Comparison of 3D anatomical dose verification and 2D phantom dose verification of IMRT/VMAT treatments for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

被引:10
|
作者
Lin H. [1 ,2 ]
Huang S. [1 ]
Deng X. [1 ]
Zhu J. [1 ,3 ]
Chen L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine
[2] Department of Radiation Oncology, Beijing Hospital of the Ministry of Health
[3] School of Physics and Engineering, Sun Yat-sen University
关键词
2D phantom dose; 3D anatomical dose; Dosimetry verification; IMRT; VMAT;
D O I
10.1186/1748-717X-9-71
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The two-dimensional phantom dose verification (2D-PDV) using hybrid plan and planar dose measurement has been widely used for IMRT treatment QA. Due to the lack of information about the correlations between the verification results and the anatomical structure of patients, it is inadequate in clinical evaluation. A three-dimensional anatomical dose verification (3D-ADV) method was used in this study to evaluate the IMRT/VMAT treatment delivery for nasopharyngeal carcinoma and comparison with 2D-PDV was analyzed.Methods: Twenty nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients treated with IMRT/VMAT were recruited in the study. A 2D ion-chamber array was used for the 2D-PDV in both single-gantry-angle composite (SGAC) and multi-gantry-angle composite (MGAC) verifications. Differences in the gamma pass rate between the 2 verification methods were assessed. Based on measurement of irradiation dose fluence, the 3D dose distribution was reconstructed for 3D-ADV in the above cases. The reconstructed dose homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI) of the planning target volume (PTV) were calculated. Gamma pass rate and deviations in the dose-volume histogram (DVH) of each PTV and organ at risk (OAR) were analyzed.Results: In 2D-PDV, the gamma pass rate (3%, 3 mm) of SGAC (99.55% ± 0.83%) was significantly higher than that of MGAC (92.41% ± 7.19%). In 3D-ADV, the gamma pass rates (3%, 3 mm) were 99.75% ± 0.21% in global, 83.82% ± 16.98% to 93.71% ± 6.22% in the PTVs and 45.12% ± 32.78% to 98.08% ± 2.29% in the OARs. The maximum HI increment in PTVnx was 19.34%, while the maximum CI decrement in PTV1 and PTV2 were -32.45% and -6.93%, respectively. Deviations in dose volume of PTVs were all within ±5%. D2% of the brainstem, spinal cord, left/right optic nerves, and the mean doses to the left/right parotid glands maximally increased by 3.5%, 6.03%, 31.13%/26.90% and 4.78%/4.54%, respectively.Conclusion: The 2D-PDV and global gamma pass rate might be insufficient to provide an accurate assessment for the complex NPC IMRT operation. In contrast, the 3D-ADV is superior in clinic-related quality assurance offering evaluation of organ specific pass rate and dose-volume deviations. © 2014 Lin et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] DOSIMETRIC VERIFICATION OF IMRT TREATMENTS USING A 2D ION CHAMBER ARRAY
    Marcantonini, M.
    Raymondi, C.
    Zucchetti, C.
    Leogrande, M. P.
    Aristei, C.
    Gobbi, G.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2011, 99 : S511 - S511
  • [42] A Gated IMRT Study Based On Comparative 2D and 3D Dose Measurements
    Dvorak, P.
    Stevens, S.
    McQuaid, M.
    Dawes, S.
    Richmond, A.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (06) : 3879 - 3879
  • [43] Development of 3D Printed Phantom for Dose Verification in Radiotherapy for the Patient with Metal Artefacts Inside
    Adliene, Diana
    Jaselske, Evelina
    Urbonavicius, Benas Gabrielis
    Laurikaitiene, Jurgita
    Rudzianskas, Viktoras
    Didvalis, Tadas
    WORLD CONGRESS ON MEDICAL PHYSICS AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING 2018, VOL 3, 2019, 68 (03): : 643 - 647
  • [44] 3D Dose Reconstruction of Pretreatment Verification Plans Using Multiple 2D Planes from the OCTAVIUS/Seven29 Phantom Array
    Calvo, O.
    Stathakis, S.
    Gutierrez, A. N.
    Esquivel, C.
    Papanikolaou, N.
    TECHNOLOGY IN CANCER RESEARCH & TREATMENT, 2012, 11 (01) : 69 - 82
  • [45] Preliminary results from a comparison of 2D verification systems for IMRT
    Cirio, R
    Garelli, E
    Giordanengo, S
    Marchetto, F
    Peroni, C
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2004, 73 : S116 - S116
  • [46] Deformable dose prediction network based on hybrid 2D and 3D convolution for nasopharyngeal carcinoma radiotherapy
    Liu, Yanhua
    Luo, Wang
    Li, Xiangchen
    Liu, Min
    MEDICAL & BIOLOGICAL ENGINEERING & COMPUTING, 2024, : 733 - 747
  • [47] An EPID-based 3D patient dose verification method for SBRT-VMAT delivery
    McCowan, P.
    vanUytven, E.
    vanBeek, T.
    McCurdy, B.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 41 (08) : 2 - 2
  • [48] Two-dimensional (2D) ion chamber array for radiation dose verification including IMRT
    Szeglin, S
    Das, I
    Chopra, K
    Schuele, E
    Barker, R
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2005, 32 (06) : 2009 - 2009
  • [49] 2D-3D methods for clinical dose verification
    De Wagter, C.
    Paelinck, L. L.
    De Deene, Y.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2006, 81 : S54 - S55
  • [50] A study of the reliability of 2D vs. 3D verification methods for head and neck IMRT
    Rolfo, M.
    Wada, M.
    Height, R.
    Handley, M.
    Anderson, N.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2008, 72 (01): : S414 - S415