IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119
- PMID: 19994544
- DOI: 10.1118/1.3238104
IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119
Abstract
AAPM Task Group 119 has produced quantitative confidence limits as baseline expectation values for IMRT commissioning. A set of test cases was developed to assess the overall accuracy of planning and delivery of IMRT treatments. Each test uses contours of targets and avoidance structures drawn within rectangular phantoms. These tests were planned, delivered, measured, and analyzed by nine facilities using a variety of IMRT planning and delivery systems. Each facility had passed the Radiological Physics Center credentialing tests for IMRT. The agreement between the planned and measured doses was determined using ion chamber dosimetry in high and low dose regions, film dosimetry on coronal planes in the phantom with all fields delivered, and planar dosimetry for each field measured perpendicular to the central axis. The planar dose distributions were assessed using gamma criteria of 3%/3 mm. The mean values and standard deviations were used to develop confidence limits for the test results using the concept confidence limit = /mean/ + 1.96sigma. Other facilities can use the test protocol and results as a basis for comparison to this group. Locally derived confidence limits that substantially exceed these baseline values may indicate the need for improved IMRT commissioning.
Comment in
-
Comment on "IMRT commissioning: some causes for concern".Med Phys. 2011 Jul;38(7):4464-5; author reply 4466. doi: 10.1118/1.3602464. Med Phys. 2011. PMID: 21859047 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Statistical analysis of IMRT dosimetry quality assurance measurements for local delivery guideline.Radiat Oncol. 2011 Mar 28;6:27. doi: 10.1186/1748-717X-6-27. Radiat Oncol. 2011. PMID: 21439096 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical experience with EPID dosimetry for prostate IMRT pre-treatment dose verification.Med Phys. 2006 Oct;33(10):3921-30. doi: 10.1118/1.2230810. Med Phys. 2006. PMID: 17089854
-
Commissioning of intensity modulated neutron radiotherapy (IMNRT).Med Phys. 2013 Feb;40(2):021718. doi: 10.1118/1.4766878. Med Phys. 2013. PMID: 23387741
-
Dosimetry tools and techniques for IMRT.Med Phys. 2011 Mar;38(3):1313-38. doi: 10.1118/1.3514120. Med Phys. 2011. PMID: 21520843 Review.
-
Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with different combinations of treatment-planning systems and linacs: issues and how to detect them.Strahlenther Onkol. 2006 Aug;182(8):481-8. doi: 10.1007/s00066-006-1544-6. Strahlenther Onkol. 2006. PMID: 16896595 Review.
Cited by
-
Flattening filter-free accelerators: a report from the AAPM Therapy Emerging Technology Assessment Work Group.J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015 May 8;16(3):5219. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v16i3.5219. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015. PMID: 26103482 Free PMC article.
-
Report on use of a methodology for commissioning and quality assurance of a VMAT system.PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e58877. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058877. Epub 2013 Mar 15. PLoS One. 2013. PMID: 23554948 Free PMC article.
-
Initial clinical experience with ArcCHECK for IMRT/VMAT QA.J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016 Sep 8;17(5):20-33. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v17i5.6118. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016. PMID: 27685107 Free PMC article.
-
Improvements in treatment planning calculations motivated by tightening IMRT QA tolerances.J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019 Jan;20(1):250-257. doi: 10.1002/acm2.12524. Epub 2018 Dec 31. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019. PMID: 30599085 Free PMC article.
-
Cobalt compensator-based IMRT device: A treatment planning study of head and neck cases.Phys Med. 2023 Feb;106:102526. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2023.102526. Epub 2023 Jan 6. Phys Med. 2023. PMID: 36621080 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources