Engineering topics

Giaddui, T

Publications and source records attributed to Giaddui, T.

8 records

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-351: Establishing a Workflow for IMRT Pre-Treatment Reviews for NRG-GY006 Clinical Trial

Purpose: To establish a workflow for NRG-GY006 IMRT pre-treatment reviews, incorporating advanced radiotherapy technologies being evaluated as part of the clinical trial. Methods: Pre-Treatment reviews are required for every IMRT case as part of NRG-GY006 (a randomized phase II trial of radiation therapy and cisplatin alone or in combination with intravenous triapine in women with newly diagnosed bulky stage I B2, stage II, IIIB, or IVA cancer of the uterine cervix or stage II-IVA vaginal cancer. The pretreatment review process includes structures review and generating an active bone marrow(ABM)- to be used as an avoidance structure during IMRT optimization- and evaluating initial IMRT plan quality using knowledgeengineering based planning (KBP). Institutions will initially submit their simulation CT scan, structures file and PET/CT to IROC QA center for generating ABM. The ABM will be returned to the institution for use in planning. Institutions will then submit an initial IMRT plan for review and will receive information back following implementation of a KBP algorithm, for use in re-optimization, before submitting the final IMRT used for treatment. Results: ABM structure is generated using MIM vista software (Version 6.5, MIM corporation, Inc.). Here, the planning CT and the diagnostic PET/CT are fused and a sub threshold structure is auto segmented above the mean value of the SUV of the bone marrow. The generated ABM were compared with those generated with other software system (e.g. Velocity, Varian) and Dice coefficient (reflects the overlap of structures) ranged between 80 – 90% was achieved. A KBP model was built in Varian Eclipse TPS using the RapidPlan KBP software to perform plan quality assurance. Conclusion: The workflow for IMRT pretreatment reviews has been established. It represents a major improvement of NRG Oncology clinical trial quality assurance and incorporates the latest radiotherapy technologies as part of NCI clinical trials. This project was supported by grants U24CA180803 (IROC), UG1CA189867 (NCORP), U10CA180868 (NRG Oncology Operations), U10CA180822 (NRG Oncology SDMC) from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and PA CURE grant.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-386: Analysis of Three QA Methods for Predicting Dose Deviation Pass Percentage for Lung SBRT VMAT Plans

Purpose: To investigate the significance of using pinpoint ionization chambers (IC) and RadCalc (RC) in determining the quality of lung SBRT VMAT plans with low dose deviation pass percentage (DDPP) as reported by ScandiDos Delta4 (D4). To quantify the relationship between DDPP and point dose deviations determined by IC (ICDD), RadCalc (RCDD), and median dose deviation reported by D4 (D4DD). Methods: Point dose deviations and D4 DDPP were compiled for 45 SBRT VMAT plans. Eighteen patients were treated on Varian Truebeam linear accelerators (linacs); the remaining 27 were treated on Elekta Synergy linacs with Agility collimators. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to determine if there were any statistically significant differences between D4DD, ICDD, and RCDD. Tukey’s test was used to determine which pair of means was statistically different from each other. Multiple regression analysis was performed to determine if D4DD, ICDD, or RCDD are statistically significant predictors of DDPP. Results: Median DDPP, D4DD, ICDD, and RCDD were 80.5% (47.6%–99.2%), −0.3% (−2.0%–1.6%), 0.2% (−7.5%–6.3%), and 2.9% (−4.0%–19.7%), respectively. The ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference between D4DD, ICDD, and RCDD for a 95% confidence interval (p < 0.001). Tukey’s test revealed a statistically significant difference between two pairs of groups, RCDD-D4DD and RCDD-ICDD (p < 0.001), but no difference between ICDD-D4DD (p = 0.485). Multiple regression analysis revealed that ICDD (p = 0.04) and D4DD (p = 0.03) are statistically significant predictors of DDPP with an adjusted r{sup 2} of 0.115. Conclusion: This study shows ICDD predicts trends in D4 DDPP; however this trend is highly variable as shown by our low r{sup 2}. This work suggests that ICDD can be used as a method to verify DDPP in delivery of lung SBRT VMAT plans. RCDD may not validate low DDPP discovered in D4 QA for small field SBRT treatments.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-653: Radiation Exposure from Cs-131 Permanent Seed Implants

