Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “POSITION ERROR”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-195: Gantry Angle Dependency of MLC Leaf Position Error

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the gantry angle dependency of the multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf position error. Methods: An automatic MLC quality assurance system (AutoMLCQA) was developed to evaluate the gantry angle dependency of the MLC leaf position error using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID). To eliminate the EPID position error due to gantry rotation, we designed a reference maker (RM) that could be inserted into the wedge mount. After setting up the EPID, a reference image was taken of the RM using an open field. Next, an EPID-based picket-fence test (PFT) was performed without the RM. These procedures were repeated at every 45° intervals of the gantry angle. A total of eight reference images and PFT image sets were analyzed using in-house software. The average MLC leaf position error was calculated at five pickets (-10, -5, 0, 5, and 10 cm) in accordance with general PFT guidelines using in-house software. This test was carried out for four linear accelerators. Results: The average MLC leaf position errors were within the set criterion of <1 mm (actual errors ranged from -0.7 to 0.8 mm) for all gantry angles, but significant gantry angle dependency was observed in all machines. The error was smaller at a gantry angle of 0° but increased toward the positive direction with gantry angle increments in the clockwise direction. The error reached a maximum value at a gantry angle of 90° and then gradually decreased until 180°. In the counter-clockwise rotation of the gantry, the same pattern of error was observed but the error increased in the negative direction. Conclusion: The AutoMLCQA system was useful to evaluate the MLC leaf position error for various gantry angles without the EPID position error. The Gantry angle dependency should be considered during MLC leaf position error analysis.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Residual position errors of lymph node surrogates in breast cancer adjuvant radiotherapy: Comparison of two arm fixation devices and the effect of arm position correction

Residual position errors of the lymph node (LN) surrogates and humeral head (HH) were determined for 2 different arm fixation devices in radiotherapy (RT) of breast cancer: a standard wrist-hold (WH) and a house-made rod-hold (RH). The effect of arm position correction (APC) based on setup images was also investigated. A total of 113 consecutive patients with early-stage breast cancer with LN irradiation were retrospectively analyzed (53 and 60 using the WH and RH, respectively). Residual position errors of the LN surrogates (Th1-2 and clavicle) and the HH were investigated to compare the 2 fixation devices. The position errors and setup margins were determined before and after the APC to investigate the efficacy of the APC in the treatment situation. A threshold of 5 mm was used for the residual errors of the clavicle and Th1-2 to perform the APC, and a threshold of 7 mm was used for the HH. The setup margins were calculated with the van Herk formula. Irradiated volumes of the HH were determined from RT treatment plans. With the WH and the RH, setup margins up to 8.1 and 6.7 mm should be used for the LN surrogates, and margins up to 4.6 and 3.6 mm should be used to spare the HH, respectively, without the APC. After the APC, the margins of the LN surrogates were equal to or less than 7.5/6.0 mm with the WH/RH, but margins up to 4.2/2.9 mm were required for the HH. The APC was needed at least once with both the devices for approximately 60% of the patients. With the RH, irradiated volume of the HH was approximately 2 times more than with the WH, without any dose constraints. Use of the RH together with the APC resulted in minimal residual position errors and setup margins for all the investigated bony landmarks. Based on the obtained results, we prefer the house-made RH. However, more attention should be given to minimize the irradiation of the HH with the RH than with the WH.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Bolus-dependent dosimetric effect of positioning errors for tangential scalp radiotherapy with helical tomotherapy

