TrueBeam

TrueBeam
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    6FFF光束的剂量测定输出,VarianTrueBeam直线加速器生产的产品随着时间的推移表现出意想不到的下降趋势,这与既定的预期相反。为了阐明这种不典型趋势的原因,对直线加速器在其生命周期内的质量控制结果进行了审查,包括,剂量测定输出的恒定性检查,光束能量,平整度和对称性,和百分比深度剂量特征。这些结果补充了一系列全面的测量,包括使用一维二极管阵列进行的平面度和对称性测量,具有平行板室的光子束的建立区域的高分辨率测量和作为X射线目标位置的函数的束输出的测量。对直线加速器的质量控制结果和补充测试的审查发现直线加速器的性能与调试和基线测量没有偏差。然而,6FFF光束输出表现出对目标位置相对于其默认位置的显著依赖性,以0.5毫米的目标平移增加5.43%,表明目标退化是非典型输出趋势的原因。输出行为的变化被认为是初级电子逃离退化目标并与直线加速器的监视器室相互作用的结果。更换X射线靶导致6FFF输出与预期趋势重新对准。由于强大的质量控制趋势数据库和对典型输出行为的认识,未发现目标退化。这些结果证明了数据趋势对识别组件故障的重要性,并为中心提供了识别此潜在故障的知识。
    The dosimetric output of a 6FFF beam, produced from a Varian TrueBeam linac exhibited an unexpected downward trend over time that was contrary to well-established expectations. To elucidate the cause of this uncharacteristic trend, a review of the linac\'s quality control results over its lifetime was performed, including, constancy checks of the dosimetric output, beam energy, flatness and symmetry, and percentage depth dose characteristics. These results were supplemented with a comprehensive series of measurements including flatness and symmetry measurements with a 1D-diode array, high-resolution measurements of the photon beam\'s build-up region with a parallel-plate chamber and measurement of the beam\'s output as a function of the x-ray target position. The review of the linac\'s QC results and supplemental tests identified no deviations in the linac\'s performance from its commissioning and baseline measurements. However, the 6FFF beam output exhibited a significant dependence on the target location relative to its default position, increasing by 5.43 % with a 0.5 mm target translation, indicating that target degradation was the cause of the atypical output trend. The change in output behaviour was believed to be the result of primary electrons escaping the degraded target and interacting with the linac\'s monitor chamber. Replacement of the x-ray target caused the 6FFF output to realign with expected trends. Target degradation was uncovered due to a robust quality control trending database and awareness of typical output behaviour. These results demonstrate the importance of data trending to identify component failure and provide centres with knowledge to recognise this potential fault.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    放射治疗中的准确剂量预测具有挑战性,促使人们需要超越传统的临床治疗计划系统(TPS)的精度。寻求基于蒙特卡洛的方法具有出色的准确性。这项研究的目的是比较ACUROS算法和GATE平台在各种组织密度和场大小之间的剂量分布,专注于较小的领域。这项研究是在对TrueBeamSTX系统进行均匀验证的基础上开始的,使用从布鲁塞尔区域间医院中心伊迪丝·卡维尔(CHIREC)获得的测量结果。验证比较剂量测定函数(百分比深度剂量(PDD),剂量曲线(DP)和准直器散射分数(CSF))采用具有2%/2mm标准公差的GAMMA指数。在此之后,异质研究检查了ACUROS算法和GATE平台在各种组织密度和场大小之间的剂量分布,特别关注较小的领域。使用两个平台对具有代表骨骼的异质平板的胸部体模进行模拟,肺,和心,每个都有一个中央肿瘤。评估了电子平衡对不同小视野大小的肿瘤的影响。结果表明,在TrueBeamSTX系统的均匀验证中,测量值和GATE计算值之间具有99%的一致性。然而,在异质研究中,与GATE模拟相比,ACUROS始终高估肺剂量高达8%,在密度界面处使用平坦的滤光片和较小的光束尺寸尤其明显。这突出了ACUROS和GATE之间的显着剂量估计差异,强调需要精确的计算。研究结果支持探索基于蒙特卡罗的方法,以提高放射治疗计划的准确性。
