A sliding-window approach for improved VMAT dose calculation accuracy

Published:December 31, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2019.11.001

      ABSTRACT

      The continuous delivery of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans is usually approximated by discrete apertures at evenly-spaced gantry angles for dose calculation purposes. This approximation can potentially lead to large dose calculation errors if the gantry angle spacings are large and/or there are large changes in the MLC apertures from one control point (CP) to the next. In this work, we developed a sliding-window (SW) method to improve VMAT dose calculation accuracy. For any 2 adjacent VMAT CPs ni and ni + 1, the dose distribution was approximated by a 2-CP SW IMRT beam with the starting MLC positions at CP ni and ending MLC positions at CP ni + 1, with the gantry angle fixed in the middle of the 2 VMAT CPs. Therefore, a VMAT beam with N CPs was approximated by a SW plan with N-1 SW beams. To validate the method, VMAT plans were generated for 10 patients in Pinnacle using 4° gantry spacing. Each plan was converted to a SW plan and dose was recalculated. Another VMAT plan, with 1° gantry spacing, was created by interpolating the original VMAT beam. The original plans were delivered on an Elekta Versa HD and measured with ArcCHECK. For both the isodose distribution and DVH, there were significant differences between the original VMAT plan and either the SW or the interpolated plan. However, they were indistinguishable between the SW and the interpolated plans. When compared with measurement, the average passing rates of the original VMAT plans were 87.3 ± 2.8% and 93.1 ± 1.0% for the 5 HN and 5 spine SBRT cases, respectively. On the other hand, the passing rates for both the VMAT1 and SW plans were above 95% for all the 10 cases studied. The dose calculation times of the original VMAT plans and the SW plans were very similar. We conclude that the proposed SW approach improves VMAT dose calculation accuracy without increase in dose calculation time.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      Subscribe to Medical Dosimetry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Otto K.
        Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc.
        Med. Phys. 2008; 35: 310-317
        • Rao M.
        • Yang W.
        • Chen F.
        • et al.
        Comparison of Elekta VMAT with helical Tomotherapy and fixed field IMRT: plan quality, delivery efficiency and accuracy.
        Med. Phys. 2010; 37: 1350-1359
        • Holt A.
        • van Vliet-Vroegindeweij C.
        • Mans A.
        • et al.
        Volumetric-modulated arc therapy for stereotactic body radiotherapy of lung tumors: a comparison with intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques.
        Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2011; 81: 1560-1567
        • Popescu C.C.
        • Olivotto I.A.
        • Beckham W.A.
        • et al.
        Volumetric modulated arc therapy improves dosimetry and reduces treatment time compared to conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locoregional radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer and internal mammary nodes.
        Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2010; 76: 287-295
        • Feygelman V.
        • Zhang G.
        • Stevens C.
        Initial dosimetric evaluation of SmartArc – a novel VMAT treatment planning module implemented in a multi-vendor delivery chain.
        J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 2010; 11: 99-116
        • Yang J.
        • Tang G.
        • Zhang P.
        Dose calculation for hypofractionated volumetric-modulated arc therapy: approximating continuous arc delivery and tongue-and-groove modeling.
        J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 2016; 17: 3-13
        • Park J.-Y.
        • Li F.
        • Li J.
        • et al.
        Angular under-sampling effect on VMAT dose calculation: an analysis and a solution strategy.
        Med. Phys. 2017; 44: 2096-2114
        • Balog J.
        • Olivera G.
        • Kapatoes J.
        Clinical helical tomotherapy commissioning dosimetry.
        Med. Phys. 2003; 30: 3097-3106
        • Fenwick J.
        • Tome W.
        • Jaradat H.
        • et al.
        Quality assurance of a helical Tomotherapy machine.
        Phys. Med. Biol. 2004; 49: 2933-2953
        • Gibbons J.P.
        • Smith K.
        • Cheek D.
        • et al.
        Independent calculation of dose from a helical Tomotherapy unit.
        J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 2009; 10: 103-119
        • Christiansen E.
        • Heath E.
        • Xu T.
        Continuous aperture dose calculation and optimization for volumetric modulated arc therapy..
        Phys. Med. Biol. 2018; 63: NT01-NT11
        • Webb S.
        • McQuaid D.
        Some considerations concerning volume-modulated arc therapy: a stepping stone towards a general theory.
        Phys. Med. Biol. 2009; 54: 4345-4360