Purpose: Permanent seed implants have traditionally been used to treat prostate, lung and head or neck cancers using I-125 and Pd-103. Cs-131, which has higher dose rate is being used to treat brain, head and/or neck cancers in our clinic, therefore, we chose to monitor the dose received by surgeons during the extensive procedure. The aims of this work are to assess the level of radiation exposure to surgeons and the instantaneous exposure at bedside and 1 m from patients. Methods: Ten patients received Cs-131 implants for recurrent brain,head and/or neck cancer; the median implanted activity, number of implanted seeds and prescription dose at 0.5 cm from the perpendicular plane of the implant were: 54.3 mCi (14.52 – 77); 19 (4 – 24) and 60 Gy (range 42 – 60) respectively. Radiation exposure was recorded at bedside and 1 m from the patient using Victoreen ion chamber (Fluke Biomedical, Cleveland, OH). Exposure to surgeons was measured using TLD (Mirion Technologies (GDS), Inc., USA). Results: The median equivalent dose rate at 1 m and bedside immediately following implantation were 1.49×10-2 mSv/h (8.77×10-3–2.63×10-2) and 7.76×10-2 mSv/h (3.1×10-2– 1.53×10-1) respectively. Median equivalent dose to surgeons’ hands was 0.60 mSv (0.33 – 1.48) and no doses were detected for whole-body. Surgical reconstruction for one patient was performed 71 days post-implant and resulted in zero exposure to surgeons. Conclusion: The recorded exposure rates were low when compared with the literature. Post procedure surveys at bed site and 1 m indicated that all patients were within safe limits for discharge (< 0.05 mSv/h at 1 m). However, as a precautionary measure, patients were advised to avoid direct contact with children and pregnant women within four weeks of the implant and stay at least at 3 ft from other people. Surgeons doses were well within occupational dose limits.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-J-134: Optimizing Technical Parameters for Using Atlas Based Automatic Segmentation for Evaluation of Contour Accuracy Experience with Cardiac Structures From NRG Oncology/RTOG 0617

Purpose: Accurate contour delineation is crucial for radiotherapy. Atlas based automatic segmentation tools can be used to increase the efficiency of contour accuracy evaluation. This study aims to optimize technical parameters utilized in the tool by exploring the impact of library size and atlas number on the accuracy of cardiac contour evaluation. Methods: Patient CT DICOMs from RTOG 0617 were used for this study. Five experienced physicians delineated the cardiac structures including pericardium, atria and ventricles following an atlas guideline. The consistency of cardiac structured delineation using the atlas guideline was verified by a study with four observers and seventeen patients. The CT and cardiac structure DICOM files were then used for the ABAS technique.To study the impact of library size (LS) and atlas number (AN) on automatic contour accuracy, automatic contours were generated with varied technique parameters for five randomly selected patients. Three LS (20, 60, and 100) were studied using commercially available software. The AN was four, recommended by the manufacturer. Using the manual contour as the gold standard, Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) was calculated between the manual and automatic contours. Five-patient averaged DSCs were calculated for comparison for each cardiac structure.In order to study the impact of AN, the LS was set 100, and AN was tested from one to five. The five-patient averaged DSCs were also calculated for each cardiac structure. Results: DSC values are highest when LS is 100 and AN is four. The DSC is 0.90±0.02 for pericardium, 0.75±0.06 for atria, and 0.86±0.02 for ventricles. Conclusion: By comparing DSC values, the combination AN=4 and LS=100 gives the best performance. This project was supported by NCI grants U24CA12014, U24CA180803, U10CA180868, U10CA180822, PA CURE grant and Bristol-Myers Squibb and Eli Lilly.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

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

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.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-116: Analysis of Patient Specific VMAT QA Passing Rates with Delta4 for Matched Machines

Purpose: To test whether unified vendor specified beam conformance for matched machines implies volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy(VMAT) delivery consistency. Methods: Twenty-two identical patient QA plans, eleven 6MV and eleven 15MV, were delivered to the Delta{sup 4}(Scandidos, Uppsala, Sweden) on two Varian TrueBEAM matched machines. Sixteen patient QA plans, nine 6 MV and seven 10 MV, were delivered to Delta{sup 4} on two Elekta Agility matched machines. The percent dose deviation(%DDev), distance-to-agreement(DTA), and the gamma analysis(γ) were collected for all plans and the differences in measurements were tabulated between matched machines. A paired t-test analysis of the data with an alpha of 0.05 determines statistical significance. Power(P) was calculated to detect a difference of 5%; all data except Elekta %DDev sets were strong with above a 0.85 power. Results: The average differences for Varian machines (%DDev, DTA, and γ) are 6.4%, 1.6% and 2.7% for 6MV, respectively, and 8.0%, 0.6%, and 2.5% for 15MV. The average differences for matched Elekta machines (%DDev, DTA, and γ) are 10.2%, 0.6% and 0.9% for 6 MV, respectively, and 7.0%, 1.9%, and 2.8% for 10MV.A paired t-test shows for Varian the %DDev difference is significant for 6MV and 15MV(p-value6MV=0.019, P6MV=0.96; p-value15MV=0.0003, P15MV=0.86). Differences in DTA are insignificant for both 6MV and 15MV(p-value6MV=0.063, P6MV=1; p-value15MV=0.907, P15MV=1). Varian differences in gamma are significant for both energies(p-value6MV=0.025, P6MV=0.99; p-value15MV=0.013, P15MV=1). A paired t-test shows for Elekta the difference in %DDev is significant for 6MV but not 10MV(p-value6MV=0.00065, P6MV=0.68; p-value10MV=0.262, P10MV=0.39). Differences in DTA are statistically insignificant(p-value6MV=0.803, P6MV = 1; p-value10MV=0.269, P10MV=1). Elekta differences in gamma are significant for 10MV only(p-value6MV=0.094, P6MV=1; p-value10MV=0.011, P10MV=1). Conclusion: These results show vendor specified beam conformance across machines does not ensure equivalent patient specific QA pass rates. Gamma differences are statistically significant in three of the four comparisons for two pairs of vendor matched machines.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-441: Gamma Passing Rates for IMRT QA and VMAT QA

