• 한국의학물리학회지:의학물리
• /
• 제30권4호
• /
• pp.120-127
• /
• 2019

Purpose: This study was designed to evaluate the dosimetric performance of Mobius3D by comparison with an aSi-based electronic portal imaging device (EPID) and Octavius 4D, which are conventionally used for patient-specific prescription dose verification. Methods: The study was conducted using nine patients who were treated by volumetric modulated arc therapy. To evaluate the feasibility of Mobius3D for prescription dose verification, we compared the QA results of Mobius3D to an aSi-based EPID and the Octavius 4D dose verification methods. The first was the comparison of the Mobius3D verification phantom dose, and the second was to gamma index analysis. Results: The percentage differences between the calculated point dose and measurements from a PTW31010 ion chamber were 1.6%±1.3%, 2.0%±0.8%, and 1.2%±1.2%, using collapsed cone convolution, an analytical anisotropic algorithm, and the AcurosXB algorithm respectively. The average difference was found to be 1.6%±0.3%. Additionally, in the case of using the PTW31014 ion chamber, the corresponding results were 2.0%±1.4%, 2.4%±2.1%, and 1.6%±2.5%, showing an average agreement within 2.0%±0.3%. Considering all the criteria, the Mobius3D result showed that the percentage dose difference from the EPID was within 0.46%±0.34% on average, and the percentage dose difference from Octavius 4D was within 3.14%±2.85% on average. Conclusions: We conclude that Mobius3D can be used interchangeably with phantom-based dosimetry systems, which are commonly used as patient-specific prescription dose verification tools, especially under the conditions of 3%/3 mm and 95% pass rate.

• 한국의학물리학회지:의학물리
• /
• 제32권4호
• /
• pp.107-115
• /
• 2021

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical quality assurance results of portal dosimetry using an electronic portal imaging device, a method that is extensively used for patient-specific quality assurance, and the newly released Mobius3D for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods: This retrospective study includes data from 122 patients who underwent IMRT and VMAT on the Novalis Tx and VitalBeam linear accelerators between April and June 2020. We used a paired t-test to compare portal dosimetry using an electronic portal imaging device and the average gamma passing rates of MobiusFX using log files regenerated after patient treatment. Results: The average gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and MobiusFX (5%/3 mm) were 99.43%±1.02% and 99.32%±1.87% in VitalBeam and 97.53%±3.34% and 96.45%±13.94% in Novalis Tx, respectively. Comparison of the gamma passing rate results of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and MobiusFX (5%/3 mm as per the manufacturer's manual) does not show any statistically significant difference. Conclusions: Log file-based patient-specific quality assurance, including independent dose calculation, can be appropriately used in clinical practice as a second-check dosimetry, and it is considered comparable with primary quality assurance such as portal dosimetry.

• 한국의학물리학회지:의학물리
• /
• 제28권4호
• /
• pp.149-155
• /
• 2017

Radiotherapy patients should maintain their treatment position as patient setup is very important for accurate treatment. In this study, we evaluated patient setup error quantitatively according to Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) Gamma Density Analysis using Mobius CBCT. The adjusted setup error to the $QUASAR^{TM}$ phantom was moved artificially in the superior and lateral direction, and then we acquired the CBCT image according to the phantom setup error. To analyze the treatment setup error quantitatively, we compared values suggested in the CBCT system with the Mobius CBCT. This allowed us to evaluate the setup error using CBCT Gamma Density Analysis by comparing the planning CT with the CBCT. In addition, we acquired the 3D-gamma density passing rate according to the gamma density criteria and phantom setup error. When the movement was adjusted to only the phantom body or 3 cm diameter target inserted in the phantom, the CBCT system had a difference of approximately 1 mm, while Mobius CBCT had a difference of under 0.5 mm compared to the real setup error. When the phantom body and target moved 20 mm in the Mobius CBCT, there are 17.9 mm and 13.5 mm differences in the lateral and superior directions, respectively. The CBCT gamma density passing rate was reduced according to the increase in setup error, and the gamma density criteria of 0.1 g/cc/3 mm has 10% lower passing rate than the other density criteria. Mobius CBCT had a 2 mm setup error compared with the actual setup error. However, the difference was greater than 10 mm when the phantom body moved 20 mm with the target. Therefore, we should pay close attention when the patient's anatomy changes.