The dosimetric effect of errors in patient position is studied on-phantom as a function of simulated bolus thickness to assess the need for bolus utilization in scalp radiotherapy with tomotherapy. A treatment plan is generated on a cylindrical phantom, mimicking a radiotherapy technique for the scalp utilizing primarily tangential beamlets. A planning target volume with embedded scalplike clinical target volumes (CTVs) is planned to a uniform dose of 200 cGy. Translational errors in phantom position are introduced in 1-mm increments and dose is recomputed from the original sinogram. For each error the maximum dose, minimum dose, clinical target dose homogeneity index (HI), and dose-volume histogram (DVH) are presented for simulated bolus thicknesses from 0 to 10 mm. Baseline HI values for all bolus thicknesses were in the 5.5 to 7.0 range, increasing to a maximum of 18.0 to 30.5 for the largest positioning errors when 0 to 2 mm of bolus is used. Utilizing 5 mm of bolus resulted in a maximum HI value of 9.5 for the largest positioning errors. Using 0 to 2 mm of bolus resulted in minimum and maximum dose values of 85% to 94% and 118% to 125% of the prescription dose, respectively. When using 5 mm of bolus these values were 98.5% and 109.5%. DVHs showed minimal changes in CTV dose coverage when using 5 mm of bolus, even for the largest positioning errors. CTV dose homogeneity becomes increasingly sensitive to errors in patient position as bolus thickness decreases when treating the scalp with primarily tangential beamlets. Performing a radial expansion of the scalp CTV into 5 mm of bolus material minimizes dosimetric sensitivity to errors in patient position as large as 5 mm and is therefore recommended.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-J-94: Positioning Errors Resulting From Using Bony Anatomy Alignment for Treating SBRT Lung Tumor

Purpose: To quantify patient setups errors based on bony anatomy registration rather than 3D tumor alignment for SBRT lung treatments. Method: A retrospective study was performed for patients treated with lung SBRT and imaged with kV cone beam computed tomography (kV-CBCT) image-guidance. Daily CBCT images were registered to treatment planning CTs based on bony anatomy alignment and then inter-fraction tumor movement was evaluated by comparing shift in the tumor center in the medial-lateral, anterior-posterior, and superior-inferior directions. The PTV V100% was evaluated for each patient based on the average daily tumor displacement to assess the impact of the positioning error on the target coverage when the registrations were based on bony anatomy. Of the 35 patients studied, 15 were free-breathing treatments, 10 used abdominal compression with a stereotactic body frame, and the remaining 10 were performed with BodyFIX vacuum bags. Results: For free-breathing treatments, the range of tumor displacement error is between 1–6 mm in the medial-lateral, 1–13 mm in the anterior-posterior, and 1–7 mm in the superior-inferior directions. These positioning errors lead to 6–22% underdose coverage for PTV - V100% . Patients treated with abdominal compression immobilization showed positional errors of 0–4mm mediallaterally, 0–3mm anterior-posteriorly, and 0–2 mm inferior-superiorly with PTV - V100% underdose ranging between 6–17%. For patients immobilized with the vacuum bags, the positional errors were found to be 0–1 mm medial-laterally, 0–1mm anterior-posteriorly, and 0–2 mm inferior-superiorly with PTV - V100% under dose ranging between 5–6% only. Conclusion: It is necessary to align the tumor target by using 3D image guidance to ensure adequate tumor coverage before performing SBRT lung treatments. The BodyFIX vacuum bag immobilization method has the least positioning errors among the three methods studied when bony anatomy is used for registration.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

Implication of spot position error on plan quality and patient safety in pencil-beam-scanning proton therapy

Purpose: To quantitatively and systematically assess dosimetric effects induced by spot positioning error as a function of spot spacing (SS) on intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plan quality and to facilitate evaluation of safety tolerance limits on spot position. Methods: Spot position errors (PE) ranging from 1 to 2 mm were simulated. Simple plans were created on a water phantom, and IMPT plans were calculated on two pediatric patients with a brain tumor of 28 and 3 cc, respectively, using a commercial planning system. For the phantom, a uniform dose was delivered to targets located at different depths from 10 to 20 cm with various field sizes from 2{sup 2} to 15{sup 2} cm{sup 2}. Two nominal spot sizes, 4.0 and 6.6 mm of 1 σ in water at isocenter, were used for treatment planning. The SS ranged from 0.5 σ to 1.5 σ, which is 2–6 mm for the small spot size and 3.3–9.9 mm for the large spot size. Various perturbation scenarios of a single spot error and systematic and random multiple spot errors were studied. To quantify the dosimetric effects, percent dose error (PDE) depth profiles and the value of percent dose error at the maximum dose difference (PDE [ΔDmax]) were used for evaluation. Results: A pair of hot and cold spots was created per spot shift. PDE[ΔDmax] is found to be a complex function of PE, SS, spot size, depth, and global spot distribution that can be well defined in simple models. For volumetric targets, the PDE [ΔDmax] is not noticeably affected by the change of field size or target volume within the studied ranges. In general, reducing SS decreased the dose error. For the facility studied, given a single spot error with a PE of 1.2 mm and for both spot sizes, a SS of 1σ resulted in a 2% maximum dose error; a SS larger than 1.25 σ substantially increased the dose error and its sensitivity to PE. A similar trend was observed in multiple spot errors (both systematic and random errors). Systematic PE can lead to noticeable hot spots along the field edges, which may be near critical structures. However, random PE showed minimal dose error. Conclusions: Dose error dependence for PE was quantitatively and systematically characterized and an analytic tool was built to simulate systematic and random errors for patient-specific IMPT. This information facilitates the determination of facility specific spot position error thresholds.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-261: Development of An Automated System to Detect Patient Identification and Positioning Errors Prior to Radiotherapy Treatment

