Assessment of a 2D electronic portal imaging devices-based dosimetry algorithm for pretreatment and in-vivo midplane dose verification

Jomehzadeh, Ali; Shokrani, Parvaneh; Mohammadi, Mohammad; Amouheidari, Alireza

Assessment of a 2D electronic portal imaging devices-based dosimetry algorithm for pretreatment and in-vivo midplane dose verification

Authors

¹ Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan; Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan; Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran

² Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

³ Department of Radiation Oncology, Isfahan Milad Hospital, Isfahan, Iran

⁴ Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Abstract

Background: The use of electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) is a method for the dosimetric verification of radiotherapy plans, both pretreatment and in vivo. The aim of this study is to test a 2D EPID-based dosimetry algorithm for dose verification of some plans inside a homogenous and anthropomorphic phantom and in vivo as well.
Materials and Methods: Dose distributions were reconstructed from EPID images using a 2D EPID dosimetry algorithm inside a homogenous slab phantom for a simple 10 × 10 cm² box technique, 3D conformal (prostate, head-and-neck, and lung), and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) prostate plans inside an anthropomorphic (Alderson) phantom and in the patients (one fraction in vivo) for 3D conformal plans (prostate, head-and-neck and lung).
Results: The planned and EPID dose difference at the isocenter, on an average, was 1.7% for pretreatment verification and less than 3% for all in vivo plans, except for head-and-neck, which was 3.6%. The mean γ values for a seven-field prostate IMRT plan delivered to the Alderson phantom varied from 0.28 to 0.65. For 3D conformal plans applied for the Alderson phantom, all γ1% values were within the tolerance level for all plans and in both anteroposterior and posteroanterior (AP-PA) beams.
Conclusion: The 2D EPID-based dosimetry algorithm provides an accurate method to verify the dose of a simple 10 × 10 cm² field, in two dimensions, inside a homogenous slab phantom and an IMRT prostate plan, as well as in 3D conformal plans (prostate, head-and-neck, and lung plans) applied using an anthropomorphic phantom and in vivo. However, further investigation to improve the 2D EPID dosimetry algorithm for a head-and-neck case, is necessary.

