View Item 

Show simple item record

Tolerance limits and methodologies for IMRT measurement‐based verification QA: Recommendations of AAPM Task Group No. 218
dc.contributor.authorMiften, Moyed
dc.contributor.authorOlch, Arthur
dc.contributor.authorMihailidis, Dimitris
dc.contributor.authorMoran, Jean
dc.contributor.authorPawlicki, Todd
dc.contributor.authorMolineu, Andrea
dc.contributor.authorLi, Harold
dc.contributor.authorWijesooriya, Krishni
dc.contributor.authorShi, Jie
dc.contributor.authorXia, Ping
dc.contributor.authorPapanikolaou, Nikos
dc.contributor.authorLow, Daniel A.
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-15T20:13:33Z
dc.date.available2019-06-03T15:24:19Zen
dc.date.issued2018-04
dc.identifier.citationMiften, Moyed; Olch, Arthur; Mihailidis, Dimitris; Moran, Jean; Pawlicki, Todd; Molineu, Andrea; Li, Harold; Wijesooriya, Krishni; Shi, Jie; Xia, Ping; Papanikolaou, Nikos; Low, Daniel A. (2018). "Tolerance limits and methodologies for IMRT measurement‐based verification QA: Recommendations of AAPM Task Group No. 218." Medical Physics 45(4): e53-e83.
dc.identifier.issn0094-2405
dc.identifier.issn2473-4209
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/143649
dc.publisherThe New York Times
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherγ
dc.subject.otherDTA
dc.subject.otherIMRT QA
dc.subject.othertolerance limits
dc.titleTolerance limits and methodologies for IMRT measurement‐based verification QA: Recommendations of AAPM Task Group No. 218
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/143649/1/mp12810_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/143649/2/mp12810.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/mp.12810
dc.identifier.sourceMedical Physics
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBresciani S, Dia AD, Maggio A, et al. Tomotherapy treatment plan quality assurance: the impact of applied criteria on passing rate in gamma index method. Med Phys. 2013; 40: 1217111 – 1217116.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTeke T, Bergman AM, Kwa W, Gill B, Duzenli C, Popescu IA. Monte Carlo based, patient‐specific RapidArc QA using Linac log files. Med Phys. 2010; 37: 116 – 123.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChandraraj V, Stathakis S, Manickam R, Esquivel C, Supe SS, Papanikolaou N. Comparison of four commercial devices for RapidArc and sliding window IMRT QA. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2011; 12: 3367.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFeygelman V, Zhang G, Stevens C. Initial dosimetric evaluation of SmartArc ‐ a novel VMAT treatment planning module implemented in a multi‐vendor delivery chain. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2010; 11: 3169.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLangen KM, Papanikolaou N, Balog J, et al.; A. T. Group. QA for helical tomotherapy: report of the AAPM Task Group 148. Med Phys. 2010; 37: 4817 – 4853.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBailat CJ, Buchillier T, Pachoud M, Moeckli R, Bochud FO. An absolute dose determination of helical tomotherapy accelerator, TomoTherapy High‐Art II. Med Phys. 2009; 36: 3891 – 3896.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBroggi S, Cattaneo GM, Molinelli S, et al. Results of a two‐year quality control program for a helical tomotherapy unit. Radiother Oncol. 2008; 86: 231 – 241.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoddu SM, Mutic S, Pechenaya OL, et al. Enhanced efficiency in helical tomotherapy quality assurance using a custom‐designed water‐equivalent phantom. Phys Med Biol. 2009; 54: 5663 – 5674.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGeurts M, Gonzalez J, Serrano‐Ojeda P. Longitudinal study using a diode phantom for helical tomotherapy IMRT QA. Med Phys. 2009; 36: 4977 – 4983.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYan G, Liu C, Simon TA, Peng LC, Fox C, Li JG. On the sensitivity of patient‐specific IMRT QA to MLC positioning errors. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009; 10: 2915.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMu G, Ludlum E, Xia P. Impact of MLC leaf position errors on simple and complex IMRT plans for head and neck cancer. Phys Med Biol. 2008; 53: 77 – 88.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGordon JD, Krafft SP, Jang S, Smith‐Raymond L, Stevie MY, Hamilton RJ. Confidence limit variation for a single IMRT system following the TG119 protocol. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 1641 – 1648.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceColeman L, Skourou C. Sensitivity of volumetric modulated arc therapy patient specific QA results to multileaf collimator errors and correlation to dose volume histogram based metrics. Med Phys. 2013; 40: 1117151 – 1117157.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFredh A, Scherman JB, Fog LS, Munck af Rosenschöld P. Patient QA systems for rotational radiation therapy: a comparative experimental study with intentional errors. Med Phys. 2013; 40: 0317161 – 0317169.