    The Accurate dosage prediction in Radiation Therapy is challenging, prompting a need for precision beyond conventional clinical Treatment Planning Systems (TPS). Monte Carlo-based methods are sought for their superior accuracy. The aim of this study is to compare dose distributions between the ACUROS algorithm and the GATE platform in various tissue densities and field sizes, focusing on smaller fields. This study was initiated with a homogeneous validation of the TrueBeam STX system, using measurements obtained from the Centre Hospitalier Interregional Edith Cavell (CHIREC) in Brussels. The validation compared dosimetric functions (Percentage Depth Dose (PDD), Dose profile (DP) and Collimator scatter fraction (CSF)) employing the GAMMA index with a 2% / 2 mm criterion tolerance. Following this, heterogeneous studies examined dose distributions between the ACUROS algorithm and the GATE platform in various tissue densities and field sizes, with a specific focus on smaller fields. Simulations were conducted using both platforms on chest phantoms with heterogeneous slabs representing bone, lung, and heart, each housing a central tumor. The impact of electronic equilibrium on tumors for different small field sizes was evaluated. Results showed a remarkable 99% agreement between measurements and GATE calculations in the homogeneous validation of the TrueBeam STX system. However, in heterogeneous studies, ACUROS consistently overestimated lung doses by up to 8% compared to GATE simulation, especially evident with a flattening filter and smaller beam sizes at density interfaces. This highlights significant dose estimation discrepancies between ACUROS and GATE, emphasizing the need for precise calculations. The findings support exploring Monte Carlo-based methods for enhanced accuracy in Radiation Therapy treatment planning.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    通过单等中心/多靶标(SIMT)计划对寡转移病变进行立体定向放射治疗(SBRT)比使用多等中心/多靶标SBRT更有效。这项研究量化了用于SIMT治疗的2种市售LINAC系统的空间定位精度,该精度与潜在的误差放大有关,该误差是目标到等中心点的距离的函数。我们比较了配备快速迭代锥束CT(iCBCT)的Ring-GantryHalcyonLINAC,用于图像引导的SIMT治疗,和SBRT专用的C-ArmTrueBeam与标准预处理CBCT成像。对于这两个系统,使用了SunNuclear的MultiMetWinston-Lutz立方体模型,该模型具有6个金属BB,分布在距等中心7厘米的不同平面上。通过CBCT对准并成像体模,然后应用沙发校正。要治疗所有6个BB,不同机架的Eclipse10场3D共形场(每个BB的2×2cm2MLC场)计划,准直器,准直器和沙发(TrueBeam仅)的位置是为两台机器6MV-FFF梁开发的。该计划每周通过ARIA交付一次。EPID图像通过SunNuclear的空间定位精度软件进行分析。在TrueBeam上,治疗计划交付了两次:一次是3DoF平移矫正,一次是PerfectPitch6DoF卧床矫正。平均三维空间定位精度为0.55±0.30mm,0.54±0.24mm,等中心为0.56±0.28mm,和0.59±0.30毫米,0.69±0.30mm,Halcyon在距离等中心7厘米处0.70±0.35毫米,TrueBeam3DoF,和TrueBeam6DoF,分别。这表明具有到等中心的距离的平台之间的空间不确定性没有临床上的显着偏差。在这两个平台上,我们每周的独立测量结果证明,距离等中心7cm的离轴目标位置精度小于1.0mm时具有可重复性.由于这个原因,对于等中心7厘米内的病变,不建议额外的PTV边缘。这项研究证实,Halcyon可以将与SBRT专用的TrueBeam相似的位置精度传递到距等中心7厘米的离轴目标。这些结果进一步证明了我们广泛使用的SBRT专用TrueBeamLINAC用于SIMTSBRT治疗的空间不确定性。
    Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment of oligometastatic lesions via single-isocenter/multi-target (SIMT) plan is more efficient than using multi-isocenter/multitarget SBRT. This study quantifies the spatial positioning accuracy of 2 commercially available LINAC systems for SIMT treatment pertaining to the potential amplification of error as a function of the target\'s distance-to-isocenter. We compare the Ring-Gantry Halcyon LINAC equipped with the fast iterative conebeam-CT (iCBCT) for image-guided SIMT treatment, and the SBRT-dedicated C-Arm TrueBeam with standard pretreatment CBCT imaging. For both systems, Sun Nuclear\'s MultiMet Winston-Lutz Cube phantom with 6 metallic BBs distributed at different planes up to 7 cm away from the isocenter was used. The phantom was aligned and imaged via CBCT, and then couch corrections were applied. To treat all 6 BBs, an Eclipse 10-field 3D-conformal Field-in-Field (2×2 cm2 MLC field to each BB) plan for varying gantry, collimator, and couch (TrueBeam only) positions was developed for both machines with 6MV-FFF beam. The plan was delivered through ARIA once a week. The EPID images were analyzed via Sun Nuclear\'s software for spatial positioning accuracy. On TrueBeam, the treatment plan was delivered twice: once with 3DoF translational corrections and once with PerfectPitch 6DoF couch corrections. The average 3D spatial positioning accuracy was 0.55 ± 0.30 mm, 0.54 ± 0.24 mm, and 0.56 ± 0.28 mm at isocenter, and 0.59 ± 0.30 mm, 0.69 ± 0.30 mm, and 0.70 ± 0.35 mm at 7 cm distance-to-isocenter for Halcyon, TrueBeam 3DoF, and TrueBeam 6DoF, respectively. This suggests there are no clinically significant deviations of spatial uncertainty between the platforms with the distance-to-isocenter. On both platforms, our weekly independent measurements demonstrated the reproducibility for less than 1.0 mm positional accuracy of off-axis targets up to 7 cm from the isocenter. Due to this, no additional PTV-margin is suggested for lesions within 7 cm of isocenter. This study confirms that Halcyon can deliver similar positional accuracy to SBRT-dedicated TrueBeam to off-axis targets up to 7 cm from isocenter. These results further benchmark the spatial uncertainty of our extensively used SBRT-dedicated TrueBeam LINAC for SIMT SBRT treatments.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    该研究的目的是评估Halcyon在小细胞肺癌(SCLC)的预防性颅骨照射(PCI),体积调节电弧疗法(VMAT)和海马保留中的剂量学。
    在15例诊断为SCLC并接受PCI的患者的CT图像上设计了五个VMAT计划。在三部曲和TrueBeam加速器上生成了三个带有两个完整弧的计划,在TrueBeam上使用平坦化滤波器(FF)和无平坦化滤波器(FFF)模式。生成了两个带有两个和三个完整弧的Halcyon计划,被称为H-2A和H-3A,分别。处方剂量为25Gy,分为2.5Gy。海马的剂量限制为D100≤9Gy和Dmax≤16Gy。使用Wilcoxon匹配配对符号秩检验来评估五个计划之间观察到的差异的显著性。
    H-2A计划显著增加了PTV的D2,与C臂加速器上的三种计划相比,H-3A计划显示出可比甚至更好的目标剂量测定(一致性更好)。与T和TB计划相比,两个Halcyon计划显着降低了D100和双侧海马的平均剂量,眼球的平均剂量,和最大剂量的镜片。与Trilogy计划相比,TrueBeam计划中海马的D100减少。TrueBeam上的FFF计划也代表了海马Dmean和D100的优势,眼球的Dmean和Dmax,与FF计划相比,镜头的Dmax。与FF计划相比,具有FFF模式的Halcyon计划和TrueBeam计划增加了MU。与H-2A相比,H-3A计划表现出额外的剂量学优势,包括PTV的D2、CI和HI,以及海马体和眼球的最大和平均剂量,视神经和脑干的最大剂量.两个Halcyon计划显着缩短了交货时间,并显示出比C臂加速器的三个计划更高的伽马通过率。
    与C臂加速器相比,对于保留海马的PCI,海马的剂量和Halcyon的分娩时间相对显着减少。在保留海马的PCI中,使用Halcyon的VMAT计划建议使用三个弧。
    UNASSIGNED: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the dosimetry of the Halcyon in prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and hippocampal-sparing for small cell lung cancer (SCLC).
