Experience in commissioning the halcyon linac.
Halcyon
TPS verification
beam data verification
commissioning
Journal
Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2019
Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
15
03
2019
revised:
10
06
2019
accepted:
01
07
2019
pubmed:
17
7
2019
medline:
18
2
2020
entrez:
17
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This manuscript describes the experience of two institutions in commissioning the new Halcyon Extensive beam measurements, testing of mechanical and imaging systems, including the multi-leaf collimator (MLC), were performed at the two institutions independently. The results were compared with published recommendations as well. When changes in standard practice were necessitated by the design of the new system, the efficacy of such changes was evaluated as compared to published approaches (guidelines or vendor documentation). Given the proper choice of detectors, good agreement was found between the respective experimental data and the treatment planning system calculations, and between independent measurements by the two institutions. MLC testing, MV imaging, and mechanical system showed unique characteristics that are different from the traditional C-arm linacs. Although the same methodologies and physics equipment can generally be used for commissioning the Halcyon, some adaptation of previous practices and development of new methods were also necessary. We have shown that the vendor pre-loaded data agree well with the independent measured ones during the commission process. This verifies that a data validation instead of a full-data commissioning process may be a more efficient approach for the Halcyon. Measurement results could be used as a reference for future Halcyon users.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4304-4313Informations de copyright
© 2019 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
Thompson S, Constantin M, Kokkonen P. Eclipse Photon Beam Models for Halcyon. Varian Medical Systems: Technical Perspectives; 2017.
McEwen M, DeWerd L, Ibbott G, et al. Addendum to the AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon beams. Med Phys. 2014;41:041501.
Klein EE, Hanley J, Bayouth J, et al. Task group 142 report: quality assurance of medical acceleratorsa). Med Phys. 2009;36:4197-4212.
Almond PR, Biggs PJ, Coursey BM, et al. AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams. Med Phys. 1999;26:1847-1870.
Smith K, Balter P, Duhon J, et al. Medical physics practice guideline 8.a.: linear accelerator performance tests. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017;18:23-39.
Smilowitz JB, Das IJ, Feygelman V, et al. Medical physics practice guideline 5.a.: commissioning and QA of treatment planning dose calculations - megavoltage photon and electron beams. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015;16:14-34.
Fontenot JD, Alkhatib H, Garrett JA, et al. Medical physics practice guideline 2.a: commissioning and quality assurance of X-ray-based image-guided radiotherapy systems. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15:4528.
Ezzell GA, Burmeister JW, Dogan N, et al. IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM task group 119. Med Phys. 2009;36:5359-5373.
AGENCY IAE. Commissioning and quality assurance of computerized planning systems for radiation treatment of cancer. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2004.
Das IJ, Cheng CW, Watts RJ, et al. Accelerator beam data commissioning equipment and procedures: report of the TG-106 of the therapy physics committee of the AAPM. Med Phys. 2008;35:4186-4215.
Bissonnette JP, Balter PA, Dong L, et al. Quality assurance for image-guided radiation therapy utilizing CT-based technologies: a report of the AAPM TG-179. Med Phys. 2012;39:1946-1963.
Chang Z, Wu Q, Adamson J, et al. Commissioning and dosimetric characteristics of TrueBeam system: composite data of three TrueBeam machines. Med Phys. 2012;39:6981-7018.
Glide-Hurst C, Bellon M, Foster R, et al. Commissioning of the Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator: a multi-institutional study. Med Phys. 2013;40:031719.
Clivio A, Vanetti E, Rose S, et al. Evaluation of the machine performance check application for TrueBeam linac. Radiat Oncol. 2015;10:97.
Li Y, Netherton T, Nitsch PL, et al. Independent validation of machine performance check for the Halcyon and TrueBeam linacs for daily quality assurance. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018;19:375-382.
Low DA, Li Z, Drzymala RE. Minimization of target positioning error in accelerator-based radiosurgery. Med Phys. 1995;22:443-448.
Li Y, Netherton T, Nitsch PL, et al. Normal tissue doses from MV image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) using orthogonal MV and MV-CBCT. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018;19:52-57.
Mihailidis D, Ling CC, Brady L, et al.Evaluation of MV imaging dose for the first clinical Halcyon system. ESTRO; 2017; Vienna, Austria. p. PO-0992.
De Roover R, et al. Validation and IMRT/VMAT delivery quality of a preconfigured fast-rotating O-ring linac system. Med Phys. 2019;46:328-339.
Lim TY, Dragojević I, Hoffman D, Flores-Martinez E, Kim GY. Characterization of the Halcyon TM multileaf collimator system. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019;20:106-114.
Cai B, et al. Characterization of a prototype rapid kilovoltage x-ray image guidance system designed for a ring shape radiation therapy unit. Med. Phys. 2019;46:1355-1370.