Biomedical subjects

Nathan L Childress

Publications and source records attributed to Nathan L Childress.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Detection of IMRT delivery errors using a quantitative 2D dosimetric verification system.

We investigated the feasibility of detecting intensity modulated radiotherapy delivery errors automatically using a scalar evaluation of two-dimensional (2D) transverse dose measurement of the complete treatment delivery. Techniques using the gamma index and the normalized agreement test (NAT) index were used to parametrize the agreement between measured and computed dose distributions to seven different scalar metrics. Simulated verifications with delivery errors calculated using a commercially available treatment planning system for 9 prostate and 7 paranasal sinus cases were compared to 433 clinical verifications. The NAT index with 5% and 3 mm criteria that included cold areas outside the planning target volume detected the largest percent of delivery errors. Assuming a false positive rate of 5%, it was able to detect 88% of beam energy changes, 94% of a different patient's plan being delivered, 25% of plans with one beam's collimator rotated by 90 degrees, 81% of rotating one beam's gantry angle by 10 degrees, and 100% of omitting the delivery of one beam. However, no instances of changing one beam's monitor unit setting by 10% or shifting the isocenter by 5 mm were detected. Although the phantom shift could not be detected by the small change it made in the dose distribution, our autopositioning algorithm clearly identified the spatial anomaly. Using tighter 3 %/2 mm criteria or combining dose and distance disagreements in an either/or fashion resulted in poorer delivery error detection. The mean value of the 2D gamma index distribution was less sensitive to delivery errors than the other scalar metrics studied. Although we found that scalar metrics do not have sufficient delivery error detection rates to be used as the sole clinical analysis technique, manually examining 2D dose comparison images would result in a near 100% detection rate while performing an ion chamber measurement alone would only detect 54% of these errors.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2005

Dosimetric accuracy of Kodak EDR2 film for IMRT verifications.

Patient-specific intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) verifications require an accurate two-dimensional dosimeter that is not labor-intensive. We assessed the precision and reproducibility of film calibrations over time, measured the elemental composition of the film, measured the intermittency effect, and measured the dosimetric accuracy and reproducibility of calibrated Kodak EDR2 film for single-beam verifications in a solid water phantom and for full-plan verifications in a Rexolite phantom. Repeated measurements of the film sensitometric curve in a single experiment yielded overall uncertainties in dose of 2.1% local and 0.8% relative to 300 cGy. 547 film calibrations over an 18-month period, exposed to a range of doses from 0 to a maximum of 240 MU or 360 MU and using 6 MV or 18 MV energies, had optical density (OD) standard deviations that were 7%-15% of their average values. This indicates that daily film calibrations are essential when EDR2 film is used to obtain absolute dose results. An elemental analysis of EDR2 film revealed that it contains 60% as much silver and 20% as much bromine as Kodak XV2 film. EDR2 film also has an unusual 1.69:1 silver:halide molar ratio, compared with the XV2 film's 1.02:1 ratio, which may affect its chemical reactions. To test EDR2's intermittency effect, the OD generated by a single 300 MU exposure was compared to the ODs generated by exposing the film 1 MU, 2 MU, and 4 MU at a time to a total of 300 MU. An ion chamber recorded the relative dose of all intermittency measurements to account for machine output variations. Using small MU bursts to expose the film resulted in delivery times of 4 to 14 minutes and lowered the film's OD by approximately 2% for both 6 and 18 MV beams. This effect may result in EDR2 film underestimating absolute doses for patient verifications that require long delivery times. After using a calibration to convert EDR2 film's OD to dose values, film measurements agreed within 2% relative difference and 2 mm criteria to ion chamber measurements for both sliding window and step-and-shoot fluence map verifications. Calibrated film results agreed with ion chamber measurements to within 5 % /2 mm criteria for transverse-plane full-plan verifications, but were consistently low. When properly calibrated, EDR2 film can be an adequate two-dimensional dosimeter for IMRT verifications, although it may underestimate doses in regions with long exposure times.

Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation↗

PubMed2005

Retrospective analysis of 2D patient-specific IMRT verifications.

We performed 858 two-dimensional (2D) patient-specific intensity modulated radiotherapy verifications over a period of 18 months. Multifield, composite treatment plans were measured in phantom using calibrated Kodak EDR2 film and compared with the calculated dose extracted from two treatment planning systems. This research summarizes our findings using the normalized agreement test (NAT) index and the percent of pixels failing the gamma index as metrics to represent the agreement between measured and computed dose distributions. An in-house dose comparison software package was used to register and compare all verifications. We found it was important to use an automatic positioning algorithm to achieve maximum registration accuracy, and that our automatic algorithm agreed well with anticipated results from known phantom geometries. We also measured absolute dose for each case using an ion chamber. Because the computed distributions agreed with ion chamber measurements better than the EDR2 film doses, we normalized EDR2 data to the computed distributions. The distributions of both the NAT indices and the percentage of pixels failing the gamma index were found to be exponential distributions. We continue to use both the NAT index and percent of pixels failing gamma with 5%/3 mm criteria to evaluate future verifications, as these two metrics were found to be complementary. Our data showed that using 2%/2 mm or 3%/3 mm criteria produces results similar to those using 5%/3 mm criteria. Normalized comparisons that have a NAT index greater than 45 and/or more than 20% of the pixels failing gamma for 5%/3 mm criteria represent outliers from our clinical data set and require further analysis. Because our QA verification results were exponentially distributed, rather than a tight grouping of similar results, we continue to perform patient-specific QA in order to identify and correct outliers in our verifications. The data from this work could be useful as a reference for other clinics to indicate anticipated trends in 2D verifications under various conditions.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2004

Effect of processing time delay on the dose response of Kodak EDR2 film.