    UNASSIGNED: Five VMAT plans were designed on CT images of 15 patients diagnosed with SCLC and received PCI. Three plans with two full arcs were generated on the Trilogy and the TrueBeam accelerators, and flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter free (FFF) modes were used on TrueBeam. Two Halcyon plans with two and three full arcs were generated, referred to as H-2A and H-3A, respectively. The prescription dose was 25 Gy in 2.5-Gy fractions. The dose limit for hippocampus were D100 ≤ 9Gy and Dmax ≤ 16Gy. The Wilcoxon matched-paired signed-rank test was used to evaluate the significance of the observed differences between the five plans.
    UNASSIGNED: H-2A plans significantly increased the D2 of PTV, and H-3A plans showed comparable or even better target dosimetry (better conformity) compared to the three plans on C-arm accelerators. Compared to T and TB plans, the two Halcyon plans significantly reduced the D100 and mean doses of bilateral hippocampus, the mean doses of eyeballs, and the maximum doses of lenses. D100 of hippocampus was reduced in TrueBeam plans comparing to Trilogy plans. The FFF plans on TrueBeam also represented advantages in Dmean and D100 of hippocampas, Dmean and Dmax of eyeballs, and the Dmax of lenses compared to FF plans. Halcyon plans and TrueBeam plans with FFF mode increased the MUs compared to FF plans. Comparing to H-2A, the H-3A plans exhibited additional dosimetric advantages, including D2, CI and HI of PTV, as well as the maximum and mean doses of hippocampus and eyeballs, and the maximum doses of optic nerves and brainstem. The two Halcyon plans significantly reduced the delivery time and showed the higher gamma passing rate than the three plans of C-arm accelerators.
    UNASSIGNED: Compared with the C-arm accelerators, the dose of hippocampus and the delivery times on Halcyon are relatively significantly reduced for hippocampal-sparing PCI. Three arcs are recommended for VMAT plans with the Halcyon in hippocampal-sparing PCI.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本文根据通过进行简单的日常测试获得的轨迹日志(TLs)中收集的数据,研究了对多叶准直器(MLC)实施预测性维护计划的可行性,目的是尽量减少计划外停机时间。
    方法:设计了动态现场试验,收集在直线加速器中每日给药过程中产生的TL,以评估MLC叶片的轨迹偏差以及机器报告的互锁(COL420219/20,COL420207/08)。在这次评估中,我们观察到,某些叶子的轨迹偏差增加到一个阈值,超过该阈值,某些互锁开始出现在这些叶子的处理区域中。因此,开发了指数退化模型来预测这种漂移并确定每个叶片的剩余使用寿命(RUL)。一旦模型的适用性得到确认,我们添加了配备了具有相同配置的MLC的第二个加速器来验证模型。
    结果:该模型能够预测由主读数/预期位置差异导致的某些COL420219/20互锁,并估计每片叶子的RUL。总的来说,提前7天检测到11例(8个联锁+3个因服务干预而避免的潜在联锁[占总数的27.3%]),没有假阳性结果。因此,在MLC故障发生前几天安排服务干预是可能的。当模型没有预测这些类型的联锁时,它们总是由叶片电机故障产生的。因此,干预时间也可以通过直接更换电机来优化。在学习期间,对于这些类型的互锁,我们的方法将每个加速器的停机时间从35.25小时减少到4.00小时(88.7%),从34.75小时减少到22.83小时(34.3%),分别。对于COL420207/08联锁,由初级/次级读出差异产生,与TLs中记录的叶片轨迹偏差增加没有相关性。在整个研究期间,这些类型的联锁需要服务干预,也主要用于电机更换,第一个加速器的停机时间为9.50h(占总停机时间的21.2%),第二个加速器的停机时间为4.33h(占总停机时间的11.1%)。
    结论:这项研究表明,通过应用基于TLs中收集的信息的预测性MLC维护计划,可以预测某些互锁,因此安排先发制人的干预措施以避免其发生。这可以优化医疗保健交付性能并最大程度地减少治疗疗程的损失。
    OBJECTIVE: This paper investigates the feasibility of implementing a predictive maintenance program for a multileaf collimator (MLC) based on data collected in trajectory logs (TLs) obtained by conducting a simple daily test, with the aim of minimizing unscheduled downtime.
