Have a personal or library account? Click to login

Comparison of three film analysis softwares using EBT2 and EBT3 films in radiotherapy

Open Access
|Aug 2020

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Inhomogeneity map of the full scanning surface (A) and the homogeneous area in the centre of the scanner glass (B).
Inhomogeneity map of the full scanning surface (A) and the homogeneous area in the centre of the scanner glass (B).

Figure 2

Change of optical density in % after 18 (A) and 60 (B) months of primary irradiation, in function of the primary irradiated dose (cGy).
Change of optical density in % after 18 (A) and 60 (B) months of primary irradiation, in function of the primary irradiated dose (cGy).

Figure 3

Evaluation of the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) plan with PTW Mephysto (A), FilmQAPro (B) and radiohromic.com(C).
Evaluation of the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) plan with PTW Mephysto (A), FilmQAPro (B) and radiohromic.com(C).

Pass rates of the gamma analysis using three software products; the negligible threshold dose was 10% and the normalization of gamma analysis was performed on global dose maximum_ (RA: RapidArc, SIB: simultaneous integrated boost)

3DCRTIMRTRARA – SIB
2%,2mm3%,3mm2%,2mm3%,3mm2%,2mm3%,3mm2%,2mm3%,3mm
PTW Mephysto87.1 %95.5 %89.2 %98.2 %83.9 %91.5 %86.3 %98.3 %
EBT2FilmQA Pro98.9 %100.0 %75.7 %93.4 %99.9 %100.0 %87.3 %92.8 %
radiochromic.com87.2 %98.1 %80.2 %93.1 %90.4 %98.5 %84.2 %95.3 %
PTW Mephysto86.6 %94.4 %78.3 %93.8 %92.0 %97.8 %86.8 %93.4 %
EBT3FilmQA Pro99.0 %99.9 %82.6 %95.0 %98.3 %99.4 %87.9 %91.9 %
radiochromic.com91.0 %98.8 %80.2 %94.4 %95.4 %98.7 %87.5 %92.1 %

Pass rates of gamma analysis of small stereotactic fields; the negligible threshold dose was 10% for EBT 3 films (CA: Conformal Arc, RA: RapidArc, NC: non-coplanar)

CARANC - CANC – RA
2%,2mm3%,3mm2%,2mm3% ,3mm2%,2mm3%,3mm2%,2mm3%,3mm
PTW Mephysto97.0 %99.2 %87.9 %90.2 %95.1 %98.6 %89.2 %93.5 %
globalFilmQA Pro100.0 %100.0 %98.5 %100.0 %99.8 %100.0 %99.2 %100.0 %
radiochromic.com98.2 %99.9 %97.2 %99.8 %95.0 %99.7 %96.4 %99.6 %
PTW Mephysto95.2 %97.2 %87.4 %89.9 %93.1 %97.9 %76.8 %83.1 %
localFilmQA Pro99.9 %99.9 %95.7 %99.9 %99.5 %100.0 %98.7 %99.5 %
radiochromic.com96.9 %98.5 %93.3 %97.5 %91.5 %97.3 %91.2 %97.8 %

Statistical evaluation and visualisation of the gamma passing rates for the three different softwares, according to all analysed cases

Gamma passing rate statistics (%)
Mephysto PTWFilmQA ProRadiochromic.com
Minimum76.875.780.2
Maximum99.2100.099.9
Median92.699.595.9
Mean91.496.694.2
Std. Deviation5.95.85.5
Lower 95% CI89.394.592.3
Upper 95% CI93.598.896.2
comparisons Dunn’s multiple testAdjusted P ValueSignificant?
PTW FilmQA Mephysto Pro vs.<0,0001Yes
PTW Mephysto vs. Radiochromic.com0.1824No
FilmQA Pro vs. Radiochromic.com0.0005Yes
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2020-0049 | Journal eISSN: 1581-3207 | Journal ISSN: 1318-2099
Language: English
Page range: 505 - 512
Submitted on: Feb 23, 2020
Accepted on: Jun 27, 2020
Published on: Aug 5, 2020
Published by: Association of Radiology and Oncology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2020 Tamás Pócza, Zsuzsánna Zongor, Barbara Melles-Bencsik, Dóra Zita Tatai-Szabó, Tibor Major, Csilla Pesznyák, published by Association of Radiology and Oncology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.