Effect of MLC leaf position, collimator rotation angle, and gantry rotation angle errors on intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Medical Dosimetry

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 143-147

  Bai, Sen ^a   Li, Guangjun ^a   Wang, Maojie ^a   Jiang, Qinfeng ^a   Zhang, Yingjie ^a   Wei, Yuquan ^a  

^a SICHUAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Dosimetry; Intensity modulated radiotherapy; MLC position error; Threshold

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DOSIMETRY; HUMAN; INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; MULTILEAF COLLIMATOR; NASOPHARYNX CARCINOMA; PAROTID GLAND; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RADIOSENSITIVITY; TREATMENT PLANNING;

EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; HUMANS; NASOPHARYNGEAL NEOPLASMS; RADIOMETRY; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOTHERAPY SETUP ERRORS; RADIOTHERAPY, CONFORMAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROTATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84876996597     PISSN: 09583947     EISSN: 18734022     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2012.10.002     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Braam P.M., Terhaard C.H., Roesink J.M., et al. Intersity modulated radiotherapy significantly reduces xerostomia compared with conventional radioterapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys 2006, 66:975-980.
2. Eisbruch A., Ten Haken R.K., Kim H.M., et al. Dose volume and function relationships in parotid salivary glands following conformal and intensity-modulated irradiation of head and neck cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys 1999, 45:577-587.
3. Sastre-Padro M., Welleweerd J., Malinen E., et al. Consequences of leaf calibration errors on IMRT delivery. Phys. Med. Biol 2007, 52:1147-1156.
4. Clarke M.F., Budgell G.J. Use of an amorphous silicon EPID for measuring MLC calibration at varying gantry angle. Phys. Med. Biol 2008, 53:473-485.
5. Budgell G.J., Clarke M.F. Analysis of the measurement precision of an amorphous silicon EPID used for MLC leaf position quality control and the long-term calibration stavility of an optically controlled MLC. Phys. Med. Biol 2008, 53:N297-N306.
6. Mu G., Ludlum E., Xia P. Impact of MLC leaf position errors on simple and complex IMRT plans for head and neck cancer. Phys. Med. Biol 2008, 53:77-88.
7. Oliver M., Gagne I., Bush K., et al. Clinical significance of multi-leaf collimator positional errors for volumetric modulated arc therapy. Radiother. Oncol 2010, 97:554-560.
8. Oliver M., Bush K., Zavgorodni S., et al. Understanding the impact of RapidArc therapy delivery errors for prostate cancer. J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys 2011, 12:32-43.
9. Rangel A., Palte G., Dunscombe P. The sensitivity of patient specific IMRT QC to systematic MLC leaf bank offset errors. Med. Phys 2010, 37:3862-3867.
10. Carver A., Gilmore M., Riley.S., et al. An analytical approach to acceptance criteria for quality assurance of intensity modulated radiotherapy. Radiother. Oncol 2011, 100:453-455.
11. Lee, N.; Garden, A.; Kramer, A.; et al. A phase II study of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) +/- chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal cancer. RTOG 0225; 2005.
12. Li Z.H., Zhang R.P., Deng M.G., et al. Position accuracy and measurement method of Elekta multi-leaf collimator. Chin. J. Radiat. Oncol 2008, 17:66-68.
13. Mohammadi M., Bezak E. Evaluation of MLC leaf positioning using a scanning liquid ionization chamber EPID. Phys. Med. Biol 2007, 52:N21-N33.
14. Bayouth J.E., Wendt D., Morrill S.M. MLC quality assurance techniques for IMRT applications. Med. Phys 2003, 30:743-750.
15. Klein E.E., Hanley J., Bayouth J., et al. Task Group 142 report: Quality assurance of medical accelerators. Med. Phys 2009, 36:4197-4212.
16. LoSasso T., Chui C.S., Ling C.C. Comprehensive quality assurance for the delivery of intensity modulated radiotherapy with a multileaf collimator used in the dynamic mode. Med. Phys 2001, 28:2209-2219.