    METHODS: A dynamic field test was designed, and the TLs generated in the course of daily administration in a linear accelerator were collected to evaluate trajectory deviations of the MLC leaves as well as interlocks (COL 420219/20, COL 420207/08) reported by the machine. During this evaluation, we observed that the trajectory deviations of some leaves increased up to a threshold value beyond which certain interlocks began to appear in treatment fields in those leaves. An exponential degradation model was therefore developed to predict this drift and determine each leaf\'s remaining useful life (RUL). Once the applicability of the model was confirmed, we added a second accelerator equipped with an MLC with the same configuration to validate the model.
    RESULTS: The model was able to predict certain COL 420219/20 interlocks resulting from primary readout/expected position discrepancies and to estimate each leaf\'s RUL. In total, 11 cases (8 interlocks + 3 potential interlocks avoided due to service interventions [27.3% of the total]) were detected over 7 days in advance, with no false positive results. Scheduling of service interventions several days prior to MLC failure would therefore be possible. When these types of interlocks were not predicted by the model, they were always generated by leaf motor failure. Consequently, intervention time could also be optimized by directly replacing the motor. During the study period, for these types of interlocks, our approach would have reduced downtime from 35.25 to 4.00 h (88.7%) and from 34.75 to 22.83 h (34.3%) for each accelerator, respectively. For COL 420207/08 interlocks, which are generated by primary/secondary readout discrepancies, no correlation with leaf trajectory deviation increases recorded in the TLs was found. Throughout the study period, these types of interlocks requiring service intervention, also mainly for motor replacement, represented a downtime of 9.50 h for the first accelerator (21.2% of total downtime) and by 4.33 h (11.1% of total downtime) for the second accelerator.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that by applying a predictive MLC maintenance program based on information collected in TLs, it is possible to predict certain interlocks and therefore schedule preemptive interventions to avoid their occurrence. This could optimize health-care delivery performance and minimize the loss of treatment sessions.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:该研究通过三种先进的加速器的日志文件评估了叶片定位偏差的差异,并建立了不同类型加速器叶片定位偏差的具体评估参数。
    方法:从三部曲中收集了总共420个治疗计划和5个连续的治疗日志文件,TrueBeam和Halcyon加速器。MillenniumMLC配备了三部曲和TrueBeam加速器。在Halcyon加速器上采用了无锯齿设计和双层MLC。在每个加速器上随机选择70个IMRT和70个VMAT计划。所有计划的治疗部位包括头颈部,胸部,乳房,骨盆和其他部位。2100个日志文件的解析任务由Sun核公司的SunCheck软件进行。最大叶均方根(RMS)误差,对第95百分位误差和不同叶片定位误差的百分比进行统计分析。这些评估参数与加速器性能参数(最大叶片速度,平均叶片速度,机架和弧角)进行了分析。
    结果:在IMRT和VMAT计划中,三部曲的平均最大叶片RMS误差为0.44±0.09mm和0.79±0.07mm,分别,高于TrueBeam的0.03±0.01毫米,0.03±0.01毫米,Halcyon的0.05±0.01毫米,0.07±0.01mm。在第95百分位数误差中显示了类似的数据结果。最大叶片RMS误差与第95百分位数误差密切相关(皮尔逊指数>0.5)。对于所有加速器,VMAT中的叶片定位偏差均高于IMRT中的叶片定位偏差。在TrueBeam和Halcyon,在IMRT和VMAT计划中未发现1毫米以上的叶片位置误差。叶片定位偏差的主要影响因素是叶片速度,与机架和弧角没有很强的相关性。
    结论:与质量保证指南相比,应拧紧三个加速器的MLC定位偏差公差。对于IMRT和VMAT技术,对于三部曲加速器,建议将第95百分位误差和最大RMS误差分别收紧至1.5和1mm。在TrueBeam和Halcyon加速器中,第95百分位误差和最大RMS误差为1和0.5mm,分别,被认为是合适的。
    OBJECTIVE: The study evaluated the differences in leaf positioning deviations by the log files of three advanced accelerators with two delivery techniques, and established specific assessment parameters of leaf positioning deviations for different types of accelerators.
