SU‐E‐T‐115: Analysis of Patient Specific QA for VMAT by Disease Site and Planning‐Delivery System Using the ScandiDos Delta4 Phantom

• Published in: Medical physics (Lancaster) 2015-06, Vol.42 (6Part13), p.3358-3358
• Main Authors: Giaddui, T, Hardin, M, Keller, J, Kremmel, E, Fu, M, Peng, C, Doyle, L, Yu, Y, Xiao, Y, Harrison, A
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; ABDOMEN; CHEST; DISEASES; Dosimetry; Drug delivery; HEAD; LINEAR ACCELERATORS; LUNGS; Medical treatment planning; NECK; PATIENTS; PELVIS; PHANTOMS; Photothermal spectroscopy; PROSTATE; QUALITY ASSURANCE; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; SURGERY; VERIFICATION; VERTEBRAE
• ISSN: 0094-2405; 2473-4209
• DOI: 10.1118/1.4924476

Purpose: To evaluate patient specific quality assurance (PSQA) for the delivery of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) by disease site. To compare planning‐delivery system (PDS) PSQA pass rates in a dual vendor institution. Methods: PSQA is performed for VMAT plans using a ScandiDos Delta4 phantom. Verification plans are calculated using Varian Eclipse and Elekta Monaco treatment planning systems (TPS) for patients treated using Varian Truebeam and Elekta linear accelerators respectively. Individual arcs are delivered to the Delta4 phantoms and assessed using the gamma index pass criterion(3% Dose Deviation(DD%), 3mm Distance to Agreement(DTA),10% dose threshold and 90% gamma index). Results: A total of 287 VMAT plans and 680 arcs were analyzed. The passing rates for VMAT QA plans were 95% and 98% for head/neck and pelvis/prostate plans respectively, and 100% for chest/abdomen, spine, lung Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) and Stereotactic Radiosurgery(SRS) plans. Average gamma indices were: (99 ± 2) % for pelvis/prostate, chest/abdomen and lung SBRT plans, (97 ± 4) % for head and neck plans and (98 ± 3) % for spine plans. The average DD% and DTA pass rates ranged from 82% to 90% and 98% to 99% respectively for plans in different disease sites. Paired t‐test analysis (two tails) indicated no significant differences in the gamma indices between plans delivered using different PDS; the P values were: 0.08, 0.45, and 0.94 for lung SBRT, head/neck and pelvis/prostate plans respectively. The statistical power for comparing PDS in different disease sites with an alpha of 0.05 is 1. Conclusion: The Gamma indices based on 3% DD%, 3 mm DTA and 10% dose threshold for the VMAT QA plans in all disease sites were well above 90%, suggesting the possibility of using a more stringent PSQA criterion. No significant differences were observed in the QA of VMAT plans delivered using different PDS.