SU‐E‐T‐463

Utilizing the TG119 Assessment to Quantify Planning System Improvements

J. Gordon, S. Hashmi, Russell J Hamilton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To quantify the impact of modifications to an IMRT planning system using the TG1 19 assessment score as an indicator of improvement. Method and Materials: Evaluation of an IMRT system following the TG1 19 protocol was initially performed to establish baseline results. The TG1 19 evaluation set consisted of five IMRT test cases planned and delivered to a 30 cm × 30 cm × 15 cm solid water phantom. Per‐field measurements were collected using a diode array, and composite measurements were collected using film and an ionization chamber. Measurements were compared to calculation to determine TG1 19 confidence limits. The original plans were then modified to include table attenuation, previously omitted by the planning system. Without modifying the incident radiation fields, the plans were recalculated on the modified phantom, which includes a table model. The resultant calculations were compared to the original measurements, and new TG1 19 confidence limits were determined. Results: The baseline TG1 19 assessment resulted in confidence limits of 4.36%, 23.8% and 9.16% for diode array, composite film, and composite ion chamber measurements, respectively. The TG1 19 assessment after plan modification resulted in confidence limits of 4.36%, 19.5%, and 8.54%. The TG1 19 confidence limits were reduced by 4.30% and 0.62% in film and ion chamber, respectively, which is a relative improvement of 18.1% and 6.8%. Conclusions: Using a single set of measurements, modifications to the planning system via the addition of a table model resulted in quantifiable improvement in TG1 19 assessment results. In this system, the addition of a table model improved the agreement between calculation and measurement, as indicated by the TG1 19 confidence limit results. The improvement was only observed in confidence limits from composite comparisons using film and ion chamber, but not observed for per‐field comparisons using a diode array.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3595
Number of pages1
JournalMedical Physics
Volume38
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Ions
Radiation
Water

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

SU‐E‐T‐463 : Utilizing the TG119 Assessment to Quantify Planning System Improvements. / Gordon, J.; Hashmi, S.; Hamilton, Russell J.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 38, No. 6, 2011, p. 3595.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ddab727b5c344f8c9a285455f2a192ce,
title = "SU‐E‐T‐463: Utilizing the TG119 Assessment to Quantify Planning System Improvements",
abstract = "Purpose: To quantify the impact of modifications to an IMRT planning system using the TG1 19 assessment score as an indicator of improvement. Method and Materials: Evaluation of an IMRT system following the TG1 19 protocol was initially performed to establish baseline results. The TG1 19 evaluation set consisted of five IMRT test cases planned and delivered to a 30 cm × 30 cm × 15 cm solid water phantom. Per‐field measurements were collected using a diode array, and composite measurements were collected using film and an ionization chamber. Measurements were compared to calculation to determine TG1 19 confidence limits. The original plans were then modified to include table attenuation, previously omitted by the planning system. Without modifying the incident radiation fields, the plans were recalculated on the modified phantom, which includes a table model. The resultant calculations were compared to the original measurements, and new TG1 19 confidence limits were determined. Results: The baseline TG1 19 assessment resulted in confidence limits of 4.36{\%}, 23.8{\%} and 9.16{\%} for diode array, composite film, and composite ion chamber measurements, respectively. The TG1 19 assessment after plan modification resulted in confidence limits of 4.36{\%}, 19.5{\%}, and 8.54{\%}. The TG1 19 confidence limits were reduced by 4.30{\%} and 0.62{\%} in film and ion chamber, respectively, which is a relative improvement of 18.1{\%} and 6.8{\%}. Conclusions: Using a single set of measurements, modifications to the planning system via the addition of a table model resulted in quantifiable improvement in TG1 19 assessment results. In this system, the addition of a table model improved the agreement between calculation and measurement, as indicated by the TG1 19 confidence limit results. The improvement was only observed in confidence limits from composite comparisons using film and ion chamber, but not observed for per‐field comparisons using a diode array.",
author = "J. Gordon and S. Hashmi and Hamilton, {Russell J}",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1118/1.3612417",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "3595",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - SU‐E‐T‐463

T2 - Utilizing the TG119 Assessment to Quantify Planning System Improvements

AU - Gordon, J.

AU - Hashmi, S.

AU - Hamilton, Russell J

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Purpose: To quantify the impact of modifications to an IMRT planning system using the TG1 19 assessment score as an indicator of improvement. Method and Materials: Evaluation of an IMRT system following the TG1 19 protocol was initially performed to establish baseline results. The TG1 19 evaluation set consisted of five IMRT test cases planned and delivered to a 30 cm × 30 cm × 15 cm solid water phantom. Per‐field measurements were collected using a diode array, and composite measurements were collected using film and an ionization chamber. Measurements were compared to calculation to determine TG1 19 confidence limits. The original plans were then modified to include table attenuation, previously omitted by the planning system. Without modifying the incident radiation fields, the plans were recalculated on the modified phantom, which includes a table model. The resultant calculations were compared to the original measurements, and new TG1 19 confidence limits were determined. Results: The baseline TG1 19 assessment resulted in confidence limits of 4.36%, 23.8% and 9.16% for diode array, composite film, and composite ion chamber measurements, respectively. The TG1 19 assessment after plan modification resulted in confidence limits of 4.36%, 19.5%, and 8.54%. The TG1 19 confidence limits were reduced by 4.30% and 0.62% in film and ion chamber, respectively, which is a relative improvement of 18.1% and 6.8%. Conclusions: Using a single set of measurements, modifications to the planning system via the addition of a table model resulted in quantifiable improvement in TG1 19 assessment results. In this system, the addition of a table model improved the agreement between calculation and measurement, as indicated by the TG1 19 confidence limit results. The improvement was only observed in confidence limits from composite comparisons using film and ion chamber, but not observed for per‐field comparisons using a diode array.

AB - Purpose: To quantify the impact of modifications to an IMRT planning system using the TG1 19 assessment score as an indicator of improvement. Method and Materials: Evaluation of an IMRT system following the TG1 19 protocol was initially performed to establish baseline results. The TG1 19 evaluation set consisted of five IMRT test cases planned and delivered to a 30 cm × 30 cm × 15 cm solid water phantom. Per‐field measurements were collected using a diode array, and composite measurements were collected using film and an ionization chamber. Measurements were compared to calculation to determine TG1 19 confidence limits. The original plans were then modified to include table attenuation, previously omitted by the planning system. Without modifying the incident radiation fields, the plans were recalculated on the modified phantom, which includes a table model. The resultant calculations were compared to the original measurements, and new TG1 19 confidence limits were determined. Results: The baseline TG1 19 assessment resulted in confidence limits of 4.36%, 23.8% and 9.16% for diode array, composite film, and composite ion chamber measurements, respectively. The TG1 19 assessment after plan modification resulted in confidence limits of 4.36%, 19.5%, and 8.54%. The TG1 19 confidence limits were reduced by 4.30% and 0.62% in film and ion chamber, respectively, which is a relative improvement of 18.1% and 6.8%. Conclusions: Using a single set of measurements, modifications to the planning system via the addition of a table model resulted in quantifiable improvement in TG1 19 assessment results. In this system, the addition of a table model improved the agreement between calculation and measurement, as indicated by the TG1 19 confidence limit results. The improvement was only observed in confidence limits from composite comparisons using film and ion chamber, but not observed for per‐field comparisons using a diode array.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024784554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024784554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.3612417

DO - 10.1118/1.3612417

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - 3595

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 6

ER -