    METHODS: A total of 420 treatment plans with 5 consecutive treatment log files were collected from the Trilogy, TrueBeam and Halcyon accelerators. Millennium MLC was equipped on the Trilogy and TrueBeam accelerators. A jawless design and dual-layer MLC were adopted on the Halcyon accelerator. 70 IMRT and 70 VMAT plans were selected randomly on each accelerator. The treatment sites of all plans included head and neck, chest, breast, pelvis and other sites. The parsing tasks for 2100 log files were proceeded by SunCheck software from Sun Nuclear Corporation. The maximum leaf root mean square (RMS) errors, 95th percentile errors and percentages of different leaf positioning errors were statistically analyzed. The correlations between these evaluation parameters and accelerator performance parameters (maximum leaf speed, mean leaf speed, gantry and arc angle) were analyzed.
    RESULTS: The average maximum leaf RMS errors of the Trilogy in the IMRT and VMAT plans were 0.44 ± 0.09 mm and 0.79 ± 0.07 mm, respectively, which were higher than the TrueBeam\'s 0.03 ± 0.01 mm, 0.03 ± 0.01 mm and the Halcyon\'s 0.05 ± 0.01 mm, 0.07 ± 0.01 mm. Similar data results were shown in the 95th percentile error. The maximum leaf RMS errors were strongly correlated with the 95th percentile errors (Pearson index > 0.5). The leaf positioning deviations in VMAT were higher than those in IMRT for all accelerators. In TrueBeam and Halcyon, leaf position errors above 1 mm were not found in IMRT and VMAT plans. The main influencing factor of leaf positioning deviation was the leaf speed, which has no strong correlation with gantry and arc angles.
    CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the quality assurance guidelines, the MLC positioning deviations tolerances of the three accelerators should be tightened. For both IMRT and VMAT techniques, the 95th percentile error and the maximum RMS error are suggested to be tightened to 1.5 and 1 mm respectively for the Trilogy accelerator. In TrueBeam and Halcyon accelerators, the 95th percentile error and maximum RMS error of 1 and 0.5 mm, respectively, are considered appropriate.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    全脑放疗因其有效性而成为脑转移患者的标准姑息治疗方法,可用性,易于管理。最近的临床试验表明,限制对海马的辐射剂量与认知毒性降低有关。在这项研究中,我们更新了现有的基于知识的计划模型,以进一步减少海马体的剂量并改善其他剂量测定计划质量特征.根据指南对42例临床病例进行了轮廓分析。创建了一个新的剂量计分卡,作为计划质量的客观衡量标准。新的海马保留全脑版本2(HSWBv2)模型采用了复杂的递归训练过程,并在另外5个案例中进行了验证。在VarianHalcyonTM和TrueBeamTM系统上生成HSWBv2治疗计划,并与2016年发布的现有(HSWBv1)模型生成的计划进行比较。在HalcyonTM平台上,42例重新计划。HSWBv2和HSWBv1模型的海马D100%平均剂量为5.75Gy和6.46Gy,分别(p<0.001)。HSWBv2模型还获得了7.49Gy的海马Dmean,在HSWBv1模型中vs8.10Gy(p<0.001)。HSWBv2模型海马D0.03CC为9.86Gy,与HSWBv1中的10.57Gy相反(p<0.001)。对于PTV_3000,来自HSWBv2模型的D98%和D2%分别为28.27Gy和31.81Gy,分别,与HSWBv1的28.08Gy(p=0.020)和32.66Gy(p<0.001)相比。在其他几个剂量测定质量改进中,PTV_3000V105%从35.35%(HSWBv1)显著降低至6.44%(HSWBv2)(p<0.001)。在5个额外的验证案例中,在TrueBeamTM上也观察到剂量测定的改善。与公布的数据相比,HSWBv2模型通过进一步减少海马剂量,同时改善靶覆盖率和剂量一致性/均匀性,实现了更高质量的海马回避全脑放射治疗治疗计划.HSWBv2模型是公开共享的。
    Whole-brain radiotherapy has been the standard palliative treatment for patients with brain metastases due to its effectiveness, availability, and ease of administration. Recent clinical trials have shown that limiting radiation dose to the hippocampus is associated with decreased cognitive toxicity. In this study, we updated an existing Knowledge Based Planning model to further reduce dose to the hippocampus and improve other dosimetric plan quality characteristics. Forty-two clinical cases were contoured according to guidelines. A new dosimetric scorecard was created as an objective