Purpose: To develop a system that can automatically detect patient identification and positioning errors using 3D computed tomography (CT) setup images and kilovoltage CT (kVCT) planning images. Methods: Planning kVCT images were collected for head-and-neck (H&N), pelvis, and spine treatments with corresponding 3D cone-beam CT (CBCT) and megavoltage CT (MVCT) setup images from TrueBeam and TomoTherapy units, respectively. Patient identification errors were simulated by registering setup and planning images from different patients. Positioning errors were simulated by misaligning the setup image by 1cm to 5cm in the six anatomical directions for H&N and pelvis patients. Misalignments for spine treatments were simulated by registering the setup image to adjacent vertebral bodies on the planning kVCT. A body contour of the setup image was used as an initial mask for image comparison. Images were pre-processed by image filtering and air voxel thresholding, and image pairs were assessed using commonly-used image similarity metrics as well as custom -designed metrics. A linear discriminant analysis classifier was trained and tested on the datasets, and misclassification error (MCE), sensitivity, and specificity estimates were generated using 10-fold cross validation. Results: Our workflow produced MCE estimates of 0.7%, 1.7%, and 0% for H&N, pelvis, and spine TomoTherapy images, respectively. Sensitivities and specificities ranged from 98.0% to 100%. MCEs of 3.5%, 2.3%, and 2.1% were obtained for TrueBeam images of the above sites, respectively, with sensitivity and specificity estimates between 96.2% and 98.4%. MCEs for 1cm H&N/pelvis misalignments were 1.3/5.1% and 9.1/8.6% for TomoTherapy and TrueBeam images, respectively. 2cm MCE estimates were 0.4%/1.6% and 3.1/3.2%, respectively. Vertebral misalignment MCEs were 4.8% and 4.9% for TomoTherapy and TrueBeam images, respectively. Conclusion: Patient identification and gross misalignment errors can be robustly and automatically detected using 3D setup images of two imaging modalities across three commonly-treated anatomical sites.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-132: Dosimetric Impact of Positioning Errors in Hypo-Fractionated Cranial Radiation Therapy Using Frameless Stereotactic BrainLAB System

Purpose: To determine dosimetric impact of positioning errors in the stereotactic hypo-fractionated treatment of intracranial lesions using 3Dtransaltional and 3D-rotational corrections (6D) frameless BrainLAB ExacTrac X-Ray system. Methods: 20 cranial lesions, treated in 3 or 5 fractions, were selected. An infrared (IR) optical positioning system was employed for initial patient setup followed by stereoscopic kV X-ray radiographs for position verification. 6D-translational and rotational shifts were determined to correct patient position. If these shifts were above tolerance (0.7 mm translational and 1° rotational), corrections were applied and another set of X-rays was taken to verify patient position. Dosimetric impact (D95, Dmin, Dmax, and Dmean of planning target volume (PTV) compared to original plans) of positioning errors for initial IR setup (XC: Xray Correction) and post-correction (XV: X-ray Verification) was determined in a treatment planning system using a method proposed by Yue et al. (Med. Phys. 33, 21-31 (2006)) with 3D-translational errors only and 6D-translational and rotational errors. Results: Absolute mean translational errors (±standard deviation) for total 92 fractions (XC/XV) were 0.79±0.88/0.19±0.15 mm (lateral), 1.66±1.71/0.18 ±0.16 mm (longitudinal), 1.95±1.18/0.15±0.14 mm (vertical) and rotational errors were 0.61±0.47/0.17±0.15° (pitch), 0.55±0.49/0.16±0.24° (roll), and 0.68±0.73/0.16±0.15° (yaw). The average changes (loss of coverage) in D95, Dmin, Dmax, and Dmean were 4.5±7.3/0.1±0.2%, 17.8±22.5/1.1±2.5%, 0.4±1.4/0.1±0.3%, and 0.9±1.7/0.0±0.1% using 6Dshifts and 3.1±5.5/0.0±0.1%, 14.2±20.3/0.8±1.7%, 0.0±1.2/0.1±0.3%, and 0.7±1.4/0.0±0.1% using 3D-translational shifts only. The setup corrections (XC-XV) improved the PTV coverage by 4.4±7.3% (D95) and 16.7±23.5% (Dmin) using 6D adjustment. Strong correlations were observed between translation errors and deviations in dose coverage for XC. Conclusion: The initial BrainLAB IR system based on rigidity of the mask-frame setup is not sufficient for accurate stereotactic positioning; however, with X-ray imageguidance sub-millimeter accuracy is achieved with negligible deviations in dose coverage. The angular corrections (mean angle summation=1.84°) are important and cause considerable deviations in dose coverage.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

