Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Oncotarget. 2017 Jan 17;8(3):5449-5459. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.12279.

Correlation analysis between 2D and quasi-3D gamma evaluations for both intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Kim JI1,2,3, Choi CH1,2,3,4, Wu HG1,2,3,5, Kim JH1,2,3, Kim K6, Park JM1,2,3,4.

Author information

1
Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
2
Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
3
Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
4
Center for Convergence Research on Robotics, Advanced Institutes of Convergence Technology, Suwon, Republic of Korea.
5
Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
6
Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Abstract

The aim of this work was to investigate correlations between 2D and quasi-3D gamma passing rates. A total of 20 patients (10 prostate cases and 10 head and neck cases, H&N) were retrospectively selected. For each patient, both intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated. For each plan, 2D gamma evaluation with radiochromic films and quasi-3D gamma evaluation with fluence measurements were performed with both 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm criteria. Gamma passing rates were grouped together according to delivery techniques and treatment sites. Statistical analyses were performed to examine the correlation between 2D and quasi-3D gamma evaluations. Statistically significant difference was observed between delivery techniques only in the quasi-3D gamma passing rates with 2%/2 mm. Statistically significant differences were observed between treatment sites in the 2D gamma passing rates (differences of less than 8%). No statistically significant correlations were observed between 2D and quasi-3D gamma passing rates except the VMAT group and the group including both IMRT and VMAT with 3%/3 mm (r = 0.564 with p = 0.012 for theVMAT group and r = 0.372 with p = 0.020 for the group including both IMRT and VMAT), however, those were not strong. No strong correlations were observed between 2D and quasi-3D gamma evaluations.

KEYWORDS:

2D gamma evaluation; intensity-modulated radiation therapy; pre-treatment patient-specific quality assurance; quasi-3D gamma evaluation; volumetric modulated arc therapy

PMID:
27690300
PMCID:
PMC5354922
DOI:
10.18632/oncotarget.12279
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Impact Journals, LLC Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center