Evaluation of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Delivery System using a Volumetric Phantom on the Basis of the Task Group 119 Report of American Association of Physicists in Medicine

The current work describes the implementation of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM)'s Task Group 119 report on a volumetric phantom (Delta4, Scandidos, Uppsala, Sweden) following the stated dose goals, to evaluate the step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) system. Delta4 consists of diode detectors, lying on two crossed planes, measuring the delivered dose, and providing two-dimensional dosimetric information. Seven plans of different goals and complexity were performed, with individual structure sets. TG199 structure sets and plans were transferred and implemented on the Delta4 phantom taking into account its cylindrical geometry. All plans were delivered with a 6 MV linear accelerator equipped with multileaf collimator of 1 cm thickness. Plan results for each test met the recommended dose goals. The evaluation was performed in terms of dose deviation, distance to agreement, and gamma index passing rate. In all test cases, the gamma index passing rate was measured >90%. Delta4 phantom has proven to be fast, applicable, and reliable for the step-and-shoot IMRT commissioning following TG119's recommended tests. Although AAPM's TG119 report is referring to the implementation of test plans that do not correspond to patient plans, it could be used as an evaluation tool of various IMRT systems, considering the local treatment planning system and the delivery system.

[1]  Maria Lyra,et al.  MLC positional accuracy evaluation through the Picket Fence test on EBT2 films and a 3D volumetric phantom , 2015, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[2]  Tao Ju,et al.  Does the γ dose distribution comparison technique default to the distance to agreement test in clinical dose distributions? , 2013, Medical physics.

[3]  A. Bäck,et al.  IMRT patient-specific QA using the Delta4 dosimetry system and evaluation based on ICRU 83 recommendations , 2013 .

[4]  Lei Dong,et al.  Dosimetry tools and techniques for IMRT. , 2011, Medical physics.

[5]  Daniel A Low,et al.  Gamma Dose Distribution Evaluation Tool , 2010 .

[6]  J. Mechalakos,et al.  IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119. , 2009, Medical physics.

[7]  M. Stock,et al.  Interpretation and evaluation of the gamma index and the gamma index angle for the verification of IMRT hybrid plans. , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  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.

[9]  D A Low,et al.  A software tool for the quantitative evaluation of 3D dose calculation algorithms. , 1998, Medical physics.

[10]  D. Low,et al.  A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. , 1998, Medical physics.

[11]  J. Cygler,et al.  Commissioning and quality assurance of treatment planning computers. , 1993, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.