Results of a two-year quality control program for a helical tomotherapy unit.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Image-guided helical tomotherapy (HT) is a new modality for delivering intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with helical irradiation: the slip ring continuously rotates while the couch moves into the bore. The radiation source (Linac, 6 MV) is collimated into a fan beam and modulated by means of a binary multileaf collimator (MLC). A xenon detector array, opposite the radiation source, allows a megavoltage-CT (MVCT) acquisition of patient images for set-up verification. The aim of this paper is to report the results of a two-year quality control (QC) program for the physical and dosimetric characterization of an HT unit installed at our Institute and clinically activated in November 2004, in order to monitor and verify the stability and the reliability of this promising radiation treatment unit. MATERIALS AND METHODS Conventional Linac acceptance protocols (ATP) and QC protocols were adapted to HT with the addition of specific items reflecting important differences between the two irradiation modalities. QC tests can be summarized as: (a) mechanical and geometrical characterization of the system's components: evaluation of alignment among radiation source-gantry rotation plan-jaws-MLC-MVCT; (b) treatment beam configuration in static condition: depth dose curves (PDD) and profiles, output factors, output reproducibility and linearity; (c) dynamic component characterization: accuracy and reproducibility of MLC positioning; rotational output reproducibility and linearity, leaf latency, couch movement constancy; (d) gantry-couch and MLC-gantry synchronization; and (e) MVCT image quality. Peculiar periodicity specific tolerance and action levels were defined. Ionization chambers (Exradin A1SL 0.056 cc), films (XOmat-V/EDR2), water and solid water phantoms were used to perform quality assurance measurements. RESULTS Over a two-year period the final average output variation after possible beam output adjustment was -0.2+/-1% for the static condition and equal to 0+/-1% for the rotational condition: around 98% of the collected output data was within the action level compared to 94% if no beam output adjustment was considered. An average energy variation of -0.4+/-0.4% was found. The daily absolute dose verification of IMRT plans showed a dose reproducibility of -0.5+/-1.2% and -0.4+/-2.2%, for low and high dose gradient regions, respectively. Source-jaws-MLC and MVCT alignment results and jaw and leaf positioning accuracy were +/-1mm. Couch-gantry-MLC synchrony tests showed good stability level (<or= +/-2mm). CONCLUSIONS QC results indicated good reproducibility of all HT mechanical-dosimetric performance.

[1]  A W Beavis,et al.  Is tomotherapy the future of IMRT? , 2004, The British journal of radiology.

[2]  K. Ruchala,et al.  Evaluation of a diode array for QA measurements on a helical tomotherapy unit. , 2005, Medical physics.

[3]  J O Deasy,et al.  Tomotherapy: a new concept for the delivery of dynamic conformal radiotherapy. , 1993, Medical physics.

[4]  Patrick A Kupelian,et al.  Performance characterization of megavoltage computed tomography imaging on a helical tomotherapy unit. , 2005, Medical physics.

[5]  J O Deasy,et al.  An investigation of tomotherapy beam delivery. , 1997, Medical physics.

[6]  T R Mackie,et al.  Quality assurance of a helical tomotherapy machine. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[7]  B Mijnheer,et al.  Tolerances for the accuracy of photon beam dose calculations of treatment planning systems. , 2001, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[8]  B. Fallone,et al.  Patient specific treatment verifications for helical tomotherapy treatment plans. , 2005, Medical physics.

[9]  J. Palta,et al.  Comprehensive QA for radiation oncology: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 40. , 1994, Medical physics.

[10]  Walter Grant,et al.  The evolution of quality assurance for intensity- modulated radiation therapy (IMRT): sequential tomotherapy. , 2003, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  Tim Holmes,et al.  Helical tomotherapy dynamic quality assurance. , 2006, Medical physics.

[12]  D. Low Quality assurance of intensity-modulated radiotherapy. , 2002, Seminars in radiation oncology.

[13]  Chester R Ramsey,et al.  Technical note: output and energy fluctuations of the tomotherapy Hi-Art helical tomotherapy system. , 2004, Medical physics.

[14]  Robert Jeraj,et al.  Benchmarking beam alignment for a clinical helical tomotherapy device. , 2003, Medical physics.

[15]  J Venselaar,et al.  Application of a test package in an intercomparison of the photon dose calculation performance of treatment planning systems used in a clinical setting. , 2001, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[16]  Mauro Iori,et al.  Acceptance tests and quality control (QC) procedures for the clinical implementation of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using inverse planning and the sliding window technique: experience from five radiotherapy departments. , 2002, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[17]  B. Heijmen,et al.  Commissioning of a commercially available system for intensity-modulated radiotherapy dose delivery with dynamic multileaf collimation. , 2001, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[18]  John Balog,et al.  Clinical helical tomotherapy commissioning dosimetry. , 2003, Medical physics.

[19]  Robert Jeraj,et al.  Radiation characteristics of helical tomotherapy. , 2004, Medical physics.

[20]  Tommy Knöös,et al.  Quality assurance of treatment planning systems - Practical examples for non-IMRT photon beams, ESTRO Booklet No. 7 , 2004 .

[21]  J. Kapatoes,et al.  Megavoltage CT image reconstruction during tomotherapy treatments. , 2000, Physics in medicine and biology.

[22]  Cedric X. Yu,et al.  Guidance document on delivery, treatment planning, and clinical implementation of IMRT: report of the IMRT Subcommittee of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee. , 2003, Medical physics.

[23]  M. Aspradakis,et al.  Elements of commissioning step-and-shoot IMRT: delivery equipment and planning system issues posed by small segment dimensions and small monitor units. , 2005, Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.

[24]  D W O Rogers,et al.  A Monte Carlo derived TG-51 equivalent calibration for helical tomotherapy. , 2005, Medical physics.

[25]  C. Langer,et al.  Concurrent chemoradiation using paclitaxel and carboplatin in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. , 1999, Seminars in radiation oncology.

[26]  A Wambersie,et al.  What degree of accuracy is required and can be achieved in photon and neutron therapy? , 1987, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[27]  T. Mackie,et al.  Megavoltage CT on a tomotherapy system. , 1999, Physics in medicine and biology.