Purpose: This study compares gamma passing rates for a cohort of similar intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) quality assurance (QA) plans to determine the equivalence of the patient specific QA plan delivery. The passing criterion is 90% gamma index with 3% dose difference (DD), 3mm distance-to-agreement (DTA) and a dose threshold of 10%. Methods: Gamma passing results of previously treated IMRT QA plans, delivered to Sun Nuclear MapCheck phantom, and VMAT QA plans, delivered to ScandiDos Delta4 phantom, are organized by anatomical site and treatment machine. Both Varian and Elekta machines are included. Pairs of IMRT and VMAT plans are matched based on site, machine, and PTV volume to ensure similar plan cohorts. A two-tailed t-test analysis of the data with an alpha of 0.05 determines if there exists a statistically significant difference. Power was calculated to detect a difference of 4%; all data sets were strong with above a 0.8 power. Results: The first data set consisting of 20 matched pairs of prostate plans was statistically insignificant (p-value=0.90, Power=0.99). The 14 matched pairs set of head and neck plans has a statistically significant Result (p-value=0.028, Power=0.88). The head and neck IMRT gamma indexes have a mean of 93.1% and range of 82%-100% while the VMAT gamma indexes have a mean of 96.7% and range of 92%-100%. The two combined data sets of matched plans had a statistically insignificant Result (p-value=0.073, Power=0.99). Conclusion: Overall, IMRT and VMAT have equivalent passing rates when comparing the gamma analysis using a passing criterion of 3% DD and 3mm DTA. When separated by site, prostate IMRT and VMAT plans have equivalent passing rates while head and neck plans have a statistically significant variation of passing rates. The passing rates for the two modalities are independent of delivery machine for matched PTV target volumes.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-BRA-07: Quantitative Evaluation of 2D-2D and 2D-3D Image Guided Radiation Therapy for Clinical Trial Credentialing, NRG Oncology/RTOG

Purpose: 2D-2D kV image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) credentialing evaluation for clinical trial qualification was historically qualitative through submitting screen captures of the fusion process. However, as quantitative DICOM 2D-2D and 2D-3D image registration tools are implemented in clinical practice for better precision, especially in centers that treat patients with protons, better IGRT credentialing techniques are needed. The aim of this work is to establish methodologies for quantitatively reviewing IGRT submissions based on DICOM 2D-2D and 2D-3D image registration and to test the methodologies in reviewing 2D-2D and 2D-3D IGRT submissions for RTOG/NRG Oncology clinical trials qualifications. Methods: DICOM 2D-2D and 2D-3D automated and manual image registration have been tested using the Harmony tool in MIM software. 2D kV orthogonal portal images are fused with the reference digital reconstructed radiographs (DRR) in the 2D-2D registration while the 2D portal images are fused with DICOM planning CT image in the 2D-3D registration. The Harmony tool allows alignment of the two images used in the registration process and also calculates the required shifts. Shifts calculated using MIM are compared with those submitted by institutions for IGRT credentialing. Reported shifts are considered to be acceptable if differences are less than 3mm. Results: Several tests have been performed on the 2D-2D and 2D-3D registration. The results indicated good agreement between submitted and calculated shifts. A workflow for reviewing these IGRT submissions has been developed and will eventually be used to review IGRT submissions. Conclusion: The IROC Philadelphia RTQA center has developed and tested a new workflow for reviewing DICOM 2D-2D and 2D-3D IGRT credentialing submissions made by different cancer clinical centers, especially proton centers. NRG Center for Innovation in Radiation Oncology (CIRO) and IROC RTQA center continue their collaborative efforts to enhance quality assurance services and to be consistently adaptive to the new advances in radiation therapy. This project was supported by NCI grants U10CA180868, U10CA180822, U24CA180803, U24CA12014 and PA CURE Grant.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