SU-G-JeP3-02: Comparison of Magnitude and Frequency of Patient Positioning Errors in Breast Irradiation Using AlignRT 3D Optical Surface Imaging and Skin Mark Techniques

Purpose: To evaluate clinical usefulness of AlignRT (Vision RT Ltd., London, UK) in reducing patient positioning errors in breast irradiation. Methods: 60 patients undergoing whole breast irradiation were selected for this study. Patients were treated to the left or right breast lying on Qfix Access breast board (Qfix, Avondale, PA) in supine position for 28 fractions using tangential fields. 30 patients were aligned using AlignRT by aligning a breast surface region of interest (ROI) to the same area from a reference surface image extracted from planning CT. When the patient’s surface image deviated from the reference by more than 3mm on one or more translational and rotational directions, a new reference was acquired using AlignRT in-room cameras. The other 30 patients were aligned to the skin marks with room lasers. On-Board MV portal images of medial field were taken daily and matched to the DRRs. The magnitude and frequency of positioning errors were determined from measured translational shifts. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to evaluate statistical differences of positional accuracy and precision between AlignRT and non-AlignRT patients. Results: The percentage of port images with no shift required was 46.5% and 27.0% in vertical, 49.8% and 25.8% in longitudinal, 47.6% and 28.5% in lateral for AlignRT and non-AlignRT patients, respectively. The percentage of port images requiring more than 3mm shifts was 18.1% and 35.1% in vertical, 28.6% and 50.8% in longitudinal, 11.3% and 24.2% in lateral for AlignRT and non-AlignRT patients, respectively. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test showed that there were significant differences between the frequency distributions of AlignRT and non-AlignRT in vertical, longitudinal, and lateral shifts. Conclusion: As confirmed by port images, AlignRT-assisted patient positioning can significantly reduce the frequency and magnitude of patient setup errors in breast irradiation compared to the use of lasers and skin marks.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-P-21: Impact of MLC Position Errors On Simultaneous Integrated Boost Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

