SU‐E‐T‐381: The Step‐And‐Shoot IMRT Overshooting Phenomena: A Novel Method to Mitigate Patient Overdosage

A. Pompos, H. Zhen, L. Ouyang, Q. Bao, S. Stojadinovic

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To demonstrate a method to mitigate the step‐and‐shoot (SS) IMRT overdose phenomenon for set of patients which initially failed IMRT QA process. Methods: Five SS IMRT patients treated on Varian 2100C‐EX linacs with larger than +4.5% phantom IC point dose difference relative to planned dose were investigated. For every patient plan, five fractions (Fx) were delivered. Dynalog files were recorded and centiMU pulses from dose integrator board for every control point (CP) were counted using a BK1856D (BK Precision Corp.) pulse counter (PC). The recorded MUs were imported to Pinnacle9.2 (Philips Healthcare), the 3D dose was recalculated and compared to the planned dose distribution. The initial plans were then modified by adding one starting segment to every beam. This segment consisted of an MLC aperture of 0.5x1cm2 hidden under the jaws with 1MU. For each patient, five Fx of the modified plan were delivered, recorded and the delivered 3D dose recalculated. Individual voxels' dose in high dose region, isocenter point dose, segment MUs, PTV D95 and OAR D2cc were compared between the original plan and the results of both deliveries. Results: The PC recorded total number showed the delivered beam MUs exceeded the plan by only ∼0.2%. For all initial plans, the first CP on average overshot by 0.6MU. It was determined that this on average translated to an increased dose to isocenter, PTV D95, bladder D2cc and high‐dose‐region voxels' dose by 2.66% (2.21%–3.12%), 2.06% (1.59%–2.48%), 2.57% (1.97%–3.11%), and 2.19% (1.75%–2.75%) respectively. All modified plans had inconsequential 0.05MU overshoot in first unmodified CP and 0.04%(−0.45% −0.55%), −0.07%(−0.44–‐0.48%), 0.08%(−0.28%–0.33%) and −0.07%(−0.31%–0.20%) differences for dosimetric parameters listed above. Conclusion: Our proposed method of attaching a special aperture 1MU CP to each beam was experimentally verified by using centiMU pulse counts to successfully eliminate the overdosage.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Number of pages1
JournalMedical Physics
Volume40
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Jaw
Urinary Bladder
Delivery of Health Care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

SU‐E‐T‐381 : The Step‐And‐Shoot IMRT Overshooting Phenomena: A Novel Method to Mitigate Patient Overdosage. / Pompos, A.; Zhen, H.; Ouyang, L.; Bao, Q.; Stojadinovic, S.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 40, No. 6, 2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e2fc43a1442741bb88f357361c2b982d,
title = "SU‐E‐T‐381: The Step‐And‐Shoot IMRT Overshooting Phenomena: A Novel Method to Mitigate Patient Overdosage",
abstract = "Purpose: To demonstrate a method to mitigate the step‐and‐shoot (SS) IMRT overdose phenomenon for set of patients which initially failed IMRT QA process. Methods: Five SS IMRT patients treated on Varian 2100C‐EX linacs with larger than +4.5{\%} phantom IC point dose difference relative to planned dose were investigated. For every patient plan, five fractions (Fx) were delivered. Dynalog files were recorded and centiMU pulses from dose integrator board for every control point (CP) were counted using a BK1856D (BK Precision Corp.) pulse counter (PC). The recorded MUs were imported to Pinnacle9.2 (Philips Healthcare), the 3D dose was recalculated and compared to the planned dose distribution. The initial plans were then modified by adding one starting segment to every beam. This segment consisted of an MLC aperture of 0.5x1cm2 hidden under the jaws with 1MU. For each patient, five Fx of the modified plan were delivered, recorded and the delivered 3D dose recalculated. Individual voxels' dose in high dose region, isocenter point dose, segment MUs, PTV D95 and OAR D2cc were compared between the original plan and the results of both deliveries. Results: The PC recorded total number showed the delivered beam MUs exceeded the plan by only ∼0.2{\%}. For all initial plans, the first CP on average overshot by 0.6MU. It was determined that this on average translated to an increased dose to isocenter, PTV D95, bladder D2cc and high‐dose‐region voxels' dose by 2.66{\%} (2.21{\%}–3.12{\%}), 2.06{\%} (1.59{\%}–2.48{\%}), 2.57{\%} (1.97{\%}–3.11{\%}), and 2.19{\%} (1.75{\%}–2.75{\%}) respectively. All modified plans had inconsequential 0.05MU overshoot in first unmodified CP and 0.04{\%}(−0.45{\%} −0.55{\%}), −0.07{\%}(−0.44–‐0.48{\%}), 0.08{\%}(−0.28{\%}–0.33{\%}) and −0.07{\%}(−0.31{\%}–0.20{\%}) differences for dosimetric parameters listed above. Conclusion: Our proposed method of attaching a special aperture 1MU CP to each beam was experimentally verified by using centiMU pulse counts to successfully eliminate the overdosage.",
author = "A. Pompos and H. Zhen and L. Ouyang and Q. Bao and S. Stojadinovic",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1118/1.4814815",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - SU‐E‐T‐381

T2 - The Step‐And‐Shoot IMRT Overshooting Phenomena: A Novel Method to Mitigate Patient Overdosage

AU - Pompos, A.

