Premium
Dosimetric effects of rotational output variation and x‐ray target degradation on helical tomotherapy plans
Author(s) -
Staton Robert J.,
Langen Katja M.,
Kupelian Patrick A.,
Meeks Sanford L.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.3134262
Subject(s) - tomotherapy , beam (structure) , optics , degradation (telecommunications) , physics , nuclear medicine , radiation therapy , engineering , electronic engineering , medicine , surgery
In this study, two potential sources of IMRT delivery error have been identified for helical tomotherapy delivery using the HiART system (TomoTherapy, Inc., Madison, WI): Rotational output variation and target degradation. The HiArt system is known to have output variation, typically about ±2%, due to the absence of a dose servo system. On the HiArt system, x‐ray target replacement is required approximately every 10–12 months due to target degradation. Near the end of target life, the target thins and causes a decrease in the beam energy and a softening of the beam profile at the lateral edges of the beam. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the dosimetric effects of rotational output variation and target degradation by modeling their effects and incorporating them into recalculated treatment plans for three clinical scenarios: Head and neck, partial breast, and prostate. Models were created to emulate both potential sources of error. For output variation, a model was created using a sine function to match the amplitude (±2%), frequency, and phase of the measured rotational output variation data. A second model with a hypothetical variation of ±7% was also created to represent the largest variation that could exist without violating the allowable dose window in the delivery system. A measured beam profile near the end of target life was used to create a modified beam profile model for the target degradation. These models were then incorporated into the treatment plan by modifying the leaf opening times in the delivery sinogram. A new beam model was also created to mimic the change in beam energy seen near the end of target life. The plans were then calculated using a research version of the PLANNED ADAPTIVE treatment planning software from TomoTherapy, Inc. Three plans were evaluated in this study: Head and neck, partial breast, and prostate. TheD 50of organs at risk, theD 95for planning target volumes (PTVs), and the local dose difference were used to evaluate the changes in the modified treatment plans. Dosimetric effects from rotational variation were found to be low (less than 1%) for a typical variation of ±2%. Even using a variation of ±7%, DVH values and dose distributions were altered by less than 2% for all scenarios. The dosimetric effects of target degradation were found to be slightly more significant. For a model using data taken just before target failure, dosimetric differences of 2%–4% were observed in the recalculated plans when compared to the original plans. The largest effects (up to 4.5%) were observed for PTVs that were located at deeper depths as seen in the prostate plan. Overall, the recalculated plans show that the dosimetric effects of rotational variation and target degradation are on the order of 1%–4% for helical tomotherapy on the HiART system and do not pose a risk for significant deviations from the original treatment plan.