An extensive set of benchmark measurement of PDDs and beam profiles was performed in a heterogeneous layer phantom, including a lung equivalent heterogeneity, by means of several detectors and compared against the predicted dose values by different calculation algorithms in two treatment planning systems. PDDs were measured with TLDs, plane parallel and cylindrical ionization chambers and beam profiles with films. Additionally, Monte Carlo simulations by means of the PENELOPE code were performed. Four different field sizes (10 x 10, 5 x 5, 2 x 2, and 1 x 1 cm2) and two lung equivalent materials (CIRS, p(w)e=0.195 and St. Bartholomew Hospital, London, p(w)e=0.244-0.322) were studied. The performance of four correction-based algorithms and one based on convolution-superposition was analyzed. The correction-based algorithms were the Batho, the Modified Batho, and the Equivalent TAR implemented in the Cadplan (Varian) treatment planning system and the TMS Pencil Beam from the Helax-TMS (Nucletron) treatment planning system. The convolution-superposition algorithm was the Collapsed Cone implemented in the Helax-TMS. The only studied calculation methods that correlated successfully with the measured values with a 2% average inside all media were the Collapsed Cone and the Monte Carlo simulation. The biggest difference between the predicted and the delivered dose in the beam axis was found for the EqTAR algorithm inside the CIRS lung equivalent material in a 2 x 2 cm2 18 MV x-ray beam. In these conditions, average and maximum difference against the TLD measurements were 32% and 39%, respectively. In the water equivalent part of the phantom every algorithm correctly predicted the dose (within 2%) everywhere except very close to the interfaces where differences up to 24% were found for 2 x 2 cm2 18 MV photon beams. Consistent values were found between the reference detector (ionization chamber in water and TLD in lung) and Monte Carlo simulations, yielding minimal differences (0.4%+/-1.2%). The penumbra broadening effect in low density media was not predicted by any of the correction-based algorithms, and the only one that matched the experimental values and the Monte Carlo simulations within the estimated uncertainties was the Collapsed Cone Algorithm.

The Exradin W1 response is energy independent for high energy x-rays and electron beams, and only one calibration coefficient is needed. A temperature correction factor should be applied to keep uncertainties around 2% for absolute dose measurements and around 1% for relative measurements in high-energy photon and electron beams. The Exradin W1 scintillator is an excellent alternative to detectors such as diodes for relative dose measurements.

We found no correlation between the gamma index and the clinical impact of a discrepancy for any of the gamma index evaluation possibilities (global, local, 2D, or 3D). Some of the tests yielded false positives or false negatives in a per-beam gamma analysis. However, they were correctly accounted for in a DVH analysis. We also showed that 3DVH software is reliable for our tests, and is a viable method for correlating planar discrepancies with clinical relevance by comparing the measured DVH of target and OAR's with clinical tolerance.

Plan evaluation is a key step in the radiotherapy treatment workflow. Central to this step is the assessment of treatment plan quality. Hence, it is important to agree on what we mean by plan quality and to be fully aware of which parameters it depends on. We understand plan quality in radiotherapy as the clinical suitability of the delivered dose distribution that can be realistically expected from a treatment plan. Plan quality is commonly assessed by evaluating the dose distribution calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS). Evaluating the 3D dose distribution is not easy, however; it is hard to fully evaluate its spatial characteristics and we still lack the knowledge for personalising the prediction of the clinical outcome based on individual patient characteristics. This advocates for standardisation and systematic collection of clinical data and outcomes after radiotherapy. Additionally, the calculated dose distribution is not exactly the dose delivered to the patient due to uncertainties in the dose calculation and the treatment delivery, including variations in the patient set-up and anatomy. Consequently, plan quality also depends on the robustness and complexity of the treatment plan. We believe that future work and consensus on the best metrics for quality indices are required. Better tools are needed in TPSs for the evaluation of dose distributions, for the robust evaluation and optimisation of treatment plans, and for controlling and reporting plan complexity. Implementation of such tools and a better understanding of these concepts will facilitate the handling of these characteristics in clinical practice and be helpful to increase the overall quality of treatment plans in radiotherapy.

Background and purpose: It is known that intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans that are highly complex might be less accurate in dose calculation and treatment delivery. Multiple complexity metrics have been proposed, but the relationships between them have not been thoroughly investigated. This study investigated these relationships in multi-institutional comparisons of treatment plans, where plans from multiple treatment planning systems (TPSs) are typically evaluated. Materials and methods: A program was developed to compute several complexity indices and provide analysis of dynamic plan parameters. This in-house software was used to analyse plans from a recent multi-institutional audit. Additionally, 100 clinical volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans from two institutions using different TPSs were analysed. Results: All plans produced satisfactory pre-treatment verification results and, hence, complexity metrics could not be used to predict plans failing QA. Regarding the relationship among complexity indices, some very strong correlations were found (r > 0.9 with p < 0.01). However, some relevant discrepancies between complexity indices were obtained, even with negative correlation coefficients (r ∼ −0.6) which were expected to be positive. These discrepancies could be explained because each complexity index focused on different features of the plan and different TPSs prioritised modulation of different plan parameters. Conclusions: Some complexity indices provided similar information and can be considered equivalent. However, indices that focused on different plan parameters yielded different results and it was unclear which complexity index should be used. Careful consideration should be given to the use of complexity metrics in multi-institutional studies.

