Journal of radiological science and technology (대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학)

Korean Society of Radiological Science (대한방사선과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Treatment Planning Guideline of EBT Film-based Delivery Quality Assurance Using Statistical Process Control in Helical Tomotherapy

토모테라피에서 통계적공정관리를 이용한 EBT 필름 기반의 선량품질보증의 치료계획 가이드라인

  • 장경환 (극동대학교 방사선학과)
  • Received : 2022.08.16
  • Accepted : 2022.09.23
  • Published : 2022.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to analyze the results from statistical process control (SPC) to recommend upper and lower control limits for planning parameters based on delivery quality assurance (DQA) results and establish our institutional guidelines regarding planning parameters for helical tomotherapy (HT). A total of 53 brain, 41 head and neck (H & N), and 51 pelvis cases who had passing or failing DQA measurements were selected. The absolute point dose difference (DD) and the global gamma passing rate (GPR) for all patients were analyzed. Control charts were used to evaluate upper and lower control limits (UCL and LCL) for all assessed treatment planning parameters. Treatment planning parameters were analyzed to provide its range for DQA pass cases. We confirmed that the probability of DQA failure was higher when the proportion of leaf open time (LOT) below 100 ms was greater than 30%. LOT and gantry period (GP) were significant predictor for DQA failure using the SPC method. We investigated the availability of the SPC statistic method to establish the local planning guideline based on DQA results for HT system. The guideline of each planning parameter in HT may assist in the prediction of DQA failure using the SPC statistic method in the future.

Keywords

References

  1. Chang KH, Ji Y, Kwak J, Kim SW, Jeong C, Cho B, et al. Clinical Implications of High Definition Multileaf Collimator (HDMLC) Dosimetric Leaf Gap (DLG) Variations. Prog Med Phys. 2016;27(3):111-6. https://doi.org/10.14316/pmp.2016.27.3.111
  2. Ham IS, Cho PK, Jung KK. Dosimetric Comparison of Setup Errors in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy with Deep Inspiration Breath Holding in Breast Cancer Radiation Therapy. Korean Society of Radiological Science. 2019;42(2):137-43.
  3. Kim DG, Jung JH. Evaluating the Usefulness of Rice Bolus Phantom in Tomotherapy: Phantom Study. Korean Society of Radiological Science. 2021;44(6): 663-9.
  4. Chang KH, Lee S, Jung H, Choo YW, Cao YJ, Shim JB, et al. Development of a 3D optical scanner for evaluating patient-specific dose distributions. Physica Medica. 2015;31(5):553-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2015.05.009
  5. Thiyagarajan R, Nambiraj A, Sinha SN, Yadav G, Kumar A, Subramani V, et al. Analyzing the performance of ArcCHECK diode array detector for VMAT plan. Reports of Practical Oncology & Radiotherapy. 2016;21(1):50-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpor.2015.10.004
  6. Dong P, Lee P, Ruan D, Long T, Romeijn E, Low DA, et al. 4π noncoplanar stereotactic body radiation therapy for centrally located or larger lung tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;86(3): 407-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.02.002
  7. Guckenberger M, Meyer J, Wilbert J, Baier K, Bratengeier K, Vordermark D, et al. Precision required for dose-escalated treatment of spinal metastases and implications for image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT). Radiother Oncol. 2007;84(1):56-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2007.05.021
  8. Montgomery DC. Statistical quality control. New York: Wiley; 2009.
  9. Prins J. Process or product monitoring and control. NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods: National Institute of Standards & Technology, Gaithersburg; 2007.
  10. Breen SL, Moseley DJ, Zhang B, Sharpe MB. Statistical process control for IMRT dosimetric verification. Med Phys. 2008;35(10):4417-25. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2975144
  11. Chen M, Chen Y, Chen Q, Lu W. Theoretical analysis of the thread effect in helical TomoTherapy. Medical Physics. 2011;38(11):5945-60. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3644842
  12. Shimizu H, Sasaki K, Tachibana H, Tomita N, Makita C, Nakashima K, et al. Analysis of modulation factor to shorten the delivery time in helical tomotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017;18(3): 83-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12075
  13. Skorska M, Piotrowski T. Optimization of treatment planning parameters used in tomotherapy for prostate cancer patients. Phys Med. 2013;29(3): 273-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2012.03.007
  14. Thomas SJ, Geater AR. Implications of leaf fluence opening factors on transfer of plans between matched helical tomotherapy machines. Biomedical Physics & Engineering Express. 2017;4(1):017001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2057-1976/aa9879
  15. Vaden R, Schauer N. Efficient planning for efficient treatments on tomotherapy. ASTRO; 2016.
  16. Boyd R, Jeong K, Tome WA. Determining efficient helical IMRT modulation factor from the MLC leaf-open time distribution on precision treatment planning system. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019;20(5): 64-74. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12581
  17. Binny D, Lancaster CM, Trapp JV, Crowe SB. Statistical process control and verifying positional accuracy of a cobra motion couch using step-wedge quality assurance tool. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017;18(5):70-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12136
  18. Binny D, Aland T, Archibald-Heeren BR, Trapp JV, Kairn T, Crowe SB. A multi-institutional evaluation of machine performance check system on treatment beam output and symmetry using statistical process control. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019;20(3):71-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12547
  19. Binny D, Lancaster CM, Byrne M, Kairn T, Trapp JV, Crowe SB. Tomotherapy treatment site specific planning using statistical process control. Phys Med. 2018;53:32-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.08.003
  20. Mezzenga E, D'Errico V, Sarnelli A, Strigari L, Menghi E, Marcocci F, et al. Preliminary Retrospective Analysis of Daily Tomotherapy Output Constancy Checks Using Statistical Process Control. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0147936. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147936
  21. Meyers SM, Balderson MJ, Letourneau D. Evaluation of Elekta Agility multi-leaf collimator performance using statistical process control tools. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019;20(7):100-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12660
  22. Sanghangthum T, Suriyapee S, Srisatit S, Pawlicki T. Statistical process control analysis for patient-specific IMRT and VMAT QA. Journal of Radiation Research. 2013;54(3):546-52. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrr/rrs112
  23. Chang KH, Kim DW, Choi JH, Shin HB, Hong CS, Jung DM, et al. Dosimetric Comparison of Four Commercial Patient-Specific Quality Assurance Devices for Helical Tomotherapy. Journal of the Korean Physical Society. 2020;76(3):257-63. https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.76.257
  24. Chang KH, Lee YH, Park BH, Han MC, Kim J, et al. Statistical Analysis of Treatment Planning Parameters for Prediction of Delivery Quality Assurance Failure for Helical Tomotherapy. Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment. 2020;19:1-9.
  25. Ko YS. The construction methodology of a reul-based expert system using CART-based decision tree method. The Journal of the Korea Institute of Electronic Communication Sciences. 2011;6(6):849-54. https://doi.org/10.13067/JKIECS.2011.6.6.849
  26. TomoTherapy® Treatment System StatRTTM Guide. TomoTherapy Incorporated; 2010(177)
  27. Westerly DC, Soisson E, Chen Q, Woch K, Schubert L, Olivera G, et al. Treatment planning to improve delivery accuracy and patient throughput in helical tomotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009; 74(4):1290-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.02.004
  28. Martisikova M, Ackermann B, Jakel O. Analysis of uncertainties in Gafchromic EBT film dosimetry of photon beams. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53(24): 7013-27. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/24/001
  29. Zhao YL, Mackenzie M, Kirkby C, Fallone BG. Monte Carlo calculation of helical tomotherapy dose delivery. Med Phys. 2008;35(8):3491-500. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2948409