Exploring the gamma surface: A new method for visualising modulated radiotherapy quality assurance results.

PURPOSE This work presents a novel method of visualising the results of patient-specific quality assurance (QA) for modulated radiotherapy treatment plans, using a three-dimensional distribution of gamma pass rates, referred to as the "gamma surface". The method was developed to aid in comparing borderline and failing QA plans, and to better compare patient-specific QA results between departments. METHODS Gamma surface plots were created for a representative sample of situations encountered during patient-specific QA. To produce a gamma surface plot, for each QA result, gamma pass rates were plotted as a heat map, with dose difference on one axis and distance-to-agreement on the other. This involved the calculation of 100 × 100 gamma pass rates over a dose difference and distance-to-agreement grid. As examples, five 220 × 680 arrays of dose points from radiotherapy treatment plans were compared against measurement data consisting of 21 × 66 arrays of dose points spaced 10 mm apart. RESULTS The gamma surface plots facilitated the rapid evaluation of criteria combinations for each plan, clearly highlighting the difference between plans that are modelled and delivered well, and those that are not. Large scale features were also evident in each surface, hinting at potential over-modulation, systematic dose errors, and small or large scale areas of disagreement in the distributions. CONCLUSIONS Gamma surface plots are a useful tool for investigating QA failures and borderline results, and have the capacity to grant insights into treatment plan QA performance that may otherwise be missed.

[1]  Lawrence Rosen,et al.  Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and Intellectual Property Law , 2004 .

[2]  Liting Yu,et al.  Analysis of dose comparison techniques for patient‐specific quality assurance in radiation therapy , 2019, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[3]  Annette Haworth,et al.  A virtual dosimetry audit - Towards transferability of gamma index analysis between clinical trial QA groups. , 2017, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[4]  Tanya Kairn,et al.  Dosimetric quality, accuracy, and deliverability of modulated radiotherapy treatments for spinal metastases. , 2016, Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.

[5]  Geoffrey G. Zhang,et al.  Evaluation of a new VMAT QA device, or the “X” and “O” array geometries , 2011, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[6]  Liting Yu,et al.  Technical note: A modified gamma evaluation method for dose distribution comparisons , 2019, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[7]  Tanya Kairn,et al.  Technical Note: Relationships between gamma criteria and action levels: Results of a multicenter audit of gamma agreement index results. , 2016, Medical physics.

[8]  Jon J Kruse,et al.  On the insensitivity of single field planar dosimetry to IMRT inaccuracies. , 2010, Medical physics.

[9]  Dietrich Harder,et al.  Spatial resolution of 2D ionization chamber arrays for IMRT dose verification: single-detector size and sampling step width , 2007, Physics in medicine and biology.

[10]  Tanya Kairn,et al.  Contribution : Photon optimizer ( PO ) vs progressive resolution optimizer ( PRO ) : a conformality-and complexity-based comparison for intensity-modulated arc therapy plans , 2017 .

[11]  Tanya Kairn,et al.  Retrospective audit of patient specific quality assurance results obtained using helical diode arrays , 2019 .

[12]  M Hussein,et al.  Challenges in calculation of the gamma index in radiotherapy - Towards good practice. , 2017, Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics.

[13]  C. Nelson,et al.  Commissioning results of an automated treatment planning verification system , 2014, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

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

[15]  C. Clark,et al.  Changes in Patterns of Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy Verification and Quality Assurance in the UK. , 2016, Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)).

[16]  Stine Korreman,et al.  The GLAaS algorithm for portal dosimetry and quality assurance of RapidArc, an intensity modulated rotational therapy , 2008, Radiation oncology.

[17]  Characteristics of inverse gamma histograms , 2020, Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine.

[18]  J. Dempsey,et al.  Evaluation of the gamma dose distribution comparison method. , 2003, Medical physics.

[19]  D Harder,et al.  Performance parameters of a liquid filled ionization chamber array. , 2013, Medical physics.

[20]  T Kairn,et al.  Examination of the properties of IMRT and VMAT beams and evaluation against pre-treatment quality assurance results , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

[21]  S. Deshpande,et al.  A survey of modulated radiotherapy use in Australia & New Zealand in 2015 , 2017, Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine.

[22]  K. Bratengeier,et al.  A comparison between 2-Step IMRT and conventional IMRT planning. , 2007, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.