• 한국의학물리학회지:의학물리
• /
• 제26권3호
• /
• pp.168-177
• /
• 2015

세기조절방사선치료(IMRT)는 복잡하고 정교한 방사선치료 기법을 이용한 환자 치료 시 치료계획의 정확성을 평가하기 위해 첫 치료 시작 전 품질관리를 권고하고 있다. 이 목적 실현을 위해 최근 상용화된 품질관리 소프트웨어를 이용하면 치료 전후의 정확한 방사선량의 전달을 확인할 수 있다. 이에 본 연구에서는 품질관리 시스템 내에 MLC의 선량학적엽간격(DLG)의 변화에 따른 IMRT 치료계획 경우별 계산 결과의 분석을 통해 그 효용성을 평가하고자 한다. MobiusFx에 입력할 MLC 다이나로그 파일(Dynamic MLC Log File)을 획득하기 위하여 HD120 MLC가 장착된 Novalis Tx를 이용하였다. IMRT 치료계획을 수립하기 위해 Eclipse 치료계획시스템을 사용하였으며, IBA사의 I'mRT 팬톰영상에 표적 및 장기 윤곽(다중표적, 전립선, 두경부, C-모양)을 묘사하였다. DLG에 따른 선량분포의 변화를 확인하기 위해서 MLC 다이나로그 파일을 MobiusFX 시스템에 입력하고 각 경우마다 0.5, 0.7, 1.0, 1.3, 1.6 mm로 DLG를 변화시켜 선량계산의 차이를 평가하였다. 선량평가는 허용범위가 3%/3 mm인 3차원 감마지표의 통과율과 DVH 그리고 CC13 전리함에 대한 점선량을 통해 분석하였다. MobiusFx에서 4가지의 경우에 대해 각 DLG 마다의 선량분포를 비교 분석한 결과, 다중표적과 두경부는 DLG가 0.5와 0.7 mm에서 3~5%, 1.0~1.6 mm에서 3% 미만의 선량차이를 보였다. 감마 지수 통과율에서도 0.7 mm 이하의 DLG에서 다중표적 경우의 중앙표적과 상위표적은 30% 미만, PTV와 척수는 81% 미만이었으며, 다른 DLG에서는 95% 이상의 통과율을 보였다. 하위표적과 귀밑샘은 모든 DLG에서 100.0%이었다. 전립선에서 점선량은 모든 DLG에서 3% 미만의 차이를 보였으나 PTV에서 DLG 0.7 mm 이하와 1.0 mm 이상에서는 각각 95% 미만과 98% 이상의 통과율을 보였다. 직장과 방광은 모든 DLG에서 100.0%로 나타났다. C-모양에서 점선량은 1.3 mm를 제외한 모든 DLG에서 3~9%의 차이를 보이며 PTV는 1.0과 1.3 mm의 DLG에서 각각 96.7, 93.0%의 통과율을 보였으나 다른 DLG에서는 86% 미만이었다. 코어에서는 모든 DLG에서 100.0%였다. 본 연구에서는 치료계획 품질관리 시스템에서 DLG 적용 값의 차이에 따라 품질관리의 정확성에 유의미한 영향을 미치는 것으로 확인되었다. 그러므로 IMRT, VMAT 등 MLC의 움직임을 이용한 방사선치료법의 경우 정확한 품질관리를 위해서는 사용하고 있는 치료장비 및 치료계획시스템에 맞는 적합한 DLG 값을 상호 일치시켜 사용해야 할 것으로 판단된다.