Keywords

References

1.	Steinke MF, Bezak E. Technological approaches to in-room CBCT imaging. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 2008;31:167-79.
2.	vanHerk M. Different styles of image-guided radiotherapy. Semin Radiat Oncol 2007;17:258-67.
3.	Dawson LA, Jaffray DA. Advances in image-guided radiation therapy. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:938-46.
4.	Mans A, Wendling M, McDermott LN, Sonke JJ, Tielenburg R, Vijlbrief R, et al. Catching errors with in vivo EPID dosimetry. Med Phys 2010;37:2638-44.
5.	Wendling M, Louwe RJ, McDermott LN, Sonke JJ, van Herk M, Mijnheer BJ. Accurate two-dimensional IMRT verification using a back-projection EPID dosimetry method. Med Phys 2006;33:259-73.
6.	Kirby MC, Glendinning AG. Developments in electronic portal imaging systems. Br J Radiol 2006;79:S50-65.
7.	Kaatee RS, Olofsen MJ, Verstraate MB, Quint S, Heijmen BJ. Detection of organ movement in cervix cancer patients using a fluoroscopic electronic portal imaging device and radiopaque markers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;54:576-83.
8.	Mohammadi M, Bezak E. The physical characteristics of a SLIC-EPID for transmitted dosimetry. Int J Radiat Res 2005;2:175-83.
9.	Nijsten SM, Mijnheer BJ, Dekker AL, Lambin P, Minken AW. Routine individualised patient dosimetry using electronic portal imaging devices. Radiother Oncol 2007;83:65-75.
10.	Erridge SC, Seppenwoolde Y, Muller SH, van Herk M, De Jaeger K, Belderbos JS, et al. Portal imaging to assess set-up errors, tumor motion and tumor shrinkage during conformal radiotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer. Radiother Oncol 2003;66:75-85.
11.	Hurkmans CW, Remeijer P, Lebesque JV, Mijnheer BJ. Set-up verification using portal imaging; review of current clinical practice. Radiother Oncol 2001;58:105-20.
12.	Van den Heuvel F, Fugazzi J, Seppi E, Forman JD. Clinical application of a repositioning scheme, using gold markers and electronic portal imaging. Radiother Oncol 2006;79:94-100.
13.	Bogaerts R, Van Esch A, Reyman R, Huyskens D. A method to estimate the transit dose on the beam axis for verification of dose delivery with portal images. Radiother Oncol 2000;54:39-46.
14.	McDermott LN, Wendling M, van Asselen B, Stroom J, Sonke JJ, van Herk M, et al. Clinical experience with EPID dosimetry for prostate IMRT pre-treatment dose verification. Med Phys 2006;33:3921-30.
15.	McDermott LN, Wendling M, Sonke JJ, van Herk M, Mijnheer BJ. Replacing pretreatment verification with in vivo EPID dosimetry for prostate IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;67:1568-77.
16.	McDermott LN, Wendling M, Nijkamp J, Mans A, Sonke JJ, Mijnheer BJ, et al. 3D in vivo dose verification of entire hypo-fractionated IMRT treatments using an EPID and cone-beam CT. Radiother Oncol 2008;86:35-42.
17.	Van Elmpt W, McDermott L, Nijsten S, Wendling M, Lambina P, Mijnheer B. A literature review of electronic portal imaging for radiotherapy dosimetry. Radiother Oncol 2008;88:289-309.
18.	Pasma KL, Dirkx ML, Kroonwijk M, Visser AG, Heijmen BJ. Dosimetricverification of intensity modulated beams produced with dynamic multileaf collimation using an electronic portal imaging device. Med Phys 1999;26:2373-8.
19.	McNutt TR, Mackie TR, Reckwerdt P, Papanikolaou N, Paliwal BR. Calculation of portal dose using the convolution/superposition method. Med Phys 1996;23:527-35.
20.	Huyskens D, Van Dam J, Dutreix A. Midplane dose determination using in vivo dose measurements in combination with portal imaging. Phys Med Biol 1994;39:1089-101.
21.	Terrón JA, Sánchez-Doblado F, Arráns R, Sánchez-Nieto B, Errazquin L. Midline dose algorithm for in vivo dosimetry. Med Dosim 1994;19:263-7.
22.	Rizzotti A, CompriC, Garusi GF. Dose evaluation to patients irradiated by 60Co beams, by means of direct measurement on the incident and on the exit surfaces. Radiother Oncol 1985;3:279-83.
23.	Boellaard R, Essers M, van Herk M, Mijnheer BJ. New method to obtain the midplane dose using portal in vivo dosimetry. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998;41:465-74.
24.	Jordan TJ, Williams PC. The design and performance characteristics of a multileaf collimator. Phys Med Biol 1994;39:231-51.
25.	McDermott LN, Louwe RJ, Sonke JJ, van Herk MB, Mijnheer BJ. Dose-response and ghosting effects of an amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device. Med Phys 2004;31:285-95.
26.	Louwe RJ, McDermott LN, Sonke JJ, Tielenburg R, Wendling M, van Herk MB, et al. The long-term stability of amorphous silicon flat panel imaging devices for dosimetry purposes. Med Phys 2004;31:2989-95.
27.	Boellaard R, van Herk M, Uiterwaal H, Mijnheer B. First clinical tests using a liquid-filled electronic portal imaging device and a convolution model for the verification of the midplane dose. Radiother Oncol 1998;47:303-12.
28.	Louwe RJ, Damen EM, van Herk M, Minken AW, Törzsök O, Mijnheer BJ. Three-dimensional dose reconstruction of breast cancer treatment using portal imaging. Med Phys 2003;30:2376-89.
29.	Wendling M, McDermott LN, Mans A, Olaciregui-Ruiz Í, Pecharromán-Gallego R, Sonke JJ, et al. In aqua vivo EPID dosimetry. Med Phys 2012;39:367-77.
30.	Pecharromán-Gallego R, Mans A, Sonke JJ, Stroom JC, Olaciregui-Ruiz I, van Herk M, et al. Simplifying EPID dosimetry for IMRT treatment verification. Med Phys 2011;38:983-92.
31.	vanElmpt WJ, Nijsten SM, Dekker AL, Mijnheer BJ, Lambin P. Treatment verification in the presence of inhomogeneities using EPID-based three-dimensional dose reconstruction. Med Phys 2007;34:2816-26.

Advanced Biomedical Research