Assessment of the usefulness of the Machine Performance Check system that is an evaluation tools for the determination of daily beam output

일간 빔 출력 확인을 위한 평가도구인 Machine Performance Check의 유용성 평가

  • Lee, Sang Hyeon (Department of Radiation Oncology, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Ahn, Woo Sang (Department of Radiation Oncology, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Woo Seok (Department of Radiation Oncology, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Choi, Jin Hyeok (Department of Radiation Oncology, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Seon Yeon (Department of Radiation Oncology, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine)
  • 이상현 (울산의대 강릉아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 안우상 (울산의대 강릉아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 이우석 (울산의대 강릉아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 최진혁 (울산의대 강릉아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 김선연 (울산의대 강릉아산병원 방사선종양학과)
  • Published : 2017.12.29

Abstract

Purpose: Machine Performance Check (MPC) is a self-checking software based on the Electronic Portal Imaging Device (EPID) to measure daily beam outputs without external installation. The purpose of this study is to verify the usefulness of MPC by comparing and correlating daily beam output of QA Beamchecker PLUS. Materials and Methods: Linear accelerator (Truebeam 2.5) was used to measure 10 energies which are composed of photon beams(6, 10, 15 MV and 6, 10 MV-FFF) and electron beams(6, 9, 12, 16 and 20 MeV). A total of 80 cycles of data was obtained by measuring beam output measurement before treatment over five months period. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the consistency of the beam output between the MPC and the QA Beamchecker PLUS. In this study, if the Pearson correlation coefficient is; (1) 0.8 or higher, the correlation is very strong (2) between 0.6 and 0.79, the correlation is strong (3) between 0.4 and 0.59, the correlation is moderate (4) between 0.2 and 0.39, the correlation is weak (5) lower than 0.2, the correlation is very weak. Results: Output variations observed between MPC and QA Beamchecker PLUS were within 2 % for photons and electrons. The beam outputs variations of MPC were $0.29{\pm}0.26%$ and $0.30{\pm}0.26%$ for photon and electron beams, respectively. QA Beamchecker PLUS beam outputs were $0.31{\pm}0.24%$ and $0.33{\pm}0.24%$ for photon and electron beams, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficient between MPC and QA Beamchecker PLUS indicated that photon beams were very strong at 15 MV, and strong at 6 MV, 10 MV, 6 MV-FFF and 10 MV-FFF. For electron beams, the Pearson correlation coefficient were strong at 16 MeV and 20 MeV, moderate at 9 MeV and 12 MeV, and very weak at 6 MeV. Conclusion: MPC showed significantly strong correlation with QA Beamchecker PLUS when testing with photon beams and high-energy electron beams in the evaluation of daily beam output, but the correlation when testing with low-energy electron beams (6 MeV) appeared to be low. However, MPC and QA Beamchecker PLUS are considered to be suitable for checking daily beam output, as they performed within 2 % of beam output consistency during the observation. MPC which can perform faster than the conventional daily beam output measurement tool, is considered to be an effective method for users.