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChan MF, Li J, Schupak K, Burman C. Using a novel dose QA tool to quantify the impact of systematic errors otherwise undetected by conventional QA methods: clinical head and neck case studies. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2014; 13: 57 – 67.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKry SF, Molineu A, Kerns JR, et al. Institutional patient‐specific IMRT QA does not predict unacceptable plan delivery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 90: 1195 – 1201.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcKenzie EM, Balter PA, Stingo FC, Jones J, Followill DS, Kry SF. Toward optimizing patient‐specific IMRT QA techniques in the accurate detection of dosimetrically acceptable and unacceptable patient plans. Med Phys. 2014; 41: 121702.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNelms BE, Chan MF, Jarry G, et al. Evaluating IMRT and VMAT dose accuracy: practical examples of failure to detect systematic errors when applying a commonly used metric and action levels. Med Phys. 2013; 40: 1117221 – 11172215.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBasran PS, Woo MK. An analysis of tolerance levels in IMRT quality assurance procedures. Med Phys. 2008; 35: 2300 – 2307.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStock M, Kroupa B, Georg D. Interpretation and evaluation of the γ index and the γ index angle for the verification of IMRT hybrid plans. Phys Med Biol. 2005; 50: 399.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBudgell GJ, Perrin BA, Mott J, Fairfoul J, Mackay RI. Quantitative analysis of patient‐specific dosimetric IMRT verification. Phys Med Biol. 2005; 50: 103.
dc.identifier.citedreferencevan Zijtveld M, Dirkx MLP, de Boer HCJ, Heijmen BJM. Dosimetric pre‐treatment verification of IMRT using an EPID; clinical experience. Radiother Oncol. 2006; 81: 168 – 175.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDe Martin E, Fiorino C, Broggi S, et al. Agreement criteria between expected and measured field fluences in IMRT of head and neck cancer: the importance and use of the γ histograms statistical analysis. Radiother Oncol. 2007; 85: 399 – 406.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarlone M, Cruje C, Rangel A, McCabe R, Nielsen M, MacPherson M. ROC analysis in patient specific quality assurance. Med Phys. 2013; 40: 0421031 – 0421037.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePulliam KB, Huang JY, Howell RM, et al. Comparison of 2D and 3D gamma analyses. Med Phys. 2014; 41: 021710.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePawlicki T, Whitaker M, Boyer AL. Statistical process control for radiotherapy quality assurance. Med Phys. 2005; 32: 2777 – 2786.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBreen SL, Moseley DJ, Zhang B, Sharpe MB. Statistical process control for IMRT dosimetric verification. Med Phys. 2008; 35: 4417 – 4425.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGérard K, Grandhaye J‐P, Marchesi V, Kafrouni H, Husson F, Aletti P. A comprehensive analysis of the IMRT dose delivery process using statistical process control (SPC). Med Phys. 2009; 36: 1275 – 1285.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMontgomery DC. Introduction to Statistical Process Control, 6th edn. Hoboken: Wiley, 2009.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSharpe MB, Miller BM, Yan D, Wong JW. Monitor unit settings for intensity modulated beams delivered using a step‐and‐shoot approach. Med Phys. 2000; 27: 2719 – 2725.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBortfeld T, Bürkelbach J, Boesecke R, Schlegel W. Methods of image reconstruction from projections applied to conformation radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 1990; 35: 1423.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWebb S. Optimization by simulated annealing of three‐dimensional conformal treatment planning for radiation fields defined by a multileaf collimator. Phys Med Biol. 1991; 36: 1201.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrahme A. Optimization of stationary and moving beam radiation therapy techniques. Radiother Oncol. 1988; 12: 129 – 140.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMackie TR, Holmes T, Swerdloff S, et al. Tomotherapy: a new concept for the delivery of dynamic conformal radiotherapy. Med Phys. 1993; 20: 1709.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStein J, Bortfeld T, Dörschel B, Schlegel W. Dynamic x‐ray compensation for conformal radiotherapy by means of multi‐leaf collimation. Radiother Oncol. 1994; 32: 163 – 173.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarol M, Grant W III, Pavord D, et al. Initial clinical experience with the Peacock intensity modulation of a 3‐D conformal radiation therapy system. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 1996; 66: 30 – 34.