|
|
 |
Search published articles |
 |
|
Showing 3 results for Reproducibility
Dr. M.n. Anjum, W. Parker, I. Aldahlawi, R. Ruo, M. Afzal, Volume 9, Issue 3 (12-2011)
Abstract
Background: We have validated the monitor unit
calculations from a commercially available treatment
planning system (TPS) for three intensity modulated
radiotherapy (IMRT) planning techniques for
tangential breast irradiation by using ionization
chamber measurements. Materials and Methods:
Treatment plans were generated for forty-two breast
patients by a forward planned field in field technique,
electronic tissue compensation (ETC), and an inverse
planned sliding window technique. We also
performed a reproducibility of delivery and dose
linearity analysis for each technique. The treatments
were delivered to a phantom using a Varian CL21EX
linear accelerator. A 2571 0.6 cm3 Farmer type ionization
chamber and Farmer 2570/1 electrometer
from NE Technology was used to measure output of
the linear accelerator and the dose at predefined
point in the verification plan. Results: The agreement
between the measured and calculated dose was
-0.87% ± 0.54% for field in field technique, -0.74% ±
0.23% for electronic tissue compensators, and
-1.26% ± 0.48% for the inverse planning technique
and. In terms of reproducibility the mean deviation
was -1.10% ± 0.44% for the field in field technique,
-0.38% ± 0.42% for electronic tissue compensators,
-1.04% ± 0.42% for inverse planning technique. Dose
linearity experiments showed no significant variations
for clinical situations but a breakdown was observed
in relative dose for very low monitor units.
Conclusion: We have found that the monitor unit
calculations for all three planning techniques are
correct to the order of 1%, and that the plans can be
delivered in a reproducible and accurate manner.
Iran. J. Radiat. Res., 2011 9(3): 145-150
Ms. S. Xu, Z. Li, J. Hu, J. Zhang, Volume 20, Issue 2 (4-2022)
Abstract
Background: This study aims to perform quality control (QC) practices for setup reproducibility during radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) using statistical process control (SPC) tools. Materials and Methods: A total of 480 fractional images from 48 NPC patients with the first 10 fractions of the treatment were collected. In QC practices, setup errors were described using the histogram and normal curve, cumulative frequencies of absolute setup errors and 3D Euclidean Distance (Eu) were analyzed; the X ̅-S chart and process capability index (Cpk) with the variable Eu were utilized to identify whether the outlier occurred and to evaluate the QC process. Results: The translational setup error distributions were almost normal in Lateral, Longitudinal and Vertical directions and were narrower in Lateral and Vertical directions. Vertical translational errors and Eu with a larger magnitude sag appeared the most frequently. Between the couch sag and no sag, the Eu mean of 7 to 7 NPC patients with the same 3 patients was out of control and the standard deviation of Eu of nil to 2 patients was outlier based on the X ̅-S chart, and the Cpk was 1.05 and 1.36 respectively, when the specification limit of translational errors was ±3 mm. Conclusion: Daily imaging is necessary to increase setup reproducibility for NPC patients and more measures should be taken to facilitate quality assurance procedures. SPC is better applied to QC practices depending on the reliable data and the acceptable tolerance levels in further studies.
F. Goli-Ahmadabad, Ph.d., S.r. Mahdavi, A. Nikoofar, A. Zare-Sadeghi, H. Vazirinasab, S. Bagherzadeh, G. Esmaili, N. Hasani N. Hasani, Volume 23, Issue 1 (1-2025)
Abstract
Background: The DVH is the most used radiotherapy formulation. DVH plays a fundamental role in determining dose constraints and side effects. Volume also plays the main role in calculating DVH. In prostate treatment, there is no comprehensive consensus on determining the association between bladder volume (BV) and side effects. Our aim is to investigate the reproducibility of bladder DVH (DVHB). D50%BV (dose received by 50% of BV) is used to analysis DVHB. Materials and Methods: We contoured the bladder of 467 daily MVCT images of fifteen prostate cancer patients who underwent tomotherapy. Using R software 4.2.3, the correlation between the bladder center of mass (XCM, YCM, ZCM), BV with D50%BV were modeled by the mixed model. Two prediction models were presented for D50%BV, the first model was based on BV and (XCM, YCM, ZCM), the second model was based on BV. Results: Statistical analyses revealed that independent factors YCM, ZCM, and BV have a significant influence on the response variable D50%BV. According to mixed model, YCM has a positive correlation with D50%BV, while ZCM or BV has a negative correlation. XCM does not significantly affect D50%BV. Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) index indicated that first model has a higher goodness of fit than second one. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that bladder location also affects D50%BV, in addition to BV. It can be concluded that DVHB is not always repeatable as a scientific claim.
|
|