Purpose To determine the dosimetric effects of rotational errors on target coverage using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for multi-target stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Methods and Materials This retrospective study includes 50 SRS cases, each with 2 intracranial planning target volumes (PTVs). Both PTVs were planned for simultaneous treatment to 21 Gy using a single-isocenter, non-coplanar VMAT SRS technique. Rotational errors of 0.5°, 1.0°, and 2.0° were simulated about all axes. The dose to 95% of the PTV (D95) and the volume covered by 95% of the prescribed dose (V95) were evaluated using multivariate analysis to determine how PTV coverage is related to PTV volume, PTV separation, and rotational error. Results At 0.5° rotational error, D95 values and V95 coverage rates were ≥ 95% in all cases. For rotational errors of 1.0°, 7% of targets had D95 and V95 values below 95%. Coverage worsened substantially when the rotational error increased to 2.0°: D95 and V95 values were > 95% for only 63% of the targets. Multivariate analysis showed that PTV volume and distance to isocenter were strong predictors of target coverage. Conclusions The effects of rotational errors on target coverage were studied across a broad range of SRS cases. In general, the risk of compromised coverage increases with decreasing target volume, increasing rotational error and increasing distance between targets. Multivariate regression models from this study may be used to quantify the dosimetric effects of rotational errors on target coverage given patient-specific input parameters of PTV volume and distance to isocenter.

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a system for intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment delivery that achieves high dose conformality by optimizing the dose rate, gantry speed, and the leaf positions of the dynamic multileaf collimator (DMLC). The aim of this work is to present a practical approach for patient-specific volumetric reconstruction of the dose delivered of a VMAT treatment using the DMLC and treatment controller log (Dynalog) files. The accuracy of VMAT delivery was analyzed for five prostate patients. For each patient, a clinical treatment was delivered and values recorded in the log files for the gantry angle, dose rate, and leaf positions were converted to a new DICOM-compliant plan using a custom-developed software system. The plan was imported in a treatment planning system and the dose distribution was recreated on the original CT by simply recomputing the dose. Using the standard evaluation tools, it is straightforward to assess if reconstructed dose meets clinical endpoints, as well as to compare side-by-side reconstructed and original plans. The study showed that log files can be directly used for dose reconstruction without resorting to phantom measurements or setups. In all cases, analysis of the leaf positions showed a maximum error of -0.26 mm (mean of 0.15 mm). Gantry angle deviation was less than 1degree and the total MU was within 0.5 from the planned value. Differences between the reconstructed and the intended dose matrices were less than 1.46% for all cases. Measurements using the MATRIXX system in a phantom were used to validate the dosimetric accuracy of the proposed method, with an agreement of at least 96% in all pixels as measured using the gamma index. The methodology provides a volumetric evaluation of the dose reconstructed by VMAT plans which is easily achieved by automated analysis of Dynalog files without additional measurements or phantom setups. This process provides a valuable platform for adaptive therapy in the future.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-only radiotherapy treatment planning is attractive since MRI provides superior soft tissue contrast without ionizing radiation compared with computed tomography (CT). However, it requires the generation of pseudo CT from MRI images for patient setup and dose calculation. Our machine-learning-based method to generate pseudo CT images has been shown to provide pseudo CT images with excellent image quality, while its dose calculation accuracy remains an open question. In this study, we aim to investigate the accuracy of dose calculation in brain frameless stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) using pseudo CT images which are generated from MRI images using the machine learning-based method developed by our group. We retrospectively investigated a total of 19 treatment plans from 14 patients, each of whom has CT simulation and MRI images acquired during pretreatment. The dose distributions of the same treatment plans were calculated on original CT simulation images as ground truth, as well as on pseudo CT images generated from MRI images. Clinically-relevant DVH metrics and gamma analysis were extracted from both ground truth and pseudo CT results for comparison and evaluation. The side-by-side comparisons on image quality and dose distributions demonstrated very good agreement of image contrast and calculated dose between pseudo CT and original CT. The average differences in Dose-volume histogram (DVH) metrics for Planning target volume (PTVs) were less than 0.6%, and no differences in those for organs at risk at a significance level of 0.05. The average pass rate of gamma analysis was 99%. These quantitative results strongly indicate that the pseudo CT images created from MRI images using our proposed machine learning method are accurate enough to replace current CT simulation images for dose calculation in brain SRS treatment. This study also demonstrates the great potential for MRI to completely replace CT scans in the process of simulation and treatment planning.