measure for plan quality. The new Hippocampal Sparing Whole Brain Version 2 (HSWBv2) model adopted a complex recursive training process and was validated with five additional cases. HSWBv2 treatment plans were generated on the Varian HalcyonTM and TrueBeamTM systems and compared against plans generated from the existing (HSWBv1) model released in 2016. On the HalcyonTM platform, 42 cases were re-planned. Hippocampal D100% from HSWBv2 and HSWBv1 models had an average dose of 5.75 Gy and 6.46 Gy, respectively (p < 0.001). HSWBv2 model also achieved a hippocampal Dmean of 7.49 Gy, vs 8.10 Gy in HSWBv1 model (p < 0.001). Hippocampal D0.03CC from HSWBv2 model was 9.86 Gy, in contrast to 10.57 Gy in HSWBv1 (p < 0.001). For PTV_3000, D98% and D2% from HSWBv2 model were 28.27 Gy and 31.81 Gy, respectively, compared to 28.08 Gy (p = 0.020) and 32.66 Gy from HSWBv1 (p < 0.001). Among several other dosimetric quality improvements, there was a significant reduction in PTV_3000 V105% from 35.35% (HSWBv1) to 6.44% (HSWBv2) (p < 0.001). On 5 additional validation cases, dosimetric improvements were also observed on TrueBeamTM. In comparison to published data, the HSWBv2 model achieved higher quality hippocampal avoidance whole brain radiation therapy treatment plans through further reductions in hippocampal dose while improving target coverage and dose conformity/homogeneity. HSWBv2 model is shared publicly.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:评估Halcyon(2.0)调强放疗(IMRT)技术在直肠癌长疗程放疗中是否具有优势。方法:随机选择20个临床IMRT计划Halcyon(2.0)用于长疗程(25个分次2Gy)直肠癌放疗。根据这些计划的参数,重新设计了20个TrueBeam(带有Millennium120MLC)计划,分别。剂量测定指数,场复杂度参数,伽马通过率(GPR),并获得两组计划的交付时间作为计划质量的衡量标准,调制复杂度,交付的准确性,和交付效率。分析两组各参数之间的差异,P<0.05意味着有统计学意义。结果:在剂量学方面,两组间的关键剂量学参数无显著差异或临床差异.Halcyon(2.0)字段的监控单元比TrueBeam字段低26.39,而调制复杂度得分(MCS),平均孔径面积变异性(AAV),Halcyon(2.0)田的平均叶片序列变异性(LSV)为23.8%,20%,比TrueBeam字段大2.3%,分别。在3%/3mm和2%/2mm标准中,基于ArcCheck的GPR和基于门户剂量测定的GPR均未显示Halcyon(2.0)场和TrueBeam场之间的差异。Halcyon(2.0)场的GPR(2%/2mm)与MCS之间的Pearson相关系数为0.335,而TrueBeam场的Pearson相关系数为0.502。TrueBeam计划的平均总交付时间为195.55±22.86s,Halcyon(2.0)为124.25±10.42s(P<.001),大约减少了36%。结论:对于长疗程直肠癌放疗,Halcyon(2.0)IMRT计划在剂量学和交付精度方面与TrueBeam计划几乎相同。然而,较低的MU和现场调制复杂度,结合更高的交付效率,使Halcyon(2.0)成为直肠癌长期放射治疗的可行且可靠的平台。
    Objective: To evaluate if the Halcyon(2.0) Intensity Modulation Radiotherapy (IMRT) technique has an advantage in the long-course rectal cancer radiotherapy. Methods: A total of 20 clinical IMRT plans of Halcyon(2.0) for long-course (2Gy in 25 fractions) rectal cancer radiotherapy were randomly selected. Based on the parameters of these plans, 20 TrueBeam (with the Millennium 120 MLC) plans were redesigned, respectively. The dosimetry indexes, field complexity parameters, the Gamma Passing Rates (GPR), and the delivery time of the 2 groups of plans were obtained as measures of the plan quality, the modulation complexity, the delivery accuracy, and the delivery efficiency. The differences between the 2 groups of parameters were analyzed, with P < .05 means statistically significant. Results: In terms of dosimetry, there was no significant or clinical difference between the 2 groups in critical dosimetry parameters. The Monitor Unit of the Halcyon(2.0) fields is lower than the TrueBeam fields by 26.39, while the modulation complexity score (MCS), the mean aperture area variability (AAV), and the mean leaf sequence variability (LSV) of the Halcyon(2.0) fields were 23.8%, 20%, and 2.3% larger than those of the TrueBeam fields, respectively. Neither the ArcCheck-based GPRs nor the portal-dosimetry-based GPRs in both 