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLing CC, Burman C, Chui CS, et al. Conformal radiation treatment of prostate cancer using inversely‐planned intensity‐modulated photon beams produced with dynamic multileaf collimation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996; 35: 721.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWang X, Spirou S, LoSasso T, Stein J, Chui CS, Mohan R. Dosimetric verification of intensity‐modulated fields. Med Phys. 1996; 23: 317.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChui CS, Spirou S, LoSasso T. Testing of dynamic multileaf collimation. Med Phys. 1996; 23: 635.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLow DA, Chao K, Mutic S, Gerber RL, Perez CA, Purdy JA. “Quality assurance of serial tomotherapy for head and neck patient treatments. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998; 42: 681 – 692.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLing CC, Zhang P, Archambault Y, Bocanek J, Tang G, Losasso T. Commissioning and quality assurance of RapidArc radiotherapy delivery system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008; 72: 575 – 581.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKaurin DG, Sweeney LE, Marshall EI, Mahendra S. VMAT testing for an Elekta accelerator. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2012; 13: 3725.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOtto K. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys. 2008; 35: 310 – 317.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceXing L, Chen Y, Luxton G, Li J, Boyer A. Monitor unit calculation for an intensity modulated photon field by a simple scatter‐summation algorithm. Phys Med Biol. 2000; 45: N1.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEzzell GA, Galvin JM, Low D, et al. Guidance document on delivery, treatment planning, and clinical implementation of IMRT: report of the IMRT subcommittee of the AAPM radiation therapy committee. Med Phys. 2003; 30: 2089 – 2115.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEzzell GA, Burmeister JW, Dogan N, et al. IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119. Med Phys. 2009; 36: 5359 – 5373.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLow DA, Moran JM, Dempsey JF, Dong L, Oldham M. Dosimetry tools and techniques for IMRT. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 1313 – 1338.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMoran JM, Dempsey M, Eisbruch A, et al. Safety considerations for IMRT: executive summary. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 5067.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePawlicki T, Yoo S, Court LE, et al. Moving from IMRT QA measurements toward independent computer calculations using control charts. Radiother Oncol. 2008; 89: 330 – 337.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFan J, Li J, Chen L, et al. A practical Monte Carlo MU verification tool for IMRT quality assurance. Phys Med Biol. 2006; 51: 2503 – 2514.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeal A, Sánchez‐Doblado F, Arráns R, Roselló J, Pavón EC, Lagares JI. Routine IMRT verification by means of an automated Monte Carlo simulation system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 56: 58 – 68.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAgnew A, Agnew CE, Grattan MWD, Hounsell AR, McGarry CK. Monitoring daily MLC positional errors using trajectory log files and EPID measurements for IMRT and VMAT deliveries. Phys Med Biol. 2014; 59: N49 – N63.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRangaraj D, Zhu M, Yang D, et al. Catching errors with patient‐specific pretreatment machine log file analysis. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2013; 3: 80 – 90.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStell AM, Li JG, Zeidan OA, Dempsey JF. An extensive log‐file analysis of step‐and‐shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy segment delivery errors. Med Phys. 2004; 31: 1593 – 1602.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHartford AC, Galvin JM, Beyer DC, et al. American College of Radiology (ACR) and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) practice guideline for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Am J Clin Oncol. 2012; 35: 612 – 617.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBogdanich W. Radiation Offers New Cures, and Ways to Do Harm. New York: The New York Times, 2010.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBogdanich W. As Technology Surges, Radiation Safeguards Lag. New York: The New York Times, 2010.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSmith JC, Dieterich S, Orton CG. It is STILL necessary to validate each individual IMRT treatment plan with dosimetric measurements before delivery. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 553 – 555.