A Method to Calculate a Pass Rate of the ${\gamma}$-index Analysis in Tomotherapy Delivery Quality Assurance (DQA)

단층치료기를 이용한 방사선 치료의 환자별 정도관리 평가를 위한 감마인덱스의 정량화 방법

  • Park, Dahl (Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Yong-Ho (Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Won-Taek (Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Dong-Won (Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Dong-Hyun (Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Hospital) ;
  • Jeon, Ho-Sang (Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital) ;
  • Nam, Ji-Ho (Department of Radiation Oncology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital) ;
  • Lim, Sang-Wook (Department of Radiation Oncology, Kosin University College of Medicine)
  • 박달 (부산대학교병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 김용호 (부산대학교병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 김원택 (부산대학교 의학전문대학원 방사선종양학교실) ;
  • 김동원 (부산대학교 의학전문대학원 방사선종양학교실) ;
  • 김동현 (부산대학교병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 전호상 (부산대학교양산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 남지호 (부산대학교양산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 임상욱 (고신대학교 의과대학 방사선종양학교실)
  • Received : 2010.10.18
  • Accepted : 2010.12.10
  • Published : 2010.12.31

Abstract

DQA, a patient specific quality assurance in tomotherapy, is usually performed using an ion chamber and a film. The result of DQA is analysed with the treatment planning system called Tomo Planning Station (TomoPS). The two-dimensional dose distribution of film measurement is compared with the dose distribution calculated by TomoPS using the ${\gamma}$-index analysis. In ${\gamma}$-index analysis, the criteria such as 3%/3 mm is used and we verify that whether the rate of number of points which pass the criteria (pass rate) is within tolerance. TomoPS does not provide any quantitative information regarding the pass rate. In this work, a method to get the pass rate of the ${\gamma}$-index analysis was suggested and a software PassRT which calculates the pass rate was developed. The results of patient specific QA of the intensity modulated radiation therapy measured with I'mRT MatriXX (IBA Dosimetry, Germany) and DQA of tomotherapy measured with film were used to verify the proposed method. The pass rate was calculated using PassRT and compared with the pass rate calculated by OmniPro I'mRT (IBA Dosimetry, Germany). The average difference between the two pass rates was 0.00% for the MatriXX measurement. The standard deviation and the maximum difference were 0.02% and 0.02%, respectively. For the film measurement, average difference, standard deviation and maximum difference were 0.00%, 0.02% and 0.02%, respectively. For regions of interest smaller than $24.3{\times}16.6cm^2$ the proposed method can be used to calculate the pass rate of the gamma index analysis to one decimal place and will be helpful for the more accurate DQA in tomotherapy.

단층치료기(TomoTherapy$^{(R)}$)를 이용한 방사선 치료에서 환자별 정도관리인 DQA (delivery quality assurance)는 보통 이온 전리함과 필름을 이용한다. DQA의 결과는 치료계획장비인 TomoPS (Tomo Planning Station)를 이용하여 분석하게 되는데 필름을 이용한 2차원 선량분포의 비교는 감마인덱스 분석을 사용한다. 감마인덱스를 이용한 비교는 3%/3 mm와 같은 기준을 사용하여 이 기준을 통과한 비율(pass rate)이 허용 값보다 크게 되는지 확인한다. TomoPS는 pass rate 값을 정량적으로 계산해주는 기능이 없다. 본 논문에서는 TomoPS 감마인덱스 분석의 pass rate를 정량적으로 계산하는 방법을 제시하고 이를 계산해주는 프로그램인 PassRT를 개발하였다. PassRT의 검증을 위해 I'mRT MatriXX (IBA Dosimetry, Germany)를 사용하여 측정한 세기조절방사선 치료를 받은 환자의 환자별 정도관리 자료와 필름을 사용한 DQA 자료를 사용하였다. 두 가지 종류의 자료에 대해 PassRT로 계산한 pass rate를 OmniPro I'mRT (IBA Dosimetry, Germany)프로그램으로 계산한 pass rate와 비교하였다. MatriXX를 이용하여 측정한 자료의 비교결과 평균오차 0.00%, 표준편차 0.01%, 최대오차 0.04%였고, 필름의 결과는 평균오차 0.00%, 표준편차 0.02%, 최대오차 0.02%였다. 관심영역이 $24.3{\times}16.6cm^2$ 보다 작은 경우 본 논문에서 제시한 방법으로 감마인덱스 분석의 pass rate를 소수점 첫째자리 까지 정확하게 계산할 수 있어서 보다 정확한 단층치료기의 DQA에 도움이 될 것으로 생각된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Mackie TR, Holmes TW, Swerdloff S, et al: Tomotherapy: a new concept in the delivery of dynamic conformal radiotherapy. Med Phys 20:1709-1719 (1993) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596958
  2. 김동욱, 윤명근, 박성용 등: 두경부암 환자에 대한 선량체적 히스토그램에 따른 토모치료외 선형가속기기반 세기변조방사선 치료의 정량적 비교. 의학물리 19:89-94 (2008)
  3. Van VM, Field C, Raaijmakers CP: Comparing step-andshoot IMRT with dynamic helical tomotherapy IMRT plans for head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62:1535-1539 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.04.011
  4. Chen YJ, Liu A, Han C, et al: Helical tomotherapy for radiotherapy in esophageal cancer: a preferred plan with better conformal target coverage and more homogeneous dose distribution. Med Dosim 32:166-171 (2007) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2006.12.003
  5. Ramsey C, Seibert R, Scaperoth D, et al: Image-guided helical tomotherapy for localized prostate cancer: Technique and initial clinical observations. J Appl Clinc Med Phys 8:37-51 (2007)
  6. Mavroidis P, Stathakis S, Gutierrez A, et al: Expected clinical impact of the differences between planned and delivered dose distributions in Helical Tomotherapy for treating head and neck cancer using Helical Megavoltage CT Images. J Appl Clinc Med Phys 10:125-139 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v10i3.2969
  7. Low DA, Harms WB, Mutic S, Purdy JA: A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. Med Phys 25: 656-661 (1998) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.598248
  8. TomoTherapy: Hi-Art Treatment System User Guide - Delivery Quality Assurance Version 3.x.xl
  9. Amerio S, Boriano A, Bourhaleb F, et al: Dosimetric characterization of a large area pixel-segmented ionization chamber. Med Phys 31:414-420 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1639992
  10. Saminathan S, Manickan R, Chandraraj V, et al: Dosimetric study of 2D ion chamber array matrix for the modern radiotherapy treatment verification. J Appl Clinc Med Phys 11: 116-127 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v11i2.3076
  11. Microsoft Help and Support: DIBs and Their Uses. (2005-02-11)