both inner and outer shells were analyzed with the point $D_{min}$, $D_{max}$ and $D_{mean}$, respectively. For PTV, the effect of low magnetic field on dose distribution showed a difference of up to 2% for volume change and 4 Gy for dose. In OARs analysis, the significant effect of the magnetic field was not observed. Despite small deviation values, the average difference of mean dose values showed significant difference (p<0.001), but there was no difference of point minimum dose values in both sehll structures. The largest deviation for the average difference of $D_{max}$ in the outer shell structure was $5.0{\pm}10.5Gy$ (p=0.148). The effect of low magnetic field of 0.35 T on dose deposition by a Co-60 beam was not significantly observed within the body for PBI IMRT plans. The dose deposition was only appreciable outside the body, where a dose build-up due to contaminated electrons generated in the treatment head and scattered electrons formed near the body surface.