목 적: Machine Performance Check (MPC)는 Electronic Portal Imaging Device(EPID)를 기반으로 빔 출력을 별도의 설치 없이 측정할 수 있는 장점을 지닌 자체 검사 소프트웨어이다. 본원에서는 MPC와 QA Beamchecker PLUS 간의 일간 빔 출력을 비교 및 상관관계를 분석하여 MPC의 유용성을 확인하고자 하였다. 대상 및 방법: 본 실험을 진행하기 위해 선형가속기(Truebeam 2.5)를 이용하였고, 광자선(6 MV, 10 MV, 15 MV, 6 MV-FFF, 10 MV-FFF), 전자선(6 MeV, 9 MeV, 12 MeV, 16 MeV, 20 MeV) 총 10개의 에너지를 대상으로 5 개월간 치료 전 빔 출력을 MPC와 QA Beamchecker PLUS로 측정하여, 총 80 회의 데이터를 획득하였다. Pearson 상관계수를 사용하여 MPC와 QA Beamchecker PLUS 간의 빔 출력을 비교 및 상관관계를 평가하였다. Pearson 상관계수는 0.8 이상은 아주 강함, 0.6 이상 0.8 미만 강함, 0.4 이상 0.6 미만 보통, 0.2 이상 0.4 미만 약함, 0.2 미만 아주 약함을 의미한다. 결 과: MPC와 QA Beamchecker PLUS 모두 일간 빔 출력 일치도는 2 % 이내로 나타났다. MPC의 빔 출력은 광자선이 $0.29{\pm}0.26%$, 전자선이 $0.30{\pm}0.26%$로 나타났고, QA Beamchecker PLUS의 빔 출력은 광자선이 $0.31{\pm}0.24%$, 전자선이 $0.33{\pm}0.24%$로 나타났다. MPC와 QA Beamchecker PLUS 사이의 Pearson 상관계수는 광자선의 경우 15 MV에서는 아주강함, 6 MV, 10 MV, 6 MV-FFF 그리고 10 MV-FFF에서는 강함으로 나타났고, 전자선의 경우 16 MeV, 20 MeV에서 강함, 9 MeV, 12 MeV에서 보통, 6 MeV에서 아주 약함으로 나타났다. 결 론: MPC는 일간 빔 출력 평가 면에서 광자선과 고에너지 전자선에서는 QA Beamchecker PLUS와 강한 상관관계로 보임을 확인할 수 있었다. 다만, 저에너지 전자선(6 MeV)에서는 낮은 상관관계를 보였지만, 관찰기간동안 MPC, QA Beamchecker PLUS 모두 빔 출력 일치도는 2 % 이내로 일간 빔 출력 확인 용도로는 적절할 것으로 판단된다. MPC는 기존의 일간 빔 출력 측정 도구 보다 빠르게 수행 할 수 있어 사용자 입장에서 효과적인 방법인 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Schultheiss TE, Boyer AL, Horton JL, Gastorf RJ, "Calibration frequency as determined by analysis of machine stability". Medical Physics 1989;16:84-87. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596365
  2. 김영범, 조한철, 김명관 등 "선형가속기의 QA업무에 관한 고찰". Journal of Health Science & Medical Technology 2004;30:11-16.
  3. Klein E, Hanley J, Bayouth J, et al. Task group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. Med Phys. 2009;36:4197-4212. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3190392
  4. J. Chang, C. H. Obcemea, J. Sillanpaa, J. Mechalakos, and C. Burman, "Use of EPID for leaf position accuracy QA of dynamic multi-leaf collimator (DMLC) treatment," Med. Phys. 31, 2091-2096 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1760187
  5. J. I. Prisciandaro, C. M. Frechette, M. G. Herman, P. D. Brown, Y. I. Garces, and R. L. Foote, "A methodology to determine margins by EPID measurements of patient setup variation and motion as applied to immobilization devices," Med. Phys. 31, 2978-2988 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1800712
  6. M. Mamalui-Hunter, H. Li, and D. A. Low, "MLC quality assurance using EPID: A fitting technique with subpixel precision," Med. Phys. 35, 2347-2355 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2919560
  7. P. M. McCowan, D. W. Rickey, P. Rowshanfarzad, P. B. Greer, W. Ansbacher, and B. M. McCurdy, "An investigation of gantry angle data accuracy for cinemode EPID images acquired during arc IMRT," J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 15, 187-201 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4507
  8. P. Rowshanfarzad, M. Sabet, M. P. Barnes, D. J. O' Connor, and P. B. Greer, "EPID-based verification of the MLC performance for dynamic IMRT and VMAT," Med. Phys. 39, 6192-6207 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4752207
  9. VitalBeam 2.5 Machine Performance Check Reference Guide. VARIAN medical system.
  10. Michael P Barnes, Peter B Greer "Evaluation of the TrueBeam machine performance check(MPC) beam constancy checks for flattened and flattening filterfree(FFF) photon beams". JACMP. 2016.