Use of truebeam developer mode for imaging QA

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 322-333

  Valdes, Gilmer ^a,b   Morin, Olivier ^a   Valenciaga, Yanisley ^c   Kirby, Niel ^a   Pouliot, Jean ^b   Chuang, Cynthia ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Automated QA; Image guidance radiation therapy; Support vector machine; Truebeam developer mode; XML scripts

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGING PHANTOM; MACHINE LEARNING; MAGNETIC AND ELECTROMAGNETIC EQUIPMENT; PROCEDURES; QUALITY CONTROL; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ALGORITHMS; CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MACHINE LEARNING; PARTICLE ACCELERATORS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 84938919088     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15269914     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v16i4.5363     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Fontenot JD, Alkhatib H, Garrett JA, et al. AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline 2.a: Commissioning and quality assurance of X-ray-based image-guided radiotherapy systems. J Appl Clin Med Phy. 2014;15(1):4528.
2. Bissonnette JP, Balter PA, Dong L, et al. Quality assurance for image-guided radiation therapy utilizing CT-based technologies: a report of the AAPM TG-179. Med Phys. 2012;39(4):1946-63.
3. Gopal A and Samant SS. Use of a line-pair resolution phantom for comprehensive quality assurance of electronic portal imaging devices based on fundamental imaging metrics. Med Phys. 2009;36(6):2006-15.
4. Das IJ, Cao M, Cheng CW, et al. A quality assurance phantom for electronic portal imaging devices. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2011;12(2):3350.
5. Gao WD and Balter P. Evaluation of IsoCal imaging isocenter calibration system for Varian OBI machines [abstract]. Med Phys. 2012;39(6):3604.
6. Klein EE, Hanley J, Bayouth J, et al. Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. Med Phys. 2009;36(9):4197-212.
7. Lutz W, Winston KR, Maleki N. A system for stereotactic radiosurgery with a linear accelerator. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1988;14(2):373-81.
8. Sumida I, Yamaguchi H, Kizaki H, et al. Evaluation of imaging performance of megavoltage cone-beam CT over an extended period. J Radiat Res. 2014;55(1):191-99.
9. Gayou O and Miften M. Commissioning and clinical implementation of a mega-voltage cone beam CT system for treatment localization. Med Phys. 2007;34(8):3183-92.
10. Droege RT and Morin RL. A practical method to measure the MTF of CT scanners. Med Phys. 1982;9(5):758-60.
11. Tourassi GD. Journey toward computer-aided diagnosis: role of image texture analysis. Radiology. 1999;213(2):317-20.
12. Clausi DA. An analysis of co-occurrence texture statistics as a function of grey level quantization. Can J. Remote Sensing. 2002;28(1):45-62.
13. Soh LK and Tsatsoulis C. Texture analysis of SAR sea ice imagery using gray level co-occurrence matrices. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sensing. 1999;37(2).
14. Kim KF, Lazos D, Harrison L. An intercomparison of imaging performance of two linac-mounted imaging systems used in radiation therapy: TrueBeam and Trilogy [abstract]. Med Phys. 2012;39(2):3656.