Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Sep 8;15(5):4990.
doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v15i5.4990.

Evaluation of a novel secondary check tool for intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment planning

Jonas D Fontenot  1
Affiliations

Evaluation of a novel secondary check tool for intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment planning

Jonas D Fontenot. J Appl Clin Med Phys. .

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy and efficacy of an automated treatment plan verification, or "secondary check", tool (Mobius3D), which uses a reference dataset to perform an independent three-dimensional dose verification of the treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculation and assesses plan quality by comparing dose-volume histograms to reference benchmarks. The accuracy of the Mobius3D (M3D) system was evaluated by comparing dose calculations from IMRT and VMAT plans with measurements in phantom geometries and with TPS calculated dose distributions in prostate, lung, and head and neck patients (ten each). For the patient cases, instances of DVH limits exceeding reference values were also recorded. M3D showed agreement with measured point and planar doses that was comparable to the TPS in phantom geometries. No statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) were noted. M3D dose distributions from VMAT plans in patient cases were in good agreement with the TPS, with an average of 99.5% of dose points showing γ5%,3mm < 1. The M3D system also identified several plans that had exceeded dose-volume limits specified by RTOG protocols for those sites. The M3D system showed dosimetric accuracy comparable with the TPS, and identified several plans that exceeded dosimetric benchmarks. The M3D system possesses the potential to enhance the current treatment plan verification paradigm and improve safety in the clinical treatment planning and review process.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Isodose distributions and dose profiles (a) from the treatment planning system (solid lines) and Mobius3D (dashed lines) for head and neck Case #6. Regions of blue and purple colorwash in the sinus and airway denote regions where M3D underpredicted the TPS dose by greater than the gamma criteria. Dose‐volume histograms (b) for relevant regions of interest calculated by the TPS (solid) and M3D (dashed). (Adapted from the M3D user interface.)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Stern RL, Heaton R, Fraser MW et al. Verification of monitor unit calculations for non‐IMRT clinical radiotherapy: report of AAPM Task Group 114. Med Phys. 2011;38(1):504–30. - PubMed
    1. Cozzi L, Fogliata A, Bolsi A, Nicolini G, Bernier J. Three‐dimensional conformal vs. intensity‐modulated radiotherapy in head‐and‐neck cancer patients: comparative analysis of dosimetric and technical parameters. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58(2):617–24. - PubMed
    1. Zelefsky MJ, Fuks Z, Happersett L et al. Clinical experience with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2000;55(3):241–49. - PubMed
    1. Otto K. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys. 2008;35(1):310–17. - PubMed
    1. Guadagnolo BA, Liu CC, Cormier JN et al. Evaluation of trends in the use of intensity‐modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancer from 2000 through 2005: socioeconomic disparity and geographic variation in a large population‐based cohort. Cancer. 2010;116(14):3505–12. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources