Premium
SU‐E‐T‐472: Improvement of IMRT QA Passing Rate by Correcting Angular Dependence of MatriXX
Author(s) -
Chen Q,
Watkins W,
Kim T,
Neal B
Publication year - 2015
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 - 10.1118/1.4924834
Subject(s) - tomotherapy , physics , optics , scaling , monte carlo method , detector , beam (structure) , signal (programming language) , range (aeronautics) , computational physics , nuclear medicine , mathematics , computer science , statistics , materials science , medicine , geometry , radiation therapy , composite material , programming language
Purpose: Multi‐channel planar detector arrays utilized for IMRT‐QA, such as the MatriXX, exhibit an incident‐beam angular dependent response which can Result in false‐positive gamma‐based QA results, especially for helical tomotherapy plans which encompass the full range of beam angles. Although MatriXX can use with gantry angle sensor to provide automatically angular correction, this sensor does not work with tomotherapy. The purpose of the study is to reduce IMRT‐QA false‐positives by correcting for the MatriXX angular dependence. Methods: MatriXX angular dependence was characterized by comparing multiple fixed‐angle irradiation measurements with corresponding TPS computed doses. For 81 Tomo‐helical IMRT‐QA measurements, two different correction schemes were tested: (1) A Monte‐Carlo dose engine was used to compute MatriXX signal based on the angular‐response curve. The computed signal was then compared with measurement. (2) Uncorrected computed signal was compared with measurements uniformly scaled to account for the average angular dependence. Three scaling factor (+2%, +2.5%, +3%) were tested. Results: The MatriXX response is 8% less than predicted for a PA beam even when the couch is fully accounted for. Without angular correction, only 67% of the cases pass the >90% points γ<1 (3%, 3mm). After full angular correction, 96% of the cases pass the criteria. Of three scaling factors, +2% gave the highest passing rate (89%), which is still less than the full angular correction method. With a stricter γ(2%,3mm) criteria, the full angular correction method was still able to achieve the 90% passing rate while the scaling method only gives 53% passing rate. Conclusion: Correction for the MatriXX angular dependence reduced the false‐positives rate of our IMRT‐QA process. It is necessary to correct for the angular dependence to achieve the IMRT passing criteria specified in TG129.