Purpose: To investigate the impact of MLC position errors on simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SIB-IMRT) for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Methods: To compare the dosimetric differences between the simulated plans and the clinical plans, ten patients with locally advanced NPC treated with SIB-IMRT were enrolled in this study. All plans were calculated with an inverse planning system (Pinnacle3, Philips Medical System{sub )}. Random errors −2mm to 2mm{sub )},shift errors{sub (} 2mm,1mm and 0.5mm) and systematic extension/ contraction errors (±2mm, ±1mm and ±0.5mm) of the MLC leaf position were introduced respectively into the original plans to create the simulated plans. Dosimetry factors were compared between the original and the simulated plans. Results: The dosimetric impact of the random and system shift errors of MLC position was insignificant within 2mm, the maximum changes in D95% of PGTV,PTV1,PTV2 were-0.92±0.51%,1.00±0.24% and 0.62±0.17%, the maximum changes in the D0.1cc of spinal cord and brainstem were 1.90±2.80% and −1.78±1.42%, the maximum changes in the Dmean of parotids were1.36±1.23% and −2.25±2.04%.However,the impact of MLC extension or contraction errors was found significant. For 2mm leaf extension errors, the average changes in D95% of PGTV,PTV1,PTV2 were 4.31±0.67%,4.29±0.65% and 4.79±0.82%, the averaged value of the D0.1cc to spinal cord and brainstem were increased by 7.39±5.25% and 6.32±2.28%,the averaged value of the mean dose to left and right parotid were increased by 12.75±2.02%,13.39±2.17% respectively. Conclusion: The dosimetric effect was insignificant for random MLC leaf position errors up to 2mm. There was a high sensitivity to dose distribution for MLC extension or contraction errors.We should pay attention to the anatomic changes in target organs and anatomical structures during the course,individual radiotherapy was recommended to ensure adaptive doses.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-J-131: Reproducibility of Positioning Error Due to Temporarily Indwelled Urethral Catheter for Urethra-Sparing Prostate IMRT

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to prospectively assess the reproducibility of positioning errors due to temporarily indwelled catheter in urethra-sparing image-guided (IG) IMRT. Methods: Ten patients received urethra-sparing prostate IG-IMRT with implanted fiducials. After the first CT scan was performed in supine position, 6-Fr catheter was indwelled into urethra, and the second CT images were taken for planning. While the PTV received 80 Gy, 5% dose reduction was applied for the urethral PRV along the catheter. Additional CT scans were also performed at 5th and 30th fraction. Positions of interests (POIs) were set on posterior edge of prostate at beam isocenter level (POI1) and cranial and caudal edge of prostatic urethra on the post-indwelled CT images. POIs were copied into the pre-indwelled, 5th and 30th fraction’s CT images after fiducial matching on these CT images. The deviation of each POI between pre- and post-indwelled CT and the reproducibility of prostate displacement due to catheter were evaluated. Results: The deviation of POI1 caused by the indwelled catheter to the directions of RL/AP/SI (mm) was 0.20±0.27/−0.64±2.43/1.02±2.31, respectively, and the absolute distances (mm) were 3.15±1.41. The deviation tends to be larger if closer to the caudal edge of prostate. Compared with the pre-indwelled CT scan, a median displacement of all POIs (mm) were 0.3±0.2/2.2±1.1/2.0±2.6 in the post-indwelled, 0.4±0.4/3.4±2.1/2.3±2.6 in 5th, and 0.5±0.5/1.7±2.2/1.9±3.1 in 30th fraction’s CT scan with a similar data distribution. There were 6 patients with 5-mm-over displacement in AP and/or CC directions. Conclusion: Reproducibility of positioning errors due to temporarily indwelling catheter was observed. Especially in case of patients with unusually large shifts by indwelling catheter at the planning process, treatment planning should be performed by using the pre-indwelled CT images with transferred contour of the urethra identified by post-indwelled CT images.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-405: Robustness of Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) Plans to Systematic MLC Positional Errors

Purpose: To evaluate the dosimetric impact of systematic MLC positional errors (PEs) on the quality of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. Methods: Five patients with head-and-neck cancer (HN) and five patients with prostate cancer were randomly chosen for this study. The clinically approved VMAT plans were designed with 2–4 coplanar arc beams with none-zero collimator angles in the Pinnacle planning system. The systematic MLC PEs of 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mm on both MLC banks were introduced into the original VMAT plans using an in-house program, and recalculated with the same planned Monitor Units in the Pinnacle system. For each patient, the original VMAT plans and plans with MLC PEs were evaluated according to the dose-volume histogram information and Gamma index analysis. Results: For one primary target, the ratio of V100 in the plans with 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mm MLC PEs to those in the clinical plans was 98.8 ± 2.2%, 97.9 ± 2.1%, 90.1 ± 9.0% for HN cases and 99.5 ± 3.2%, 98.9 ± 1.0%, 97.0 ± 2.5% for prostate cases. For all OARs, the relative difference of Dmean in all plans was less than 1.5%. With 2mm/2% criteria for Gamma analysis, the passing rates were 99.0 ± 1.5% for HN cases and 99.7 ± 0.3% for prostate cases between the planar doses from the original plans and the plans with 1.0 mm MLC errors. The corresponding Gamma passing rates dropped to 88.9 ± 5.3% for HN cases and 83.4 ± 3.2% for prostate cases when comparing planar doses from the original plans and the plans with 2.0 mm MLC errors. Conclusion: For VMAT plans, systematic MLC PEs up to 1.0 mm did not affect the plan quality in term of target coverage, OAR sparing, and Gamma analysis with 2mm/2% criteria.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-613: Dosimetric Consequences of Systematic MLC Leaf Positioning Errors