Frameless radiosurgery is an attractive alternative to the framed procedure if it can be performed with comparable precision in a reasonable time frame. Here, we present a positioning approach for frameless radiosurgery based on in‐room volumetric imaging coupled with an advanced six‐degrees‐of‐freedom (6 DOF) image registration technique which avoids use of a bite block. Patient motion is restricted with a custom thermoplastic mask. Accurate positioning is achieved by registering a cone‐beam CT to the planning CT scan and applying all translational and rotational shifts using a custom couch mount. System accuracy was initially verified on an anthropomorphic phantom. Isocenters of delineated targets in the phantom were computed and aligned by our system with an average accuracy of 0.2 mm, 0.3 mm, and 0.4 mm in the lateral, vertical, and longitudinal directions, respectively. The accuracy in the rotational directions was 0.1°, 0.2°, and 0.1° in the pitch, roll, and yaw, respectively. An additional test was performed using the phantom in which known shifts were introduced. Misalignments up to 10 mm and 3° in all directions/rotations were introduced in our phantom and recovered to an ideal alignment within 0.2 mm, 0.3 mm, and 0.4 mm in the lateral, vertical, and longitudinal directions, respectively, and within 0.3° in any rotational axis. These values are less than couch motion precision. Our first 28 patients with 38 targets treated over 63 fractions are analyzed in the patient positioning phase of the study. Mean error in the shifts predicted by the system were less than 0.5 mm in any translational direction and less than 0.3° in any rotation, as assessed by a confirmation CBCT scan. We conclude that accurate and efficient frameless radiosurgery positioning is achievable without the need for a bite block by using our 6 DOF registration method. This system is inexpensive compared to a couch‐based 6 DOF system, improves patient comfort compared to systems that utilize a bite block, and is ideal for the treatment of pediatric patients with or without general anesthesia, as well as of patients with dental issues. From this study, it is clear that only adjusting for 4 DOF may, in some cases, lead to significant compromise in PTV coverage. Since performing the additional match with 6 DOF in our registration system only adds a relatively short amount of time to the overall process, we advocate making the precise match in all cases.PACS number: 87.55.tm; 87.55.Qr; 87.57.nj

Purpose: Treatment planning systems (TPSs) from different vendors can involve different implementations of Monte Carlo dose calculation (MCDC) algorithms for pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy. There are currently no guidelines for validating non-water materials in TPSs. Furthermore, PBSspecific parameters can vary by 1-2 orders of magnitude among different treatment delivery systems (TDSs). This paper proposes a standardized framework on the use of commissioning data and steps to validate TDS-specific parameters and TPS-specific heterogeneity modeling to potentially reduce these uncertainties. Methods: A standardized commissioning framework was developed to commission the MCDC algorithms of RayStation 8A and Eclipse AcurosPT v13.7.20 using water and non-water materials. Measurements included Bragg peak depth-dose and lateral spot profiles and scanning field outputs for Varian ProBeam. The phase-space parameters were obtained from in-air measurements and the number of protons per MU from output measurements of 10 9 10 cm 2 square fields at a 2 cm depth. Spot profiles and various PBS field measurements at additional depths were used to validate TPS. Human tissues in TPS, Gammex phantom materials, and artificial materials were used for the TPS benchmark and validation. Results: The maximum differences of phase parameters, spot sigma, and divergence between MCDC algorithms are below 4.5 µm and 0.26 mrad in air, respectively. Comparing TPS to measurements at depths, both MC algorithms predict the spot sigma within 0.5 mm uncertainty intervals, the resolution of the measurement device. Beam Configuration in AcurosPT is found to underestimate number of protons per MU by~2.5% and requires user adjustment to match measured data, while RayStation is within 1% of measurements using Auto model. A solid water phantom was used to validate the range accuracy of non-water materials within 1% in AcurosPT. Conclusions: The proposed standardized commissioning framework can detect potential issues during PBS TPS MCDC commissioning processes, and potentially can shorten commissioning time and improve dosimetric accuracies. Secondary MCDC can be used to identify the root sources of disagreement between primary MCDC and measurement.