Implementation of phantom-less IMRT delivery verification using Varian DynaLog files and R/V output

Physics in Medicine and Biology

Volumn 57, Issue 21, 2012, Pages 6761-6777

  Agnew, C E ^a   King, R B ^a   Hounsell, A R ^a,b   McGarry, C K ^a,b  

^a ROYAL GROUP OF HOSPITALS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AVERAGE ERRORS; BEAM DATA; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; FLUENCE DELIVERY; FLUENCES; GAMMA ANALYSIS; HEAD AND NECK; IMRT DELIVERY; INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; LEAF POSITION; LOG FILE; MACHINE PERFORMANCE; MONITOR UNITS; MULTILEAF COLLIMATORS; PELVIC NODES; POSITION ERRORS; RMS ERRORS; ROOT MEAN SQUARE; SITE-SPECIFIC; TREATMENT SITES;

ERRORS; FINANCIAL DATA PROCESSING; PIXELS; QUALITY ASSURANCE; RADIOTHERAPY; UROLOGY;

PHYSICAL THERAPY;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOTHERAPY; GAMMA RADIATION; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INSTRUMENTATION; INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; MAGNETIC AND ELECTROMAGNETIC EQUIPMENT; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NEOPLASM; PATIENT POSITIONING; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIATION DOSE FRACTIONATION; RADIOTHERAPY; STANDARD;

DOSE FRACTIONATION; GAMMA RAYS; HUMANS; MALE; NEOPLASMS; PARTICLE ACCELERATORS; PATIENT POSITIONING; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOTHERAPY SETUP ERRORS; RADIOTHERAPY, INTENSITY-MODULATED; RECORDS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84868021564     PISSN: 00319155     EISSN: 13616560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/57/21/6761     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Buckey C R, Stathakis S and Papanikolaou N 2010 The inter- intrafraction reproducibilities of three common IMRT delivery techniques Med. Phys. 37 4854-60
2. Chandraraj V, Stathakis S, Manickam R, Esquivel C, Supe S S and Papanikolaou N 2011 Consistency and reproducibility of the VMAT plan delivery using three independent validation methods J. Appl. Clin. Med.Phys. 12 129-40
3. Dearnaley D et al 2012 Conventional versus hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: preliminary safety results from the CHHiP randomised controlled trial Lancet Oncol. 13 43-54
4. Ezzell G A and Chungbin S 2001 The overshoot phenomenon in step and shoot IMRT delivery J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 2 138-48
5. Ezzell G A et al 2009 IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119 Med. Phys. 36 5359-73
6. Harris V, South C, Cruickshank C and Dearnaley D 2011 A national phase III trial of pelvic lymph node (LN) IMRT in prostate cancer (PIVOTAL): a comparison of LN outlining methods Radiat. Oncol. 99 S486-7
7. James H, Beavis A, Budgell G, Clark C, Convery D, Mott J, Dearnaley D, Perry P and Scrase C 2008 Guidance for the clinical implementation of intensity modulated radiation therapy IPEM Report 96
8. Kuperman V Y and Lam W-C 2006 Improving delivery of segments with small MU in step and shoot IMRT Med. Phys. 33 1067-73
9. LaSasso T L 2002 Quality assurance of IMRT delivery systems AAPM 44th Annu. Meeting
10. Li G J, Dempsey J F, Ding L, Liu C and Palta J R 2003 Validation of dynamic MLC-controller log files using a two dimensional array Med. Phys. 30 799-805 (Pubitemid 36578682)
11. Ling CC, Zhang P, Archambault Y, Bocanek J, Tang G and LoSasso T 2008 Commisioning and quality assurance of rapidarc radiotherapy delivery system Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 72 575-81
12. Litzenberg D W, Moran J M and Benedick A F 2002 Verification of dynamic and segmental IMRT delivery by dynamic log file analysis J. App. Clin. Med. Phys. 3 63-72
13. Luo W et al 2006 Monte Carlo based IMRT dose verification using MLC log files and R/V outputs Med. Phys. 33 2557-64 (Pubitemid 43967245)
14. McGarry C K, Chinneck C D, OToole M M, OSullivan J M, Prise K M and Hounsell A R 2011 Assessing software upgrades, plan properties and patient geometry using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) complexity metrics Med. Phys. 38 2027-34
15. McNiven A L, Sharpe M B and Purdie T G 2010 A new metric for assessing IMRT modulation complexity and plan deliverability Med. Phys. 37 505-15
16. Miah A B et al 2012 Dose-escalated IMRT is feasible and may improve locoregional control and laryngeal preservation in laryngo-hypopharyngeal cancers Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. 82 539-47
17. Miles E A et al 2005 The impact of introducing intensity modulated radiotherapy into routine clinical practice Radiother. Oncol. 77 241-6 (Pubitemid 41785331)
18. Smith J C, Dieterich S and Orton C G 2011 It is STILL necessary to validate each individual IMRT treatment plan with dosimetric measurements before delivery Med. Phys. 38 553-5
19. Stell A M, Li G J, Zeidan O A and Dempsey J F 2004 An extensive log-file analysis of step and shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy segment delivery error Med. Phys. 31 1593-1602 (Pubitemid 38808529)
20. Teke T, Bergman A M, William K, Bradford G, Duzenli C and Popescu I A 2010 Monte Carlo based, patient specific RadidArc QA using linac log files Med. Phys. 37 116-23
21. Van de Werf E, Verstraete J and Lievens Y 2012 The cost of radiotherapy in a decade of technology evolution Radiother. Oncol. 102 148-53
22. Varian Medical Systems 2003 DynaLog File Viewer Reference Guide
23. Ziedan O A, Li J G, Ranade M and Stell A M 2004 Verification of step and shoot IMRT delivery using a fast video based electronic portal imaging device Med. Phys. 31 463-76 (Pubitemid 38381006)