Kodak EDR2 film is a widely used two-dimensional dosimeter for intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) measurements. Our clinical use of EDR2 film for IMRT verifications revealed variations and uncertainties in dose response that were larger than expected, given that we perform film calibrations for every experimental measurement. We found that the length of time between film exposure and processing can affect the absolute dose response of EDR2 film by as much as 4%-6%. EDR2 films were exposed to 300 cGy using 6 and 18 MV 10 x 10 cm2 fields and then processed after time delays ranging from 2 min to 24 h. An ion chamber measured the relative dose for these film exposures. The ratio of optical density (OD) to dose stabilized after 3 h. Compared to its stable value, the film response was 4%-6% lower at 2 min and 1% lower at 1 h. The results of the 4 min and 1 h processing time delays were verified with a total of four different EDR2 film batches. The OD/dose response for XV2 films was consistent for time periods of 4 min and 1 h between exposure and processing. To investigate possible interactions of the processing time delay effect with dose, single EDR2 films were irradiated to eight different dose levels between 45 and 330 cGy using smaller 3 x 3 cm2 areas. These films were processed after time delays of 1, 3, and 6 h, using 6 and 18 MV photon qualities. The results at all dose levels were consistent, indicating that there is no change in the processing time delay effect for different doses. The difference in the time delay effect between the 6 and 18 MV measurements was negligible for all experiments. To rule out bias in selecting film regions for OD measurement, we compared the use of a specialized algorithm that systematically determines regions of interest inside the 10 x 10 cm2 exposure areas to manually selected regions of interest. There was a maximum difference of only 0.07% between the manually and automatically selected regions, indicating that the use of a systematic algorithm to determine regions of interest in large and fairly uniform areas is not necessary. Based on these results, we recommend a minimum time of 1 h between exposure and processing for all EDR2 film measurements.

Film Dosimetry↗

PubMed2003

The design and testing of novel clinical parameters for dose comparison.

PURPOSE: New multidimensional dose comparison parameters, normalized agreement test (NAT) values and the NAT index, are introduced and compared with an ideal dose comparison parameter. In this article, we analyze a clinically based two-dimensional (2D) quantitative dose comparison case using a wide range of new and old comparison tools. In doing so, we address the benefits and limitations of many common dose comparison tools. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An in-house software program was developed using the MATLAB 6.5 programming language. Using this software, several 2D quantitative dose comparison parameters were calculated for the computed and measured dose distributions in an intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) prostate cancer treatment. The experiences gained in the design and testing of this software program form the basis of the dose comparison tool analysis. RESULTS: Each dose comparison tool has unique strengths and weaknesses. The underlying assumptions of the NAT values and NAT index lead to acceptable generalized behavior, but are not always valid. CONCLUSION: A thorough 2D quantitative dose comparison analysis can only be accomplished through the use of many dose comparison tools. The introduction of the NAT index allows a 2D dose comparison to be reduced to a single value, and is thus ideal for setting clinical acceptance criteria for IMRT verifications.

Humans↗

PubMed2002

Rapid radiographic film calibration for IMRT verification using automated MLC fields.

A method for measuring a film sensitometric curve using a single sheet of film exposed with a two field step-and-shoot MLC treatment was developed and tested with Kodak XV2 and EDR2 films. With this technique a film sensitometric curve can be completed in only 10 minutes, making it practical to generate new film calibrations daily. This method is applicable to film calibrations for all purposes, but is particularly useful in IMRT treatment verification due to the method's use of small fields. This method agrees with the traditional large-field multifilm calibration within 0.5% and will produce sensitometric curves with errors less than 1% throughout the dose range, including uncertainties in dose delivery, film response, and optical density measurements. OD values for XV2 and EDR2 films were consistent in the middle of exposure areas at high depths, but the XV2 film penumbra regions showed large amounts of over-response as the calibration depth increased. If XV2 film is used for IMRT treatment verification, it is necessary to reduce the fluence of low energy photons in areas around the film by using thin lead shields. EDR2 film was shown to have minimal energy dependence, as it accurately represented penumbra areas and yielded identical sensitometric curves generated with 6 and 18 MV photons. However, its darker tint may make it more sensitive to scanning laser film digitizers' horizontal nonuniformities. This single film method proved to be superior to the traditional calibration method and allows fast daily calibrations of films for highly accurate IMRT delivery verifications.

Calibration↗