title: A model-based 3D patient-specific pre-treatment QA method for VMAT using the EPID.
abstract: This study reports the development and validation of a model-based, 3D patient dose reconstruction method for pre-treatment quality assurance using EPID images. The method is also investigated for sensitivity to potential MLC delivery errors. Each cine-mode EPID image acquired during plan delivery was processed using a previously developed back-projection dose reconstruction model providing a 3D dose estimate on the CT simulation data. Validation was carried out using 24 SBRT-VMAT patient plans by comparing: (1) ion chamber point dose measurements in a solid water phantom, (2) the treatment planning system (TPS) predicted 3D dose to the EPID reconstructed 3D dose in a solid water phantom, and (3) the TPS predicted 3D dose to the EPID and our forward predicted reconstructed 3D dose in the patient (CT data). AAA and AcurosXB were used for TPS predictions. Dose distributions were compared using 3%/3 mm (95% tolerance) and 2%/2 mm (90% tolerance) γ-tests in the planning target volume (PTV) and 20% dose volumes. The average percentage point dose differences between the ion chamber and the EPID, AcurosXB, and AAA were 0.73  ±  1.25%, 0.38  ±  0.96% and 1.06  ±  1.34% respectively. For the patient (CT) dose comparisons, seven (3%/3 mm) and nine (2%/2 mm) plans failed the EPID versus AAA. All plans passed the EPID versus Acuros XB and the EPID versus forward model γ-comparisons. Four types of MLC sensitive errors (opening, shifting, stuck, and retracting), of varying magnitude (0.2, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0 mm), were introduced into six different SBRT-VMAT plans. γ-comparisons of the erroneous EPID dose and original predicted dose were carried out using the same criteria as above. For all plans, the sensitivity testing using a 3%/3 mm γ-test in the PTV successfully determined MLC errors on the order of 1.0 mm, except for the single leaf retraction-type error. A 2%/2 mm criteria produced similar results with two more additional detected errors.
authors.affiliation: Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T 2N2, Canada. Medical Physics Department, CancerCare Manitoba, 675 McDermot Ave., Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3E 0V9, Canada.
authors.forename: P M
authors.initials: PM
authors.lastname: McCowan
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Asuni
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: van Beek
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: van Uytven
authors.forename: K
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Kujanpaa
authors.forename: B M C
authors.initials: BM
authors.lastname: McCurdy
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D066230:Patient-Specific Modeling; D019047:Phantoms, Imaging; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D050397:Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated / Q000379:methods*