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSiochi RAC, Molineu A, Orton CG. Patient‐specific QA for IMRT should be performed using software rather than hardware methods. Med Phys. 2013; 40: 0706011 – 0706013.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKruse JJ, Mayo CS. Comment on “Catching errors with patient‐specific pretreatment machine log file analysis”. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2012; 3: 91 – 92.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFraass B, Doppke K, Hunt M, et al. American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 53: quality assurance for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning. Med Phys. 1998; 25: 1773 – 1829.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVan Dyk J, Barnett RB, Cygler JE, Shragge PC. Commissioning and quality assurance of treatment planning computers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993; 26: 261 – 273.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIbbott GS, Followill DS, Molineu HA, Lowenstein JR, Alvarez PE, Roll JE. Challenges in credentialing institutions and participants in advanced technology multi‐institutional clinical trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008; 71: S71 – S75.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePalta JR, Deye JA, Ibbott GS, Purdy JA, Urie MM. Credentialing of institutions for IMRT in clinical trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004; 59: 1257 – 1259.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePalta JR, Kim S, Li J, Liu C. Tolerance limits and action levels for planning and delivery of IMRT. In: Palta JR, Mackie TR, eds. Intensity‐Modulated Radiation Therapy: The State of Art. Madison: Medical Physics Publishing; 2003: 593 – 612.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDas IJ, Cheng CW, Chopra KL, Mitra RK, Srivastava SP, Glatstein E. Intensity‐modulated radiation therapy dose prescription, recording, and delivery: patterns of variability among institutions and treatment planning systems. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008; 100: 300 – 307.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLoSasso T, Chui C‐S, Ling CC. Comprehensive quality assurance for the delivery of intensity modulated radiotherapy with a multileaf collimator used in the dynamic mode. Med Phys. 2001; 28: 2209 – 2219.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlber M, Broggi C, De Wagter C, et al. Guidelines for the verification of IMRT. ESTRO booklet, 2008.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChildress NL, Bloch C, White RA, Salehpour M, Rosen II. Detection of IMRT delivery errors using a quantitative 2D dosimetric verification system. Med Phys. 2005; 32: 153 – 162.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChuang CF, Verhey LJ, Xia P. Investigation of the use of MOSFET for clinical IMRT dosimetric verification. Med Phys. 2002; 29: 1109 – 1115.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGodart J, Korevaar EW, Visser R, Wauben DJ, Van’t Veld AA. Reconstruction of high‐resolution 3D dose from matrix measurements: error detection capability of the COMPASS correction kernel method. Phys Med Biol 2011; 56: 5029 – 5043.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHan Z, Ng SK, Bhagwat MS, Lyatskaya Y, Zygmanski P. Evaluation of MatriXX for IMRT and VMAT dose verifications in peripheral dose regions. Med Phys. 2010; 37: 3704 – 3714.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLow DA, Dempsey JF. Evaluation of the gamma dose distribution comparison method. Med Phys. 2003; 30: 2455 – 2464.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePawlicki T, Yoo S, Court LE, et al. Process control analysis of IMRT QA: implications for clinical trials. Phys Med Biol. 2008; 53: 5193 – 5205.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSanghangthum T, Suriyapee S, Kim G‐Y, Pawlicki T. A method of setting limits for the purpose of quality assurance. Phys Med Biol. 2013; 58: 7025 – 7037.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrualla‐González L, Gómez F, Vicedo A, et al. A two‐dimensional liquid‐filled ionization chamber array prototype for small‐field verification: characterization and first clinical tests. Phys Med Biol. 2012; 57: 5221 – 5234.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDuan J, Shen S, Fiveash JB, Brezovich IA, Popple RA, Pareek PN. Dosimetric effect of respiration‐gated beam on IMRT delivery. Med Phys. 2003; 30: 2241 – 2252.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNelms BE, Zhen H, Tomé WA. Per‐beam, planar IMRT QA passing rates do not predict clinically relevant patient dose errors. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 1037.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBogner L, Scherer J, Treutwein M, Hartmann M, Gum F, Amediek A. Verification of IMRT: techniques and Problems. Strahlenther Onkol. 2004; 180: 340 – 350.