A systematic evaluation of the error detection abilities of a new diode transmission detector

Abstract Transmission detectors meant to measure every beam delivered on a linear accelerator are now becoming available for monitoring the quality of the dose distribution delivered to the patient daily. The purpose of this work is to present results from a systematic evaluation of the error detection capabilities of one such detector, the Delta4 Discover. Existing patient treatment plans were modified through in‐house‐developed software to mimic various delivery errors that have been observed in the past. Errors included shifts in multileaf collimator leaf positions, changing the beam energy from what was planned, and a simulation of what would happen if the secondary collimator jaws did not track with the leaves as they moved. The study was done for simple 3D plans, static gantry intensity modulated radiation therapy plans as well as dynamic arc and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. Baseline plans were delivered with both the Discover device and the Delta4 Phantom+ to establish baseline gamma pass rates. Modified plans were then delivered using the Discover only and the predicted change in gamma pass rate, as well as the detected leaf positions were evaluated. Leaf deviations as small as 0.5 mm for a static three‐dimensional field were detected, with this detection limit growing to 1 mm with more complex delivery modalities such as VMAT. The gamma pass rates dropped noticeably once the intentional leaf error introduced was greater than the distance‐to‐agreement criterion. The unit also demonstrated the desired drop in gamma pass rates of at least 20% when jaw tracking was intentionally disabled and when an incorrect energy was used for the delivery. With its ability to find errors intentionally introduced into delivered plans, the Discover shows promise of being a valuable, independent error detection tool that should serve to detect delivery errors that can occur during radiotherapy treatment.

[1]  Louis B. Harrison,et al.  Automating the initial physics chart‐checking process , 2009, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[2]  R. Macklis,et al.  Error rates in clinical radiotherapy. , 1998, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  Chang Heon Choi,et al.  Validation of new transmission detector transmission factors for online dosimetry: an experimental study , 2018, Radiation oncology.

[4]  F. Rath Tools for developing a quality management program: proactive tools (process mapping, value stream mapping, fault tree analysis, and failure mode and effects analysis). , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  E. Grigg Smarter Clinical Checklists: How to Minimize Checklist Fatigue and Maximize Clinician Performance. , 2015, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[6]  A. Riegel,et al.  Variability of gross tumor volume delineation in head-and-neck cancer using CT and PET/CT fusion. , 2005, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[7]  G T Chen,et al.  Tumor and target delineation: current research and future challenges. , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[8]  Investigation of the spatial resolution of an online dose verification device. , 2012, Medical physics.

[9]  B. Poppe,et al.  Clinical performance of a transmission detector array for the permanent supervision of IMRT deliveries. , 2010, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[10]  Fang-Fang Yin,et al.  Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. , 2009, Medical physics.

[11]  R. Garcia,et al.  Analyse des risques a priori du processus de prise en charge des patients en radiothérapie : exemple d’utilisation de la méthode Amdec , 2012 .

[12]  Ashraf Labib,et al.  Learning from failures: Design improvements using a multiple criteria decision-making process , 2003 .

[13]  D. Jaffray,et al.  An integral quality monitoring system for real-time verification of intensity modulated radiation therapy. , 2009, Medical physics.

[14]  Jean M. Moran,et al.  Improving treatment plan evaluation with automation , 2016, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[15]  L. Beaulieu,et al.  Real-time verification of multileaf collimator-driven radiotherapy using a novel optical attenuation-based fluence monitor. , 2011, Medical physics.

[16]  Benedick A Fraass,et al.  Errors in radiotherapy: motivation for development of new radiotherapy quality assurance paradigms. , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[17]  C. Thieke,et al.  DAVID—a translucent multi-wire transmission ionization chamber for in vivo verification of IMRT and conformal irradiation techniques , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[18]  M van Herk,et al.  Catching errors with in vivo EPID dosimetry. , 2010, Medical physics.

[19]  M. Petasecca,et al.  Characterization of a novel two dimensional diode array the "magic plate" as a radiation detector for radiation therapy treatment. , 2012, Medical physics.

[20]  Sridhar Yaddanapudi,et al.  Automated radiation therapy treatment plan workflow using a commercial application programming interface. , 2014, Practical radiation oncology.

[21]  T. K. Yeung,et al.  Quality assurance in radiotherapy: evaluation of errors and incidents recorded over a 10 year period. , 2005, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[22]  Uulke A. van der Heide,et al.  Simultaneous multi-modality ROI delineation in clinical practice , 2009, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[23]  L. Potters,et al.  Common error pathways seen in the RO-ILS data that demonstrate opportunities for improving treatment safety. , 2018, Practical radiation oncology.

[25]  Benedick A Fraass,et al.  A method for evaluating quality assurance needs in radiation therapy. , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[26]  David J Hoopes,et al.  RO-ILS: Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System: A report from the first year of experience. , 2015, Practical radiation oncology.

[27]  Marcel van Herk,et al.  Decreased 3D observer variation with matched CT-MRI, for target delineation in Nasopharynx cancer , 2010, Radiation oncology.

[28]  N Cao,et al.  Validating FMEA output against incident learning data: A study in stereotactic body radiation therapy. , 2015, Medical physics.

[29]  Deshan Yang,et al.  Automated radiotherapy treatment plan integrity verification. , 2012, Medical physics.

[30]  Audrey H. Zhuang,et al.  Sensitivity study of an automated system for daily patient QA using EPID exit dose images , 2018, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[31]  R. Steenbakkers,et al.  Reduction of dose delivered to the rectum and bulb of the penis using MRI delineation for radiotherapy of the prostate. , 2003, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[32]  R. Garcia,et al.  [FMEA applied to the radiotherapy patient care process]. , 2012, Cancer Radiothérapie.

[33]  Colin G. Drury,et al.  Supporting Vicarious Learning With Collaborative Lessons Learned Programs , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.

[34]  Taoran Li,et al.  Diode‐based transmission detector for IMRT delivery monitoring: a validation study , 2016, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[35]  P. Greer,et al.  Evaluation of an a-Si EPID in direct detection configuration as a water-equivalent dosimeter for transit dosimetry. , 2010, Medical physics.