Purpose With the advent of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment techniques, the requirement for more elaborate approaches in reviewing linac components’ integrity has become even more stringent. A possible solution to this challenge is to employ the usage of log files generated during treatment. The log files generated by the new generation of Elekta linacs record events at a higher frequency (25 Hz) than their predecessors, which allows for retrospective analysis and identification of subtle changes and provides another means of quality assurance. The ability to track machine components based on log files for each treatment can allow for constant monitoring of fraction consistency in addition to machine reliability. Using Elekta Agility log files, a set of tests were developed to evaluate the reliability and robustness of the multileaf collimators (MLCs). Methods To evaluate Elekta log file utilization for linac MLC QA effectiveness, five MLC test patterns were constructed to review the effects of leaf velocity and acceleration on positional accuracy, including gravitational effects for the Elekta MLC system. Each test was run five times in a particular setting to obtain reproducibility data and statistical averages. This study was performed on two identical Versa HD machines, each delivering a full set of test plans with all possible variations. Plans were delivered using Elekta's iCOMcat software and recorded log files were extracted. Log files were reformatted for readability and automatically analyzed in Matlab®. Results The Elekta Agility MLC system was shown to be capable of obtaining speeds within the range of 5–35 mm/s. MLC step and shoot tests have demonstrated the MLC system's capability of having positional repeatability, averaging 0.03‐ and 0.08‐mm offsets with and without gravitational effects, respectively. The IMRT‐specific tests have shown that gravitational effects are negligible with all positional tests averaging 0.5‐mm offsets. The largest speed root‐mean‐square error (RMSE) for the MLC system was found at the maximum speed of 35 mm/s with an average error of 0.8 mm. For slower speeds, the value was found to be much lower. Conclusion Utilizing log files has demonstrated the feasibility for higher precision of MLC motions to be reviewed, based on the performance tests that were instituted. Log files provide insight on the effects of friction, acceleration, and gravity, with MU's delivered that previously could not be reviewed in such detail. Based on our results, log file‐based QA has enhanced our ability to review performance, functionality, and perform QA on Elekta's MLC system.

In single-isocenter stereotactic radiosurgery/radiotherapy (SRS/SRT) intracranial applications, multiple targets are being treated concurrently, often involving non-coplanar arcs, small photon beams and steep dose gradients. In search for more rigorous quality assurance protocols, this work presents and evaluates a novel methodology for patient-specific pre-treatment plan verification, utilizing 3D printing technology. In a patient’s planning CT scan, the external contour and bone structures were segmented and 3D-printed using high-density bone-mimicking material. The resulting head phantom was filled with water while a film dosimetry insert was incorporated. Patient and phantom CT image series were fused and inspected for anatomical coherence. HUs and corresponding densities were compared in several anatomical regions within the head. Furthermore, the level of patient-to-phantom dosimetric equivalence was evaluated both computationally and experimentally. A single-isocenter multi-focal SRS treatment plan was prepared, while dose distributions were calculated on both CT image series, using identical calculation parameters. Phantom- and patient-derived dose distributions were compared in terms of isolines, DVHs, dose-volume metrics and 3D gamma index (GI) analysis. The phantom was treated as if the real patient and film measurements were compared against the patient-derived calculated dose distribution. Visual inspection of the fused CT images suggests excellent geometric similarity between phantom and patient, also confirmed using similarity indices. HUs and densities agreed within one standard deviation except for the skin (modeled as ‘bone’) and sinuses (water-filled). GI comparison between the calculated distributions resulted in passing rates better than 97% (1%/1 mm). DVHs and dose-volume metrics were also in satisfying agreement. In addition to serving as a feasibility proof-of-concept, experimental absolute film dosimetry verified the computational study results. GI passing rates were above 90%. Results of this work suggest that employing the presented methodology, patient-equivalent phantoms (except for the skin and sinuses areas) can be produced, enabling literally patient-specific pre-treatment plan verification in intracranial applications.

The purpose of this study is to report the dosimetric aspects of commissioning performed on an Elekta Versa HD linear accelerator (linac) with high‐dose‐rate flattening filter‐free (FFF) photon modes and electron modes. Acceptance and commissioning was performed on the Elekta Versa HD linac with five photon energies (6 MV, 10 MV, 18 MV, 6 MV FFF, 10 MV FFF), four electron energies (6 MeV, 9 MeV, 12 MeV, 15 MeV) and 160‐leaf (5 mm wide) multileaf collimators (MLCs). Mechanical and dosimetric data were measured and evaluated. The measurements include percent depth doses (PDDs), in‐plane and cross‐plane profiles, head scatter factor (Sc), relative photon output factors (Scp), universal wedge transmission factor, MLC transmission factors, and electron cone factors. Gantry, collimator, and couch isocentricity measurements were within 1 mm, 0.7 mm, and 0.7 mm diameter, respectively. The PDDs of 6 MV FFF and 10 MV FFF beams show deeper dmax and steeper falloff with depth than the corresponding flattened beams. While flatness values of 6 MV FFF and 10 MV FFF normalized profiles were expectedly higher than the corresponding flattened beams, the symmetry values were almost identical. The cross‐plane penumbra values were higher than the in‐plane penumbra values for all the energies. The MLC transmission values were 0.5%, 0.6%, and 0.6% for 6 MV, 10 MV, and 18 MV photon beams, respectively. The electron PDDs, profiles, and cone factors agree well with the literature. The outcome of radiation treatment is directly related to the accuracy in the dose modeled in the treatment planning system, which is based on the commissioned data. Commissioning data provided us a valuable insight into the dosimetric characteristics of the beam. This set of commissioning data can provide comparison data to others performing Versa HD commissioning, thereby improving patient safety.PACS number(s): 87.56.bd

