Interpretation of Gamma Index for Quality Assurance of Simultaneously Integrated Boost (SIB) IMRT Plans for Head and Neck Carcinoma

Maria Atiq; Atia Atiq; Khalid Iqbal; Quratul ain Shamsi; Farah Andleeb; Saeed Ahmad Buzdar

doi:10.1515/pjmpe-2017-0016

.blurhash-client-img { display: none !important; }

Interpretation of Gamma Index for Quality Assurance of Simultaneously Integrated Boost (SIB) IMRT Plans for Head and Neck Carcinoma

Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering

Volume 23 (2017): Issue 4 (December 2017)

By: Maria Atiq, Atia Atiq, Khalid Iqbal, Quratul ain Shamsi, Farah Andleeb and Saeed Ahmad Buzdar

Open Access

|Dec 2017

Abstract

Objective: The Gamma Index is prerequisite to estimate point-by-point difference between measured and calculated dose distribution in terms of both Distance to Agreement (DTA) and Dose Difference (DD). This study aims to inquire what percentage of pixels passing a certain criteria assure a good quality plan and suggest gamma index as efficient mechanism for dose verification of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy plans.

Method: In this study, dose was calculated for 14 head and neck patients and IMRT Quality Assurance was performed with portal dosimetry using the Eclipse treatment planning system. Eclipse software has a Gamma analysis function to compare measured and calculated dose distribution. Plans of this study were deemed acceptable when passing rate was 95% using tolerance for Distance to agreement (DTA) as 3mm and Dose Difference (DD) as 5%.

Result and Conclusion: Thirteen cases pass tolerance criteria of 95% set by our institution. Confidence Limit for DD is 9.3% and for gamma criteria our local CL came out to be 2.0% (i.e., 98.0% passing). Lack of correlation was found between DD and γ passing rate with R² of 0.0509. Our findings underline the importance of gamma analysis method to predict the quality of dose calculation. Passing rate of 95% is achieved in 93% of cases which is adequate level of accuracy for analyzed plans thus assuring the robustness of SIB IMRT treatment technique. This study can be extended to investigate gamma criteria of 5%/3mm for different tumor localities and to explore confidence limit on target volumes of small extent and simple geometry.