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the dosimetric consequences of systematic MLC leaf positioning errors for clinical IMRT patient plans so as to establish detection tolerances for quality assurance programs. Materials and Methods: Dosimetric consequences were simulated by extracting mlc delivery instructions from the TPS, altering the file by the specified error, reloading the delivery instructions into the TPS, recomputing dose, and extracting dose-volume metrics for one head-andneck and one prostate patient. Machine error was simulated by offsetting MLC leaves in Pinnacle in a systematic way. Three different algorithms were followed for these systematic offsets, and are as follows: a systematic sequential one-leaf offset (one leaf offset in one segment per beam), a systematic uniform one-leaf offset (same one leaf offset per segment per beam) and a systematic offset of a given number of leaves picked uniformly at random from a given number of segments (5 out of 10 total). Dose to the PTV and normal tissue was simulated. Results: A systematic 5 mm offset of 1 leaf for all delivery segments of all beams resulted in a maximum PTV D98 deviation of 1%. Results showed very low dose error in all reasonably possible machine configurations, rare or otherwise, which could be simulated. Very low error in dose to PTV and OARs was shown in all possible cases of one leaf per beam per segment being offset (<1%), or that of only one leaf per beam being offset (<.2%). The errors resulting from a high number of adjacent leaves (maximum of 5 out of 60 total leaf-pairs) being simultaneously offset in many (5) of the control points (total 10–18 in all beams) per beam, in both the PTV and the OARs analyzed, were similarly low (<2–3%). Conclusions: The above results show that patient shifts and anatomical changes are the main source of errors in dose delivered, not machine delivery. These two sources of error are “visually complementary” and uncorrelated (albeit not additive in the final error) and one can easily incorporate error resulting from machine delivery in an error model based purely on tumor motion.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-P-36: Evaluation of MLC Positioning Errors in Dynamic IMRT Treatments by Analyzing Dynalog Files

Purpose: To assess the accuracy of MLC positioning in Varian linear accelerator, in dynamic IMRT technique, from the analysis of dynalog files generated by the MLC controller. Methods: In Clinac accelerators (pre-TrueBeam technology), control system has an approximately 50ms delay (one control cycle time). Then, the system compares the measured position to the planned position corresponding to the next control cycle. As it has been confirmed by Varian technical support, this effect causes that measured positions appear in dynalogs one cycle out of phase with respect to the planned positions. Around 9000 dynalogs have been analyzed, coming from the three linear accelerators of our center (one Trilogy and two Clinac 21EX) equipped with a Millennium 120 MLC. In order to compare our results to recent publications, leaf positioning errors (RMS and 95th percentile) are calculated with and without delay effect. Dynalogs have been analyzed using a in-house Matlab software. Results: The RMS errors were 0.341, 0.339 and 0.348mm for each Linac; being the average error 0.343 mm. The 95th percentiles of the error were 0.617, 0.607 and 0.625; with an average of 0.617mm. A recent multi-institution study carried out by Kerns et al. found a mean leaf RMS error of 0.32mm and a 95th percentile error value of 0.64mm.Without delay effect, mean leaf RMS errors obtained were 0.040, 0.042 and 0.038mm for each treatment machine; being the average 0.040mm. The 95th percentile error values obtained were 0.057, 0.058 and 0.054 mm, with an average of 0.056mm. Conclusion: Results obtained for the mean leaf RMS error and the mean 95th percentile were consistent with the multi-institution study. Calculated error statistics with delay effect are significantly larger due to the speed proportional and systematic leaf offset. Consequently it is proposed to correct this effect in dynalogs analysis to determine the MLC performance.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Coordinated joint motion control system with position error correction