PurposeThe Brainlab Elements treatment planning system utilizes distinct modules for treatment planning specific to stereotactic treatment sites including single or multiple brain lesions as well as spine. This work investigates the hypothesis that an optimization tailored specifically to spine can in fact create dosimetrically superior plans to those created in more general use treatment planning systems (TPS).MethodsTen spine patients at our institution were replanned in Brainlab Elements, Phillips Pinnacle3, and Elekta Monaco. The planning target volume (PTV) included the vertebral body (in either the thoracic or lumbar spine), pedicles, and transverse processes. In all plans, the target was prescribed 20 Gy to 95% of the PTV. Objectives for the study included D5%<25 Gy and spinal cord D0.035cc < 14 Gy. Plans were evaluated by the satisfaction of the objectives as well total monitor units (MU), gradient index (GI), conformity index (CI), and dose gradient (distance between 100% and 50% isodose lines) in a selected slice between the vertebral body and spinal cord.ResultsAll TPS produced clinically acceptable plans. The sharpest dose gradient was achieved with Elements (mean 3.3 ± 0.2 mm). This resulted in lowest spinal cord maximum point doses (6.6 ± 1.0 Gy). Gradient indices were also the smallest for Elements (3.6 ± 0.5). Further improvement in gradient index and spinal cord sparing were not performed due to the subsequent violation of the PTV D5% < 25 Gy constraint or the loss of conformity due to the loss of coverage at the PTV‐spinal canal interface.ConclusionsBrainlab Elements planning which relies on arc duplication to specifically optimize for spine anatomy did result in dosimetrically superior plans while holding prescription levels constant. While any planning system can improve upon specific dosimetric objectives, the simultaneous satisfaction of all constraints was best achieved with Brainlab Elements.

No abstract

No abstract

The purpose of this study is to perform dosimetric validation of Monaco treatment planning system version 5.1. The Elekta VersaHD linear accelerator with high dose rate flattening filter‐free photon modes and electron energies was used in this study. The dosimetric output of the new Agility head combined with the FFF photon modes warranted this investigation into the dosimetric accuracy prior to clinical usage. A model of the VersaHD linac was created in Monaco TPS by Elekta using commissioned beam data including percent depth dose curves, beam profiles, and output factors. A variety of 3D conformal fields were created in Monaco TPS on a combined Plastic water/Styrofoam phantom and validated against measurements with a calibrated ion chamber. Some of the parameters varied including source to surface distance, field size, wedges, gantry angle, and depth for all photon and electron energies. In addition, a series of step and shoot IMRT, VMAT test plans, and patient plans on various anatomical sites were verified against measurements on a Delta4 diode array. The agreement in point dose measurements was within 2% for all photon and electron energies in the homogeneous phantom and within 3% for photon energies in the heterogeneous phantom. The mean ± SD gamma passing rates of IMRT test fields yielded 93.8 ± 4.7% based on 2% dose difference and 2 mm distance‐to‐agreement criteria. Eight previously treated IMRT patient plans were replanned in Monaco TPS and five measurements on each yielded an average gamma passing rate of 95% with 6.7% confidence limit based on 3%, 3 mm gamma criteria. This investigation on dosimetric validation ensures accuracy of modeling VersaHD linac in Monaco TPS thereby improving patient safety.

Purpose Single‐isocenter multiple brain metastasis stereotactic radiosurgery is an efficient treatment modality increasing in clinical practice. The need to provide accurate, patient‐specific quality assurance (QA) for these plans is met by several options. This study reviews some of these options and explores the use of the Octavius 4D as a solution for patient‐specific plan quality assurance. Methods The Octavius 4D Modular Phantom (O4D) with the 1000 SRS array was evaluated in this study. The array consists of 977 liquid‐filled ion chambers. The center 5.5 cm × 5.5 cm area has a detector spacing of 2.5 mm. The ability of the O4D to reconstruct three‐dimensional (3D) dose was validated against a 3D gel dosimeter, ion chamber, and film measurements. After validation, 15 patients with 2–11 targets had their plans delivered to the phantom. The criteria used for the gamma calculation was 3%/1 mm. The portion of targets which were measurable by the phantom was countable. The accompanying software compiled the measured doses allowing each target to be counted from the measured dose distribution. Results Spatial resolution was sufficient to verify the high dose distributions characteristic of SRS. Amongst the 15 patients there were 74 targets. Of the 74 targets, 61 (82%) of them were visible on the measured dose distribution. The average gamma passing rate was 99.3% (with sample standard deviation of 0.68%). Conclusions The high resolution provided by the O4D with 1000 SRS board insert allows for very high‐resolution measurement. This high resolution in turn can allow for high gamma passing rates. The O4D with the 1000 SRS array is an acceptable method of performing quality assurance for single‐isocenter multiple brain metastasis SRS.