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm criteria showed the difference between the Halcyon(2.0) fields and the TrueBeam fields. The Pearson correlation coefficient between GPR(2%/2 mm) and MCS of the Halcyon(2.0) fields was 0.335, while that of the TrueBeam fields was 0.502. The mean total delivery time of the TrueBeam plans was 195.55 ± 22.86 s, while that of Halcyon(2.0) was 124.25 ± 10.42 s (P < .001), which was reduced approximatively by 36%. Conclusion: For long-course rectal cancer radiotherapy, the Halcyon(2.0) IMRT plans behave almost the same in dosimetry and delivery accuracy as the TrueBeam plans. However, the lower MU and the field modulation complexity, combined with the higher delivery efficiency, make Halcyon(2.0) a feasible and reliable platform in long-course radiotherapy for the rectal cancer.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    RayStation中VarianTrueBeamSTxc臂治疗输送系统的6MV扁平梁模型,在一个机构开发和验证,在另一个机构实施和验证。唯一的参数值调整是适应第二机构的机器输出。验证遵循MPPG5。Procedures.recommendations,特别注意IMRT和VMAT交付。有了这个最小的调整,该模型通过了广泛的治疗计划的验证,测量装置,以及创建测试计划并执行测量的员工。这项工作证明了在混合供应商环境中使用同一治疗计划系统中具有匹配机器的单个模板模型的可能性。
    A 6 MV flattened beam model for a Varian TrueBeamSTx c-arm treatment delivery system in RayStation, developed and validated at one institution, was implemented and validated at another institution. The only parameter value adjustments were to accommodate machine output at the second institution. Validation followed MPPG 5.a. recommendations, with particular attention paid to IMRT and VMAT deliveries. With this minimal adjustment, the model passed validation across a broad spectrum of treatment plans, measurement devices, and staff who created the test plans and executed the measurements. This work demonstrates the possibility of using a single template model in the same treatment planning system with matched machines in a mixed vendor environment.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    OBJECTIVE: Monte Carlo (MC) is the reference computation method for medical physics. In radiotherapy, MC computations are necessary for some issues (such as assessing figures of merit, double checks, and dose conversions). A tool based on GATE is proposed to easily create full MC simulations of the Varian TrueBeam STx.
    METHODS: GAMMORA is a package that contains photon phase spaces as a pre-trained generative adversarial network (GAN) and the TrueBeam\'s full geometry. It allows users to easily create MC simulations for simple or complex radiotherapy plans such as VMAT. To validate the model, the characteristics of generated photons are first compared to those provided by Varian (IAEA format). Simulated data are also compared to measurements in water and heterogeneous media. Simulations of 8 SBRT plans are compared to measurements (in a phantom). Two examples of applications (a second check and interplay effect assessment) are presented.
    RESULTS: The simulated photons generated by the GAN have the same characteristics (energy, position, and direction) as the IAEA data. Computed dose distributions of simple cases (in water) and complex plans delivered in a phantom are compared to measurements, and the Gamma index (3%/3mm) was always superior to 98%. The feasibility of both clinical applications is shown.
    CONCLUSIONS: This model is now shared as a free and open-source tool that generates radiotherapy MC simulations. It has been validated and used for five years. Several applications can be envisaged for research and clinical purposes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号