Disclosed are an articulated hydraulic machine supporting, control system and control method for same. The articulated hydraulic machine has an end effector for performing useful work. The control system is capable of controlling the end effector for automated movement along a preselected trajectory. The control system has a position error correction system to correct discrepancies between an actual end effector trajectory and a desired end effector trajectory. The correction system can employ one or more absolute position signals provided by one or more acceleration sensors supported by one or more movable machine elements. Good trajectory positioning and repeatability can be obtained. A two joystick controller system is enabled, which can in some cases facilitate the operator's task and enhance their work quality and productivity.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2016

SU-G-BRB-03: Assessing the Sensitivity and False Positive Rate of the Integrated Quality Monitor (IQM) Large Area Ion Chamber to MLC Positioning Errors

Purpose: To examine both the IQM’s sensitivity and false positive rate to varying MLC errors. By balancing these two characteristics, an optimal tolerance value can be derived. Methods: An un-modified SBRT Liver IMRT plan containing 7 fields was randomly selected as a representative clinical case. The active MLC positions for all fields were perturbed randomly from a square distribution of varying width (±1mm to ±5mm). These unmodified and modified plans were measured multiple times each by the IQM (a large area ion chamber mounted to a TrueBeam linac head). Measurements were analyzed relative to the initial, unmodified measurement. IQM readings are analyzed as a function of control points. In order to examine sensitivity to errors along a field’s delivery, each measured field was divided into 5 groups of control points, and the maximum error in each group was recorded. Since the plans have known errors, we compared how well the IQM is able to differentiate between unmodified and error plans. ROC curves and logistic regression were used to analyze this, independent of thresholds. Results: A likelihood-ratio Chi-square test showed that the IQM could significantly predict whether a plan had MLC errors, with the exception of the beginning and ending control points. Upon further examination, we determined there was ramp-up occurring at the beginning of delivery. Once the linac AFC was tuned, the subsequent measurements (relative to a new baseline) showed significant (p <0.005) abilities to predict MLC errors. Using the area under the curve, we show the IQM’s ability to detect errors increases with increasing MLC error (Spearman’s Rho=0.8056, p<0.0001). The optimal IQM count thresholds from the ROC curves are ±3%, ±2%, and ±7% for the beginning, middle 3, and end segments, respectively. Conclusion: The IQM has proven to be able to detect not only MLC errors, but also differences in beam tuning (ramp-up). Partially supported by the Susan Scott Foundation.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-318: The Effect of Patient Positioning Errors On Target Coverage and Cochlear Dose in Stereotactic Radiosurgery Treatment of Acoustic Neuromas

Purpose: Setup errors on the order of millimeters may cause under-dosing of targets and significant changes in dose to critical structures especially when planning with tight margins in stereotactic radiosurgery. This study evaluates the effects of these types of patient positioning uncertainties on planning target volume (PTV) coverage and cochlear dose for stereotactic treatments of acoustic neuromas. Methods: Twelve acoustic neuroma patient treatment plans were retrospectively evaluated in Brainlab iPlan RT Dose 4.1.3. All treatment beams were shaped by HDMLC from a Varian TX machine. Seven patients had planning margins of 2mm, five had 1–1.5mm. Six treatment plans were created for each patient simulating a 1mm setup error in six possible directions: anterior-posterior, lateral, and superiorinferior. The arcs and HDMLC shapes were kept the same for each plan. Change in PTV coverage and mean dose to the cochlea was evaluated for each plan. Results: The average change in PTV coverage for the 72 simulated plans was −1.7% (range: −5 to +1.1%). The largest average change in coverage was observed for shifts in the patient's superior direction (−2.9%). The change in mean cochlear dose was highly dependent upon the direction of the shift. Shifts in the anterior and superior direction resulted in an average increase in dose of 13.5 and 3.8%, respectively, while shifts in the posterior and inferior direction resulted in an average decrease in dose of 17.9 and 10.2%. The average change in dose to the cochlea was 13.9% (range: 1.4 to 48.6%). No difference was observed based on the size of the planning margin. Conclusion: This study indicates that if the positioning uncertainty is kept within 1mm the setup errors may not result in significant under-dosing of the acoustic neuroma target volumes. However, the change in mean cochlear dose is highly dependent upon the direction of the shift.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