External beam radiotherapy with photon beams is a highly accurate treatment modality, but requires extensive quality assurance programs to confirm that radiation therapy will be or was administered appropriately. In vivo dosimetry (IVD) is an essential element of modern radiation therapy because it provides the ability to catch treatment delivery errors, assist in treatment adaptation, and record the actual dose delivered to the patient. However, for various reasons, its clinical implementation has been slow and limited. The purpose of this report is to stimulate the wider use of IVD for external beam radiotherapy, and in particular of systems using electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs). After documenting the current IVD methods, this report provides detailed software, hardware and system requirements for in vivo EPID dosimetry systems in order to help in bridging the current vendor-user gap. The report also outlines directions for further development and research. In vivo EPID dosimetry vendors, in collaboration with users across multiple institutions, are requested to improve the understanding and reduce the uncertainties of the system and to help in the determination of optimal action limits for error detection. Finally, the report recommends that automation of all aspects of IVD is needed to help facilitate clinical adoption, including automation of image acquisition, analysis, result interpretation, and reporting/documentation. With the guidance of this report, it is hoped that widespread clinical use of IVD will be significantly accelerated.

The feasibility of dual bias dual metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFETs) for entrance in vivo dose measurements in high energy x-rays beams (18 MV) was investigated. A comparison with commercially available diodes for in vivo dosimetry for the same energy range was performed. As MOSFETs are sold without an integrated build-up cap, different caps were tested: 3 cm bolus, 2 cm bolus, 2 cm hemispherical cap of a water equivalent material (Plastic Water) and a metallic hemispherical cap. This metallic build-up cap is the same as the one that is mounted on the in vivo diode used in this study. Intrinsic precision and response linearity with dose were determined for MOSFETs and diodes. They were then calibrated for entrance in vivo dosimetry in an 18 MV x-ray beam. Calibration included determination of the calibration factor in standard reference conditions and of the correction factors (CF) when irradiation conditions differed from those of reference. Correction factors for field size, source surface distance, wedge, and temperature were determined. Sensitivity variation with accumulated dose and the lifetime of both types of detectors were also studied. Finally, the uncertainties of entrance in vivo measurements using MOSFET and diodes were discussed. Intrinsic precision for MOSFETs for the high sensitivity mode was 0.7% (1 s.d.) as compared to the 0.05% (1 s.d.) for the studied diodes. The linearity of the response with dose was excellent (R2 = 1.000) for both in vivo dosimetry systems. The absolute values of the studied correction factors for the MOSFETs when covered by the different build-up caps were of the same order of those determined for the diodes. However, the uncertainties of the correction factors for MOSFETs were significantly higher than for diodes. Although the intrinsic precision and the uncertainty on the CF was higher for MOSFET detectors than for the studied diodes, the total uncertainty in entrance dose determination, once they were calibrated, was of 2.9% (1 s.d.) while for diodes it was 2.0% (1 s.d.). MOSFETs showed no sensitivity variation with accumulated dose or temperature. When used in the high sensitivity mode, after approximately 50 Gy of accumulated dose MOSFETs could no longer be used as radiation dosimeters. In conclusion, MOSFETs can be used for entrance in vivo dosimetry in high energy x-rays beams if covered by an appropriate build-up cap. Metallic build-up caps, such as those used for in vivo diodes, have the advantage of greater patient comfort and less perturbation of the treatment field than the other build-up caps tested, while keeping the correction factors of the same order.

To evaluate the dose values predicted by several calculation algorithms in two treatment planning systems, Monte Carlo (MC) simulations and measurements by means of various detectors were performed in heterogeneous layer phantoms with water- and bone-equivalent materials. Percentage depth doses (PDDs) were measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs), metal-oxide semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs), plane parallel and cylindrical ionization chambers, and beam profiles with films. The MC code used for the simulations was the PENELOPE code. Three different field sizes (10 x 10, 5 x 5, and 2 x 2 cm2) were studied in two phantom configurations and a bone equivalent material. These two phantom configurations contained heterogeneities of 5 and 2 cm of bone, respectively. We analyzed the performance of four correction-based algorithms and one based on convolution superposition. The correction-based algorithms were the Batho, the Modified Batho, the Equivalent TAR implemented in the Cadplan (Varian) treatment planning system (TPS), and the Helax-TMS Pencil Beam from the Helax-TMS (Nucletron) TPS. The convolution-superposition algorithm was the Collapsed Cone implemented in the Helax-TMS. All the correction-based calculation algorithms underestimated the dose inside the bone-equivalent material for 18 MV compared to MC simulations. The maximum underestimation, in terms of root-mean-square (RMS), was about 15% for the Helax-TMS Pencil Beam (Helax-TMS PB) for a 2 x 2 cm2 field inside the bone-equivalent material. In contrast, the Collapsed Cone algorithm yielded values around 3%. A more complex behavior was found for 6 MV where the Collapsed Cone performed less well, overestimating the dose inside the heterogeneity in 3%-5%. The rebuildup in the interface bone-water and the penumbra shrinking in high-density media were not predicted by any of the calculation algorithms except the Collapsed Cone, and only the MC simulations matched the experimental values within the estimated uncertainties. The TLD and MOSFET detectors were suitable for dose measurement inside bone-equivalent materials, while parallel ionization chambers, applying the same calibration and correction factors as in water, systematically underestimated dose by 3%-5%.