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHarms WB Sr, Low DA, Wong JW, Purdy JA. A software tool for the quantitative evaluation of 3D dose calculation algorithms. Med Phys. 1998; 25: 1830 – 1836.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLow DA, Harms WB, Mutic S, Purdy JA. A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. Med Phys. 1998; 25: 656 – 661.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMoran JM, Radawski J, Fraass BA. A dose‐gradient analysis tool for IMRT QA. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2005; 6: 62 – 73.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBakai A, Alber M, Nusslin F. A revision of the gamma‐evaluation concept for the comparison of dose distributions. Phys Med Biol. 2003; 48: 3543 – 3553.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChildress NL, Rosen II. The design and testing of novel clinical parameters for dose comparison. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003; 56: 1464 – 1479.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJu T, Simpson T, Deasy JO, Low DA. Geometric interpretation of the gamma dose distribution comparison technique: interpolation‐free calculation. Med Phys. 2008; 35: 879 – 887.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePalta JR, Liu C, Li JG. “Quality assurance of intensity‐modulated radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008; 71: S108 – S112.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNelms BE, Simon JA. A survey on planar IMRT QA analysis. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2007; 8: 2448.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChildress NL, Salehpour M, Dong L, Bloch C, White RA, Rosen II. Dosimetric accuracy of Kodak EDR2 film for IMRT verifications. Med Phys. 2005; 32: 539 – 548.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOlch AJ. Dosimetric performance of an enhanced dose range radiographic film for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy quality assurance. Med Phys. 2002; 29: 2159.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDogan N, Leybovich LB, Sethi A. Comparative evaluation of Kodak EDR2 and XV2 films for verification of intensity modulated radiation therapy. Phys Med Biol. 2002; 47: 4121.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChildress NL, Dong L, Rosen II. Rapid radiographic film calibration for IMRT verification using automated MLC fields. Med Phys. 2002; 29: 2384.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZhu X, Jursinic P, Grimm D, Lopez F, Rownd J, Gillin M. Evaluation of Kodak EDR2 film for dose verification of intensity modulated radiation therapy delivered by a static multileaf collimator. Med Phys. 2002; 29: 1687.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJursinic PA, Sharma R, Reuter J. MapCHECK used for rotational IMRT measurements: step‐and‐shoot, TomoTherapy, RapidArc. Med Phys. 2010; 37: 2837 – 2846.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMasi L, Casamassima F, Doro R, Francescon P. Quality assurance of volumetric modulated arc therapy: evaluation and comparison of different dosimetric systems. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 612 – 621.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVan Esch A, Clermont C, Devillers M, Iori M, Huyskens DP. On‐line quality assurance of rotational radiotherapy treatment delivery by means of a 2D ion chamber array and the Octavius phantom. Med Phys. 2007; 34: 3825 – 3837.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChildress NL, White RA, Bloch C, Salehpour M, Dong L, Rosen II. Retrospective analysis of 2D patient‐specific IMRT verifications. Med Phys. 2005; 32: 838 – 850.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKruse JJ. On the insensitivity of single field planar dosimetry to IMRT inaccuracies. Med Phys. 2010; 37: 2516 – 2524.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStasi M, Bresciani S, Miranti A, Maggio A, Sapino V, Gabriele P. Pretreatment patient‐specific IMRT quality assurance: a correlation study between gamma index and patient clinical dose volume histogram. Med Phys. 2012; 39: 7626 – 7634.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarrasco P, Jornet N, Latorre A, Eudaldo T, Ruiz A, Ribas M. 3D DVH‐based metric analysis versus per‐beam planar analysis in IMRT pretreatment verification. Med Phys. 2012; 39: 5040 – 5049.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZhen H, Nelms BE, Tome WA. Moving from gamma passing rates to patient DVH‐based QA metrics in pretreatment dose QA. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 5477 – 5489.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePodesta M, Nijsten SM, Persoon LC, Scheib SG, Baltes C, Verhaegen F. Time dependent pre‐treatment EPID dosimetry for standard and FFF VMAT. Phys Med Biol. 2014; 59: 4749 – 4768.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePai S, Das IJ, Dempsey JF, et al. TG‐69: radiographic film for megavoltage beam dosimetry. Med Phys. 2007; 34: 2228.