Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Evaluation of the effect of random setup errors on dose delivery in Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Cover

Evaluation of the effect of random setup errors on dose delivery in Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy

Open Access
|Apr 2020

References

  1. [1] Low DA, Moran JM, Dempsey JF, et al. Dosimetry tools and techniques for IMRT. Med Phys. 2011;38(3):1313-1338.10.1118/1.351412021520843
  2. [2] Low DA, Harms WB, Mutic S, Purdy JA. A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. Med Phys. 1998;25(5):656-661.10.1118/1.5982489608475
  3. [3] González-Castaño D, Peña J, Sánchez-Doblado F, et al. The change of response of ionization chambers in the penumbra and transmission regions: Impact for IMRT verification. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2008;46(4):373-380.10.1007/s11517-007-0249-z17828563
  4. [4] Kim KH, Kim DS, Kim TH, et al. The influence of the IMRT QA set-up error on the 2D and 3D gamma evaluation method as obtained by using Monte Carlo simulations. J Korean Phys Soc. 2015;67:1859-1867.10.3938/jkps.67.1859
  5. [5] Thilmann C, Nill S, Tücking T, et al. Correction of patient positioning errors based on in-line cone beam CTs: clinical implementation and first experiences. Radiat Oncol. 2006;1:16.10.1186/1748-717X-1-16155751816723023
  6. [6] Su J, Chen W, Yang H, et al. Different setup errors assessed by weekly cone-beam computed tomography on different registration in nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Onco Targets Ther. 2015;8:2545-2553.
  7. [7] Xu F, Wang J, Bai S, et al. Interfractional and intrafractional setup errors in radiotherapy for tumors analyzed by cone-beam computed tomography. Chinese J Cancer. 2008;27(1):1111-1116.
  8. [8] Delishaj D, Ursino S, Pasqualetti F, et al. Set-up errors in head and neck cancer treated with IMRT technique assessed by cone-beam computed tomography: a feasible protocol. Radiat Oncol J. 2018;36(1):54-62.10.3857/roj.2017.00493590336229621873
  9. [9] Deveau MA, Gutiérrez AN, Mackie TR, et al. Dosimetric impact of daily setup variations during treatment of canine nasal tumors using Intensity modulated radiation therapy. Vet Radiol Ultrasound. 2010:51(1):90-96.10.1111/j.1740-8261.2009.01629.x282671520166402
  10. [10] Zhang X, Shan G-p, Liu JP, Wang BB.. Margin evaluation of translational and rotational set-up errors in intensity modulated radiotherapy for cervical cancer. SpringerPlus. 2016;5:153.10.1186/s40064-016-1796-2476614327026850
  11. [11] Hong TS, Tome WA, Chappell RJ, et al. The impact of daily setup variations on head-and-neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;61(3):779-788.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.07.69615708257
  12. [12] Dhanabalan R, Vivekanandan N, Prakash J, et al. SU-E-T-169: Characterization and Evaluation of Octavius 4D System for Patient Specific Quality Assurance Using 3D Gamma Index Analysis in VMAT. Medical Physics. 2013;40(6Part13):243.10.1118/1.4814604
  13. [13] McKenzie EM, Balter PA, Stingo FC, et al. Reproducibility in patient-specific IMRT QA. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15(3):241-251.10.1120/jacmp.v15i3.4741404886724892350
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/pjmpe-2020-0006 | Journal eISSN: 1898-0309 | Journal ISSN: 1425-4689
Language: English
Page range: 55 - 60
Submitted on: Sep 1, 2020
Accepted on: Feb 17, 2020
Published on: Apr 3, 2020
Published by: Polish Society of Medical Physics
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2020 Avinav Bharati, Susama Rani Mandal, Anoop Kumar Srivastava, Madhup Rastogi, Rohini Khurana, Rahat Hadi, Shantanu Sapru, Ajeet Kumar Gandhi, S.P. Mishra, published by Polish Society of Medical Physics
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.