Background and purpose The study evaluated the differences in leaf positioning deviations by the log files of three advanced accelerators with two delivery techniques, and established specific assessment parameters of leaf positioning deviations for different types of accelerators. Methods A total of 420 treatment plans with 5 consecutive treatment log files were collected from the Trilogy, TrueBeam and Halcyon accelerators. Millennium MLC was equipped on the Trilogy and TrueBeam accelerators. A jawless design and dual-layer MLC were adopted on the Halcyon accelerator. 70 IMRT and 70 VMAT plans were selected randomly on each accelerator. The treatment sites of all plans included head and neck, chest, breast, pelvis and other sites. The parsing tasks for 2100 log files were proceeded by SunCheck software from Sun Nuclear Corporation. The maximum leaf root mean square (RMS) errors, 95th percentile errors and percentages of different leaf positioning errors were statistically analyzed. The correlations between these evaluation parameters and accelerator performance parameters (maximum leaf speed, mean leaf speed, gantry and arc angle) were analyzed. Results The average maximum leaf RMS errors of the Trilogy in the IMRT and VMAT plans were 0.44 ± 0.09 mm and 0.79 ± 0.07 mm, respectively, which were higher than the TrueBeam's 0.03 ± 0.01 mm, 0.03 ± 0.01 mm and the Halcyon's 0.05 ± 0.01 mm, 0.07 ± 0.01 mm. Similar data results were shown in the 95th percentile error. The maximum leaf RMS errors were strongly correlated with the 95th percentile errors (Pearson index > 0.5). The leaf positioning deviations in VMAT were higher than those in IMRT for all accelerators. In TrueBeam and Halcyon, leaf position errors above 1 mm were not found in IMRT and VMAT plans. The main influencing factor of leaf positioning deviation was the leaf speed, which has no strong correlation with gantry and arc angles. Conclusions Compared with the quality assurance guidelines, the MLC positioning deviations tolerances of the three accelerators should be tightened. For both IMRT and VMAT techniques, the 95th percentile error and the maximum RMS error are suggested to be tightened to 1.5 and 1 mm respectively for the Trilogy accelerator. In TrueBeam and Halcyon accelerators, the 95th percentile error and maximum RMS error of 1 and 0.5 mm, respectively, are considered appropriate.
BackgroundThe purpose of the study was to evaluate the dosimetry of the Halcyon in prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and hippocampal-sparing for small cell lung cancer (SCLC).MethodsFive VMAT plans were designed on CT images of 15 patients diagnosed with SCLC and received PCI. Three plans with two full arcs were generated on the Trilogy and the TrueBeam accelerators, and flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter free (FFF) modes were used on TrueBeam. Two Halcyon plans with two and three full arcs were generated, referred to as H-2A and H-3A, respectively. The prescription dose was 25 Gy in 2.5-Gy fractions. The dose limit for hippocampus were D100 ≤ 9Gy and Dmax ≤ 16Gy. The Wilcoxon matched-paired signed-rank test was used to evaluate the significance of the observed differences between the five plans.ResultsH-2A plans significantly increased the D2 of PTV, and H-3A plans showed comparable or even better target dosimetry (better conformity) compared to the three plans on C-arm accelerators. Compared to T and TB plans, the two Halcyon plans significantly reduced the D100 and mean doses of bilateral hippocampus, the mean doses of eyeballs, and the maximum doses of lenses. D100 of hippocampus was reduced in TrueBeam plans comparing to Trilogy plans. The FFF plans on TrueBeam also represented advantages in Dmean and D100 of hippocampas, Dmean and Dmax of eyeballs, and the Dmax of lenses compared to FF plans. Halcyon plans and TrueBeam plans with FFF mode increased the MUs compared to FF plans. Comparing to H-2A, the H-3A plans exhibited additional dosimetric advantages, including D2, CI and HI of PTV, as well as the maximum and mean doses of hippocampus and eyeballs, and the maximum doses of optic nerves and brainstem. The two Halcyon plans significantly reduced the delivery time and showed the higher gamma passing rate than the three plans of C-arm accelerators.ConclusionsCompared with the C-arm accelerators, the dose of hippocampus and the delivery times on Halcyon are relatively significantly reduced for hippocampal-sparing PCI. Three arcs are recommended for VMAT plans with the Halcyon in hippocampal-sparing PCI.
Background: To evaluate the dosimetry of Halcyon in treatment of bilateral breast cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy. Methods: On CT images of 10 patients with bilateral breast cancer, four Halcyon plans with different setup fields were generated and dosimetric comparisons were conducted among the four plans to select an optimal setup field mode. The four setup-field plans were referred to as CBCT-H, CBCT-L, MV-H, MV-L. Whole and partial arc plans on Trilogy and Halcyon referred to as T-4arc, T-8arc, H-4arc and H-8arc were designed. The dosimetric differences between whole and partial arc plans in the same accelerator were compared to understand the most suitable field setting mode. The better Halcyon plan was selected to the further dosimetric comparison of the plan quality and delivery efficiency between Trilogy and Halcyon. Results: CBCT-H plans increased Dmean, D2 and V107 of planning target volume (PTV) and V5 and Dmean of the heart, left ventricle (LV) and lungs compared to other plans. No significantly dosimetric differences were observed in PTV and organs at risk (OARs) among CBCT-L, MV-H and MV-L. The mean dose and low dose volume of heart, lungs and liver were significantly decreased in T-8arc plans. In terms of V5, V20, V30, V40 and Dmean of the heart, V20, V30, V40 and Dmean of the LV, V30, V40, Dmax and Dmean of the left anterior descending artery (LAD), V5 and V40 of lungs, H-8arc was significantly higher than H-4arc (p<0.05). Compared to Trilogy’s plans, Halcyon’s plans reduced the high-dose volume of the heart and LV, but increased the mean dose of the heart. For the dose of the LAD and the V20, V30 of lungs, there was no statistical difference between the two accelerators. Compared with Trilogy, plans on Halcyon significantly increased the skin dose, but also significantly reduced the delivery time. Conclusion: For Halcyon, the whole-arc plans has more dosimetric advantages in bilateral breast cancer radiotherapy. Although the mean dose of the heart and the skin dose are increased, the dose of the cardiac substructure and other OARs are comparable to the Trilogy, and the delivery time is significantly reduced.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.