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeybovich LB, Sethi A, Dogan N. Comparison of ionization chambers of various volumes for IMRT absolute dose verification. Med Phys. 2003; 30: 119 – 123.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFenoglietto P, Laliberté B, Aillères N, Riou O, Dubois JB, Azria D. Eight years of IMRT quality assurance with ionization chambers and film dosimetry: experience of the montpellier comprehensive cancer center. Radiat Oncol. 2011; 6: 85.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDong L, Antolak J, Salehpour M, et al. Patient‐specific point dose measurement for IMRT monitor unit verification. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 56: 867 – 877.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSpezi E, Angelini AL, Romani F, Ferri A. Characterization of a 2D ion chamber array for the verification of radiotherapy treatments. Phys Med Biol. 2005; 50: 3361 – 3373.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChair AN‐R, Blackwell CR, Coursey BM, et al. Radiochromic film dosimetry: recommendations of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 55. Med Phys. 1998; 25: 2093 – 2115.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBogucki T, Murphy W, Baker C, Piazza S, Haus A. Processor quality control in laser imaging systems. Med Phys. 1997; 24: 581.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZeidan OA, Stephenson SAL, Meeks SL, et al. Characterization and use of EBT radiochromic film for IMRT dose verification. Med Phys. 2006; 33: 4064 – 4072.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGum F, Scherer J, Bogner L, Solleder M, Rhein B, Bock M. Preliminary study on the use of an inhomogeneous anthropomorphic Fricke gel phantom and 3D magnetic resonance dosimetry for verification of IMRT treatment plans. Phys Med Biol. 2002; 47: N67 – N77.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGorjiara T, Hill R, Kuncic Z, et al. Investigation of radiological properties and water equivalency of PRESAGE ® dosimeters. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 2265 – 2274.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSakhalkar H, Sterling D, Adamovics J, Ibbott G, Oldham M. Investigation of the feasibility of relative 3D dosimetry in the Radiologic Physics Center Head and Neck IMRT phantom using Presage/optical‐CT. Med Phys. 2009; 36: 3371 – 3377.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWuu C‐S, Xu Y. Three‐dimensional dose verification for intensity modulated radiation therapy using optical CT based polymer gel dosimetry. Med Phys. 2006; 33: 1412 – 1419.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOldham M, Gluckman G, Kim L. 3D verification of a prostate IMRT treatment by polymer gel‐dosimetry and optical‐CT scanning. J Phys: Conf Ser. 2004; 3: 293 – 296.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcJury M, Oldham M, Cosgrove VP, et al. Radiation dosimetry using polymer gels: methods and applications. Br J Radiol. 2000; 73: 919 – 929.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLetourneau D, Publicover J, Kozelka J, Moseley DJ, Jaffray DA. Novel dosimetric phantom for quality assurance of volumetric modulated arc therapy. Med Phys. 2009; 36: 1813 – 1821.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFeygelman V, Forster K, Opp D, Nilsson G. Evaluation of a biplanar diode array dosimeter for quality assurance of step‐and‐shoot IMRT. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009; 10: 3080.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYan G, Lu B, Kozelka J, Liu C, Li JG. Calibration of a novel four‐dimensional diode array. Med Phys. 2010; 37: 108 – 115.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFeygelman V, Zhang G, Stevens C, Nelms BE. Evaluation of a new VMAT QA device, or the “X” and “O” array geometries. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2011; 12: 3346.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKozelka J, Robinson J, Nelms B, Zhang G, Savitskij D, Feygelman V. Optimizing the accuracy of a helical diode array dosimeter: a comprehensive calibration methodology coupled with a novel virtual inclinometer. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 5021 – 5032.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBoggula R, Lorenz F, Mueller L, et al. Experimental validation of a commercial 3D dose verification system for intensity‐modulated arc therapies. Phys Med Biol. 2010; 55: 5619 – 5633.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRenner WD, Norton KJ, Holmes TW. A method for deconvolution of integrated electronic portal images to obtain fluence for dose reconstruction. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2005; 6: 22 – 39.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWu C, Hosier KE, Beck KE, et al. On using 3D γ ‐analysis for IMRT and VMAT pretreatment plan QA. Med Phys. 2012; 39: 3051 – 3059.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVan Esch A, Depuydt T, Huyskens DP. The use of an aSi‐based EPID for routine absolute dosimetric pre‐treatment verification of dynamic IMRT fields. Radiother Oncol. 2004; 71: 223 – 234.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNakaguchi Y, Araki F, Maruyama M, Saiga S. Dose verification of IMRT by use of a COMPASS transmission detector. Radiol Phys Technol. 2012; 5: 63 – 70.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOlch AJ. Evaluation of the accuracy of 3DVH software estimates of dose to virtual ion chamber and film in composite IMRT QA. Med Phys. 2012; 39: 81 – 86.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNelms BE, Opp D, Robinson J, et al. VMAT QA: measurement‐guided 4D dose reconstruction on a patient. Med Phys. 2012; 39: 4228 – 4238.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOpp D, Nelms BE, Zhang G, Stevens C, Feygelman V. Validation of measurement‐guided 3D VMAT dose reconstruction on a heterogeneous anthropomorphic phantom. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013; 14: 70 – 84.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStathakis S, Myers P, Esquivel C, Mavroidis P, Papanikolaou N. Characterization of a novel 2D array dosimeter for patient‐specific quality assurance with volumetric arc therapy. Med Phys. 2013; 40: 0717311 – 0717315.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWendling M, Louwe RJW, McDermott LN, Sonke J‐J, van Herk M, Mijnheer BJ. Accurate two‐dimensional IMRT verification using a back‐projection EPID dosimetry method. Med Phys. 2006; 33: 259 – 273.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWendling M, McDermott LN, Mans A, Sonke JJ, Herk MV, Mijnheer BJ. A simple backprojection algorithm for 3D in vivo EPID dosimetry of IMRT treatments. Med Phys 2009; 36: 3310 – 3321.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBoth S, Alecu JM, Stan AR, et al. A study to establish reasonable action limits for patient specific IMRT QA. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2007; 8: 1 – 8.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBailey DW, Nelms BE, Attwood K, Kumaraswamy L, Podgorsak MB. Statistical variability and confidence intervals for planar dose QA pass rates. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 6053.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLang S, Reggiori G, Puxeu Vaquee J, et al. Pretreatment quality assurance of flattening filter free beams on 224 patients for intensity modulated plans: a multicentric study. Med Phys 2012; 39: 1351 – 1356.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMancuso GM, Fontenot JD, Gibbons JP, Parker BC. Comparison of action levels for patient‐specific quality assurance of intensity modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy treatments. Med Phys. 2012; 39: 4378 – 4385.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOlch AJ, Whitaker ML. Validation of a treatment plan‐based calibration method for 2D detectors used for treatment delivery quality assurance. Med Phys. 2010; 37: 4485 – 4494.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJursinic PA, Nelms BE. A 2‐D diode array and analysis software for verification of intensity modulated radiation therapy delivery. Med Phys. 2003; 30: 870 – 879.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLétourneau D, Gulam M, Yan D, Oldham M, Wong JW. Evaluation of a 2D diode array for IMRT quality assurance. Radiother Oncol. 2004; 70: 199 – 206.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAmerio S, Boriano A, Bourhaleb F, et al. Dosimetric characterization of a large area pixel‐segmented ionization chamber. Med Phys 2004; 31: 414 – 420.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGreer PB, Popescu CC. Dosimetric properties of an amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device for verification of dynamic intensity modulated radiation therapy. Med Phys. 2003; 30: 1618 – 1627.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWarkentin B, Steciw S, Rathee S, Fallone BG. Dosimetric IMRT verification with a flat‐panel EPID. Med Phys. 2003; 30: 3143 – 3155.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcDermott LN, Wendling M, van Asselen B, et al. Clinical experience with EPID dosimetry for prostate IMRT pre‐treatment dose verification. Med Phys. 2006; 33: 3921 – 3930.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHowell RM, Smith IPN, Jarrio CS. Clinical implementation of portal dosimetry – Establishing action levels. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2008; 9: 16 – 25.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMolineu A, Hernandez N, Nguyen T, Ibbott G, Followill D. Credentialing results from IMRT irradiations of an anthropomorphic head and neck phantom. Med Phys. 2013; 40: 5330 – 5337.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
mp12810_am.pdf
Size:
809.7KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
mp12810.pdf
Size:
929.6KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.