Abstract:To investigate the sensitivity of a 2D-transit EPID-based in-vivo dosimetry system (IVD) in highlighting the accuracy of target dose coverage for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) post mastectomy irradiations. CT datasets of an Alderson phantom were imported into a treatment planning system; 6MV photon beam of an Elekta Axesse equipped with aSi detectors EPID was selected for the treatment. The CTV and organs at risks (OARs) were delineated while the PTV was obtained with a 3mm isotropic expansion of the CTV. The VMAT treatment plan (TP) was prepared according to the clinical protocol of our center.18 setup variations were introduced shifting the isocenter in the up, down, left, right, in, out directions, of 3, 5 and10 mm; 18 corresponding VMAT TPs were optimized. Dose volume histogram (DVH) endpoints for the heart (Dmean), for the CTV (D95%, D98%) and for the left lung (V20Gy) were used to identify the configurations for which the considered endpoints were most different from the reference ones (absolute difference D95%, D98%, Dmean > 2Gy, and VxGy> 5%). EPID images acquired for each beam of each plan were analysed with Softdiso that supplies two types of tests: the ratio R between the reconstructed and planned isocenter doses and a transit dosimetry based on the γ-analysis of the electronic portal images, using 5%-5mm signal and distance to agreement gamma criteria. The tests were considered in tolerance, if R was within 5%, γ% >90% and if γ mean ≤ 0.4. Of the 18 perturbed plans, the ones obtained with a 3mm isocenter shifts did not present any DVH difference compared to the reference plan. The IVD analysis of the EPID images acquired for these perturbed plans confirmed these results registering indices within the tolerance level: y% (range 95%-100%), ymean (range 0.33-0.38), R (range 0.99-1). Significant DVH differences (CTV D95 and D98 absolute difference up to 11.95 and 15.79 Gy respectively and lung V20 up to +20%) were obtained for some of the 10 mm isocenter shifts. In these cases, y% (range 82%-90%) and ymean (range 0.50-0.65) resulted out of the tolerance level. The ratio R resulted less sensitive to 3D dose coverage variations and remained unvaried. In the situations presenting slight differences of the DVH endpoints, the indices registered remained near the acceptable threshold. In the Table below some representative results of the different scenarios are shown. The gamma analysis of the acquired EPID images provided by Softdiso is able to highlight discrepancies on target dose coverage for VMAT postmastectomy irradiation.Abstract 3723; Table 1Perturbed vs Reference Absolute differencePerturbationIVD indicesCTV D95%(DGy)CTV D98%(DGy)Lung, V20Gy (D%)Heart, Dmean (DGy)Isocenter Shift (cm)g % (5%;5mm) – gmeanR-12.0-15.8+20-2.8Up (1)84%-0.571.01-9.1-12.9-6+0.3Right (1)82%-0,651.00-4.2-6.9-5-0.5In (1)90%-0.501.00-2.2-3.8-3+0.2Right (0.5)90%-0.450.990.20.3+2+0.2Out (0.3)99%-0.340.99-0.60.7-1-0.2In (0.3)98%-0.371.00 Open table in a new tab

Comparison of Different Dosimetric Indices for Volumetric Arc Modulated Treatment Planning Using 2 Different Treatment Planning Systems: A Feasibility Study for Total Body Irradiation

SU-E-T-411: Evaluation of Treatment Plan Quality Between Two Treatment Planning Systems for VMAT

Volumetric-modulated Arc Therapy Using Multicriteria Optimization for Body and Extremity Sarcoma.

Comparison of planning parameter selection for volumetric modulated arc therapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in two different treatment planning systems

SU‐E‐T‐812: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy‐Total Body Irradiation (VMAT‐TBI) V.s. Conventional Extended SSD‐TBI (ctbi): A Dosimetric Comparisom

Dosimetric advantages of dual arc increments for head and neck volumetric‐modulated arc therapy in the Monaco treatment planning system

Comparison of three Radiotherapy Techniques Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Variable and Constant Dose Rate and Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for the Irradiation of Five Cancer Sites

Comprehensive dosimetric planning comparison for early-stage, non-small cell lung cancer with SABR: fixed-beam IMRT versus VMAT versus TomoTherapy

A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy

Radiobiological analysis of VMAT treatment plan with flattened and flattening filter free photon beam: an EUD and TCP based comparative study

Dosimetric evaluation of a treatment planning system using the AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline 5.a (MPPG 5.a) validation tests

Effectiveness of a 2D-Transit Epid-Based In-Vivo Dosimetry System in Highlighting the Accuracy of Target Dose Coverage for Post-Mastectomy VMAT Irradiation

Modeling Elekta VersaHD Using the Varian Eclipse Treatment Planning System for Photon Beams: A Single-Institution Experience.

SU‐E‐T‐485: Clinical Evaluation of Inverse Planning Models and IMRT Delivery Systems in the Framework of AAPM TG‐119 Protocol

A Comprehensive Comparison of IMRT and VMAT Plan Quality for Prostate Cancer Treatment

A Clinical Comparison of Two Inverse Intense Modulated Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Systems

Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Based Total Body Irradiation: Workflow and Clinical Experience with an Indexed Rotational Immobilization System

The assessment of the clinical impact of using a single set of radiotherapy planning data for two kilovoltage therapy units

Comparison of Vmat and Imrt for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (sbrt) of the Adrenal Metastases

A retrospective analysis for patient-specific quality assurance of volumetric-modulated arc therapy plans.

Dosimetry and efficiency comparison of knowledge-based and manual planning using volumetric modulated arc therapy for craniospinal irradiation