Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Replacing pretreatment verification with in vivo EPID dosimetry for prostate IMRT.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Apr 01; 67(5):1568-77.IJ

Abstract

PURPOSE

To investigate the feasibility of replacing pretreatment verification with in vivo electronic portal imaging device (EPID) dosimetry for prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Dose distributions were reconstructed from EPID images, inside a phantom (pretreatment) or the patient (five fractions in vivo) for 75 IMRT prostate plans. Planned and EPID dose values were compared at the isocenter and in two dimensions using the gamma index (3%/3 mm). The number of measured in vivo fractions required to achieve similar levels of agreement with the plan as pretreatment verification was determined. The time required to perform both methods was compared.

RESULTS

Planned and EPID isocenter dose values agreed, on average, within +/-1% (1 SD) of the total plan for both pretreatment and in vivo verification. For two-dimensional field-by-field verification, an alert was raised for 10 pretreatment checks with clear but clinically irrelevant discrepancies. Multiple in vivo fractions were combined by assessing gamma images consisting of median, minimum and low (intermediate) pixel values of one to five fractions. The "low" gamma values of three fractions rendered similar results as pretreatment verification. Additional time for verification was approximately 2.5 h per plan for pretreatment verification, and 15 min +/- 10 min/fraction using in vivo dosimetry.

CONCLUSIONS

In vivo EPID dosimetry is a viable alternative to pretreatment verification for prostate IMRT. For our patients, combining information from three fractions in vivo is the best way to distinguish systematic errors from non-clinically relevant discrepancies, save hours of quality assurance time per patient plan, and enable verification of the actual patient treatment.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute/Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

17394951

Citation

McDermott, Leah N., et al. "Replacing Pretreatment Verification With in Vivo EPID Dosimetry for Prostate IMRT." International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, vol. 67, no. 5, 2007, pp. 1568-77.
McDermott LN, Wendling M, Sonke JJ, et al. Replacing pretreatment verification with in vivo EPID dosimetry for prostate IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67(5):1568-77.
McDermott, L. N., Wendling, M., Sonke, J. J., van Herk, M., & Mijnheer, B. J. (2007). Replacing pretreatment verification with in vivo EPID dosimetry for prostate IMRT. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 67(5), 1568-77.
McDermott LN, et al. Replacing Pretreatment Verification With in Vivo EPID Dosimetry for Prostate IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Apr 1;67(5):1568-77. PubMed PMID: 17394951.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Replacing pretreatment verification with in vivo EPID dosimetry for prostate IMRT. AU - McDermott,Leah N, AU - Wendling,Markus, AU - Sonke,Jan-Jakob, AU - van Herk,Marcel, AU - Mijnheer,Ben J, PY - 2006/09/15/received PY - 2006/11/23/revised PY - 2006/11/24/accepted PY - 2007/3/31/pubmed PY - 2007/6/5/medline PY - 2007/3/31/entrez SP - 1568 EP - 77 JF - International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics JO - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys VL - 67 IS - 5 N2 - PURPOSE: To investigate the feasibility of replacing pretreatment verification with in vivo electronic portal imaging device (EPID) dosimetry for prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Dose distributions were reconstructed from EPID images, inside a phantom (pretreatment) or the patient (five fractions in vivo) for 75 IMRT prostate plans. Planned and EPID dose values were compared at the isocenter and in two dimensions using the gamma index (3%/3 mm). The number of measured in vivo fractions required to achieve similar levels of agreement with the plan as pretreatment verification was determined. The time required to perform both methods was compared. RESULTS: Planned and EPID isocenter dose values agreed, on average, within +/-1% (1 SD) of the total plan for both pretreatment and in vivo verification. For two-dimensional field-by-field verification, an alert was raised for 10 pretreatment checks with clear but clinically irrelevant discrepancies. Multiple in vivo fractions were combined by assessing gamma images consisting of median, minimum and low (intermediate) pixel values of one to five fractions. The "low" gamma values of three fractions rendered similar results as pretreatment verification. Additional time for verification was approximately 2.5 h per plan for pretreatment verification, and 15 min +/- 10 min/fraction using in vivo dosimetry. CONCLUSIONS: In vivo EPID dosimetry is a viable alternative to pretreatment verification for prostate IMRT. For our patients, combining information from three fractions in vivo is the best way to distinguish systematic errors from non-clinically relevant discrepancies, save hours of quality assurance time per patient plan, and enable verification of the actual patient treatment. SN - 0360-3016 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/17394951/Replacing_pretreatment_verification_with_in_vivo_EPID_dosimetry_for_prostate_IMRT_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0360-3016(06)03602-9 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -