Patient specific quality control for Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR): It takes more than one phantom

Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR) is an extension of the concepts of Stereotactic Radiosurgery from intracranial procedures to extracranial targets. This brings with it new technological challenges for set-up of a SABR program and continuing quality assurance. Compared with intracranial procedures SABR requires consideration of motion and inhomogeneities and has to deal with a much larger variety of targets ranging from lung to liver, kidney and bone. To meet many of the challenges virtually all advances in modern radiotherapy, such as Intensity Modulated and Image Guided Radiation Therapy (IMRT and IGRT) are used. Considering the few fractions and high doses per fraction delivered to complex targets it is not surprising that patient specific quality control is considered essential for safe delivery. Given the variety of targets and clinical scenarios we employ different strategies for different patients to ensure that the most important aspects of the treatment are appropriately tested, be it steep dose gradients, inhomogeneities or the delivery of dose in the presence of motion. The current paper reviews the different approaches and phantoms utilised at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre for SABR QA

Small field segments surrounded by large areas only shielded by a multileaf collimator: Comparison of experiments and dose calculation

Complex radiotherapy fields delivered using a tertiary multileaf collimator (MLC) often feature small open segments surrounded by large areas of the beam only shielded by the MLC. The aim of this study was to test the ability of two modern dose calculation algorithms to accurately calculate the dose in these fields which would be common, for example, in volumetric modulated arc treatment (VMAT) and study the impact of variations in dosimetric leaf gap (DLG), focal spot size, and MLC transmission in the beam model

Reproducibility assessment of dynamically deforming DEFGEL in a respiratory motion phantom

Conducting four-dimensional deforming dosimetry with a deformable gel dosimeter presents several challenges for implementation and interpretation of results. In this work, we describe a modification to a respiratory motion phantom to accommodate the DEFGEL dosimeter, and an evaluation of the reproducibility of the setup and deformation cycle. Setup errors are sub-mm while deformation reproducibility is typically less than half the CT voxel size (1 mm AP and LR; 3 mm SI). 4DCT confirms the absence of hysteresis

Correcting radiation survey data to account for increased leakage during intensity modulated radiotherapy treatments

Purpose\ud \ud Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatments require more beam-on time and produce more linac head leakage to deliver similar doses to conventional, unmodulated, radiotherapy treatments. It is necessary to take this increased leakage into account when evaluating the results of radiation surveys around bunkers that are, or will be, used for IMRT. The recommended procedure of 15 applying a monitor-unit based workload correction factor to secondary barrier survey measurements, to account for this increased leakage when evaluating radiation survey measurements around IMRT bunkers, can lead to potentially-costly over estimation of the required barrier thickness. This study aims to provide initial guidance on the validity of reducing the value of the correction factor when applied to different radiation barriers (primary barriers, doors, maze walls and other walls) by 20 evaluating three different bunker designs.\ud \ud Methods\ud \ud Radiation survey measurements of primary, scattered and leakage radiation were obtained at each of five survey points around each of three different radiotherapy bunkers and the contribution of leakage to the total measured radiation dose at each point was evaluated. Measurements at each survey point were made with the linac gantry set to 12 equidistant positions from 0 to 330o, to 25 assess the effects of radiation beam direction on the results.\ud \ud Results\ud \ud For all three bunker designs, less than 0.5% of dose measured at and alongside the primary barriers, less than 25% of the dose measured outside the bunker doors and up to 100% of the dose measured outside other secondary barriers was found to be caused by linac head leakage.\ud \ud Conclusions\ud \ud Results of this study suggest that IMRT workload corrections are unnecessary, for 30 survey measurements made at and alongside primary barriers. Use of reduced IMRT workload correction factors is recommended when evaluating survey measurements around a bunker door, provided that a subset of the measurements used in this study are repeated for the bunker in question. Reduction of the correction factor for other secondary barrier survey measurements is not recommended unless the contribution from leakage is separetely evaluated