References

[1] Kouloulias V, Antypas C, Liakouli Z, et al. The first implementation of IMRT technique for head & neck and prostate cancer patients in public sector in Greece: feasibility, treatment planning and dose delivery verification using the delta (4PT) Pre-Treatment volumetric quality assurance system. J BUON. 2014;20(1):196-205.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[2] Roxby KJ, Crosbie JC. Pre-treatment verification of intensity modulated radiation therapy plans using a commercial electronic portal dosimetry system. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2010;33(1):51-57.10.1007/s13246-010-0001-0
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[3] Franceschini D, Paiar F, Meattini I, et al. Simultaneous integrated boost–intensity-modulated radiotherapy in head and neck cancer. Laryngoscope. 2013;123(12):E97-103.10.1002/lary.24257
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[4] Mohan R, Wu Q, Manning M, Schmidt-Ullrich R. Radiobiological considerations in the design of fractionation strategies for intensity-modulated radiation therapy of head and neck cancers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;46(3):619-630.10.1016/S0360-3016(99)00438-1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[5] Krishnan J, Rao S, Hegde S, Shetty J. A Dosimetric Comparison of Double Arc Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Large Field Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer. IJMPCERO. 2015;4(4):353-363.10.4236/ijmpcero.2015.44042
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[6] Suzuki M, Nakamatsu K, Kanamori S, et al. Feasibility study of the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) method for malignant gliomas using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2003;33(6):271-277.10.1093/jjco/hyg053
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[7] Elawady RA, Attalla EM, Elshemey WM, et al. Dose verification of intensity modulated radiotherapy in head and neck tumors. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2014;2(3):02037.10.14319/ijcto.0203.7
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[8] Agazaryan N, Solberg TD, DeMarco JJ. Patient specific quality assurance for the delivery of intensity modulated radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2003;4(1):40-50.10.1120/jacmp.v4i1.2540
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[9] Depuydt T, Van Esch A, Huyskens DP. A quantitative evaluation of IMRT dose distributions: refinement and clinical assessment of the gamma evaluation. Radiother Oncol. 2002;62(3):309-319.10.1016/S0167-8140(01)00497-2
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[10] Low DA, Dempsey JF. Evaluation of the gamma dose distribution comparison method. Med Phys. 2003;30(9):2455-2464.10.1118/1.159871114528967
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[11] Mijheer B, Georg D. Guidelines for the verification of IMRT. Brussels, Belgium: ESTRO; 2008.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[12] Ezzell GA, Burmeister JW, Dogan N, et al. IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119. Med Phys. 2009;36(11):5359-5373.10.1118/1.323810419994544
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[13] Tonigan JR. Evaluation of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) delivery error due to IMRT treatment plan complexity and improperly matched dosimetry data. MSc Thesis. The University of Texas. Houston, Texas; 2011.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[14] Varatharaj C, Ravikumar M, Sathiyan S, et al. Dosimetric verification of brain and head and neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment using EDR2 films and 2D ion chamber array matrix. J Cancer Res Ther. 2010;6(2):179-184.10.4103/0973-1482.6523320622365
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[15] Stasi M, Bresciani S, Miranti A, et al. Pretreatment patient-specific IMRT quality assurance: A correlation study between gamma index and patient clinical dose volume histogram. Med Phys. 2012;39(12):7626-7634.10.1118/1.476776323231310
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[16] Caivano R, Califano G, Fiorentino A, et al. Clinically relevant quality assurance for intensity modulated radiotherapy plans: gamma maps and DVH-based evaluation. Cancer Invest. 2014;32(3):85-91.10.3109/07357907.2013.87747824499109
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[17] Li H, Dong L, Zhang L, et al. Toward a better understanding of the gamma index: Investigation of parameters with a surface-based distance method. Med Phys. 2011;38(12):6730-6741.10.1118/1.3659707329856522149855
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[18] Molineu A, Followill DS, Balter PA, et al. Design and implementation of an anthropomorphic quality assurance phantom for intensity-modulated radiation therapy for the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;63(2):577-583.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.05.02116168849
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[19] Grégoire V, Mackie TR. State of the art on dose prescription, reporting and recording in Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (ICRU report No. 83). Cancer Radiother. 2011;15(6-7):555-559.10.1016/j.canrad.2011.04.00321802333
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[20] Chaikh A, Desgranges C, Balosso J. Statistical methods to evaluate the correlation between measured and calculated dose using quality assurance method in IMRT. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2015;3(4):10.14319/ijcto.34.11
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[21] Stock M, Kroupa B, Georg D. Interpretation and evaluation of the γ index and the γ index angle for the verification of IMRT hybrid plans. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50(3):399-411.10.1088/0031-9155/50/3/00115773719
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[22] Chung JB, Kim JS, Ha SW, Ye SJ. Statistical analysis of IMRT dosimetry quality assurance measurements for local delivery guideline. Radiat Oncol. 2011;6(1):27.10.1186/1748-717X-6-27307387521439096
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[23] Howell RM, Smith IP, Jarrio CS. Establishing action levels for EPID-based QA for IMRT. J Appl Clin Med Phys.2008;9(3):16-25.10.1120/jacmp.v9i3.2721572229418716584
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[24] van Zijtveld M, Dirkx ML, de Boer HC, Heijmen BJ. Dosimetric pre-treatment verification of IMRT using an EPID; clinical experience. Radiother Oncol. 2006;81(2):168-175.10.1016/j.radonc.2006.09.00817055604
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[25] Childress NL, White RA, Bloch C, et al. Retrospective analysis of 2D patient-specific IMRT verifications. Med Phys. 2005;32(4):838-850.10.1118/1.187927215895566
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[26] Fraass B, Doppke K, Hunt M, et al. American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 53: quality assurance for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning. Med Phys. 1998;25(10):1773-1829.10.1118/1.5983739800687
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[27] Jang SY, Liu HH, Mohan R. Underestimation of low-dose radiation in treatment planning of intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71(5):1537-1546.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.04.01418513883
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[28] Deng J, Pawlicki T, Chen Y, et al. The MLC tongue-and-groove effect on IMRT dose distributions. Phys Med Biol. 2001;46(4):1039-106010.1088/0031-9155/46/4/31011324950
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[29] Li JS, Lin T, Chen L, et al. Uncertainties in IMRT dosimetry. Med Phys. 2010;37(6):2491-2500.10.1118/1.341399720632560
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[30] Das IJ, Ding GX, Ahnesjö A. Small fields: nonequilibrium radiation dosimetry. Med Phys. 2008;35(1):206-215.10.1118/1.281535618293576
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[31] Ceberg C. A note on the interpretation of the gamma evaluation index. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2013;(444)1:012082.10.1088/1742-6596/444/1/012082
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/pjmpe-2017-0016 | Journal eISSN: 1898-0309 | Journal ISSN: 1425-4689

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 93 - 97

Submitted on: Jun 14, 2017

Accepted on: Oct 3, 2017

Published on: Dec 21, 2017

Published by: Polish Society of Medical Physics

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

Keywords:

simultaneous integrated boost SIB,

distance to agreement DTA,

dose difference DD,

portal dosimetry,

quality assurance QA,

head and neck

Related subjects:

Medicine,

Biomedical engineering,

Physics,

Technical and applied physics,

Medical physics

© 2017 Maria Atiq, Atia Atiq, Khalid Iqbal, Quratul ain Shamsi, Farah Andleeb, Saeed Ahmad Buzdar, published by Polish Society of Medical Physics
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Volume 23 (2017): Issue 4 (December 2017)