Modeling Elekta VersaHD using the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system for photon beams: A single-institution experience.
Commissioning
Eclipse
Elekta
Treatment planning system
Varian
VersaHD
Journal
Journal of applied clinical medical physics
ISSN: 1526-9914
Titre abrégé: J Appl Clin Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101089176
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2019
Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
23
01
2019
revised:
30
07
2019
accepted:
01
08
2019
pubmed:
1
9
2019
medline:
21
3
2020
entrez:
1
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to report a single-institution experience and commissioning data for Elekta VersaHD linear accelerators (LINACs) for photon beams in the Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS). Two VersaHD LINACs equipped with 160-leaf collimators were commissioned. For each energy, the percent-depth-dose (PDD) curves, beam profiles, output factors, leaf transmission factors and dosimetric leaf gaps (DLGs) were acquired in accordance with the AAPM task group reports No. 45 and No. 106 and the vendor-supplied documents. The measured data were imported into Eclipse TPS to build a VersaHD beam model. The model was validated by creating treatment plans spanning over the full-spectrum of treatment sites and techniques used in our clinic. The quality assurance measurements were performed using MatriXX, ionization chamber, and radiochromic film. The DLG values were iteratively adjusted to optimize the agreement between planned and measured doses. Mobius, an independent LINAC logfile-based quality assurance tool, was also commissioned both for routine intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) QA and as a secondary check for the Eclipse VersaHD model. The Eclipse-generated VersaHD model was in excellent agreement with the measured PDD curves and beam profiles. The measured leaf transmission factors were less than 0.5% for all energies. The model validation study yielded absolute point dose agreement between ionization chamber measurements and Eclipse within ±4% for all cases. The comparison between Mobius and Eclipse, and between Mobius and ionization chamber measurements lead to absolute point dose agreement within ±5%. The corresponding 3D dose distributions evaluated with 3%global/2mm gamma criteria resulted in larger than 90% passing rates for all plans. The Eclipse TPS can model VersaHD LINACs with clinically acceptable accuracy. The model validation study and comparisons with Mobius demonstrated that the modeling of VersaHD in Eclipse necessitates further improvement to provide dosimetric accuracy on par with Varian LINACs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31471950
doi: 10.1002/acm2.12709
pmc: PMC6806469
doi:
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
33-42Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
Med Phys. 2009 Nov;36(11):5359-73
pubmed: 19994544
Med Phys. 2018 May;45(5):2337-2344
pubmed: 29537634
Med Phys. 2008 Oct;35(10):4460-3
pubmed: 18975693
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016 Jan 08;17(1):192-206
pubmed: 26894352
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013 May 06;14(2):4136
pubmed: 23470941
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014 Jul 08;15(4):4850
pubmed: 25207415
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 May 1;68(1):301-10
pubmed: 17448883
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2014 Nov-Dec;4(6):358-67
pubmed: 25407855
Med Phys. 2010 Jul;37(7):3704-14
pubmed: 20831078
Phys Med Biol. 2013 Jul 7;58(13):4643-57
pubmed: 23780400
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015 Jan 08;16(1):5385
pubmed: 25679180
Med Phys. 1998 May;25(5):656-61
pubmed: 9608475
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015 May 08;16(3):5242
pubmed: 26103484
Med Phys. 2008 Sep;35(9):4186-215
pubmed: 18841871
Phys Med Biol. 2006 Apr 7;51(7):1907-17
pubmed: 16552113
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016 Jan 08;17(1):179-191
pubmed: 26894351
Med Phys. 2018 Apr;45(4):e53-e83
pubmed: 29443390
Z Med Phys. 2014 May;24(2):153-63
pubmed: 24055395
South Asian J Cancer. 2013 Oct;2(4):197
pubmed: 24455624
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017 Nov;18(6):123-129
pubmed: 28944979
Med Dosim. 2018 Summer;43(2):168-176
pubmed: 29650302
Med Dosim. 2018 Summer;43(2):118-128
pubmed: 29580933
Med Phys. 1994 Jul;21(7):1093-121
pubmed: 7968843
Med Phys. 2012 Nov;39(11):6981-7018
pubmed: 23127092
Med Phys. 2011 Jul;38(7):4166-73
pubmed: 21859018
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009 Sep 30;10(4):2923
pubmed: 19918222