AU - Zhen, H.

AU - Ouyang, L.

AU - Bao, Q.

AU - Stojadinovic, S.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Purpose: To demonstrate a method to mitigate the step‐and‐shoot (SS) IMRT overdose phenomenon for set of patients which initially failed IMRT QA process. Methods: Five SS IMRT patients treated on Varian 2100C‐EX linacs with larger than +4.5% phantom IC point dose difference relative to planned dose were investigated. For every patient plan, five fractions (Fx) were delivered. Dynalog files were recorded and centiMU pulses from dose integrator board for every control point (CP) were counted using a BK1856D (BK Precision Corp.) pulse counter (PC). The recorded MUs were imported to Pinnacle9.2 (Philips Healthcare), the 3D dose was recalculated and compared to the planned dose distribution. The initial plans were then modified by adding one starting segment to every beam. This segment consisted of an MLC aperture of 0.5x1cm2 hidden under the jaws with 1MU. For each patient, five Fx of the modified plan were delivered, recorded and the delivered 3D dose recalculated. Individual voxels' dose in high dose region, isocenter point dose, segment MUs, PTV D95 and OAR D2cc were compared between the original plan and the results of both deliveries. Results: The PC recorded total number showed the delivered beam MUs exceeded the plan by only ∼0.2%. For all initial plans, the first CP on average overshot by 0.6MU. It was determined that this on average translated to an increased dose to isocenter, PTV D95, bladder D2cc and high‐dose‐region voxels' dose by 2.66% (2.21%–3.12%), 2.06% (1.59%–2.48%), 2.57% (1.97%–3.11%), and 2.19% (1.75%–2.75%) respectively. All modified plans had inconsequential 0.05MU overshoot in first unmodified CP and 0.04%(−0.45% −0.55%), −0.07%(−0.44–‐0.48%), 0.08%(−0.28%–0.33%) and −0.07%(−0.31%–0.20%) differences for dosimetric parameters listed above. Conclusion: Our proposed method of attaching a special aperture 1MU CP to each beam was experimentally verified by using centiMU pulse counts to successfully eliminate the overdosage.

AB - Purpose: To demonstrate a method to mitigate the step‐and‐shoot (SS) IMRT overdose phenomenon for set of patients which initially failed IMRT QA process. Methods: Five SS IMRT patients treated on Varian 2100C‐EX linacs with larger than +4.5% phantom IC point dose difference relative to planned dose were investigated. For every patient plan, five fractions (Fx) were delivered. Dynalog files were recorded and centiMU pulses from dose integrator board for every control point (CP) were counted using a BK1856D (BK Precision Corp.) pulse counter (PC). The recorded MUs were imported to Pinnacle9.2 (Philips Healthcare), the 3D dose was recalculated and compared to the planned dose distribution. The initial plans were then modified by adding one starting segment to every beam. This segment consisted of an MLC aperture of 0.5x1cm2 hidden under the jaws with 1MU. For each patient, five Fx of the modified plan were delivered, recorded and the delivered 3D dose recalculated. Individual voxels' dose in high dose region, isocenter point dose, segment MUs, PTV D95 and OAR D2cc were compared between the original plan and the results of both deliveries. Results: The PC recorded total number showed the delivered beam MUs exceeded the plan by only ∼0.2%. For all initial plans, the first CP on average overshot by 0.6MU. It was determined that this on average translated to an increased dose to isocenter, PTV D95, bladder D2cc and high‐dose‐region voxels' dose by 2.66% (2.21%–3.12%), 2.06% (1.59%–2.48%), 2.57% (1.97%–3.11%), and 2.19% (1.75%–2.75%) respectively. All modified plans had inconsequential 0.05MU overshoot in first unmodified CP and 0.04%(−0.45% −0.55%), −0.07%(−0.44–‐0.48%), 0.08%(−0.28%–0.33%) and −0.07%(−0.31%–0.20%) differences for dosimetric parameters listed above. Conclusion: Our proposed method of attaching a special aperture 1MU CP to each beam was experimentally verified by using centiMU pulse counts to successfully eliminate the overdosage.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024808296&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024808296&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.4814815

DO - 10.1118/1.4814815

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85024808296

VL - 40

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 6

ER -