Application of AAPM TG 119 to volumetric arc: Therapy (VMAT)

Dinesh Kumar Mynampati, Ravindra Yaparpalvi, Linda Hong, Hsiang-Chi Kuo, Dennis Mah

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to create AAPM TG 119 benchmark plans for volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) and to compare VMAT plans with IMRT plan data. AAPM TG 119 proposes a set of test clinical cases for testing the accuracy of IMRT planning and delivery system. For these test cases, we generated two treatment plans, the first plan using 7-9 static dMLC IMRT fields and a second plan utilizing one- or two-arc VMAT technique. Dose optimization and calculations performed using 6MV photons and Eclipse treatment planning system. Dose prescription and planning objectives were set according to the TG 119 goals. Plans were scored based on TG 119 planning objectives. Treatment plans were compared using conformity index (CI) for reference dose and homogeneity index (HI) (for D 5-D 95). For test cases prostate, head-and-neck, C-shape and multitarget prescription dose are 75.6Gy, 50.4 Gy, 50 Gy and 50 Gy, respectively. VMAT dose distributions were comparable to dMLC IMRT plans. Our planning results matched TG 119 planning results. For treatment plans studied, conformity indices ranged from 1.05-1.23 (IMRT) and 1.04-1.23 (VMAT). Homogeneity indices ranged from 4.6%-11.0% (IMRT) and 4.6%-10.5% (VMAT). The ratio of total monitor units necessary for dMLC IMRT to that of VMAT was in the range of 1.1-2.0. AAPM TG 119 test cases are useful to generate VMAT benchmark plans. At preclinical implementation stage, plan comparison of VMAT and IMRT plans of AAPM TG 119 test case allowed us to understand basic capabilities of VMAT technique.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)108-116
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
Volume13
Issue number5
StatePublished - 2012

Fingerprint

therapy
arcs
Planning
planning
Therapeutics
Benchmarking
dosage
Prescriptions
homogeneity
Photons
Testing
Prostate
eclipses
Neck
Head
monitors
delivery
optimization

Keywords

  • IMRT
  • Quality assurance
  • TG 119
  • VMAT

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiation
  • Instrumentation

Cite this

Application of AAPM TG 119 to volumetric arc : Therapy (VMAT). / Mynampati, Dinesh Kumar; Yaparpalvi, Ravindra; Hong, Linda; Kuo, Hsiang-Chi; Mah, Dennis.

In: Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, Vol. 13, No. 5, 2012, p. 108-116.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mynampati, Dinesh Kumar ; Yaparpalvi, Ravindra ; Hong, Linda ; Kuo, Hsiang-Chi ; Mah, Dennis. / Application of AAPM TG 119 to volumetric arc : Therapy (VMAT). In: Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. 2012 ; Vol. 13, No. 5. pp. 108-116.
@article{6e480728c5d84ee2a5fc7b637afd15d0,
title = "Application of AAPM TG 119 to volumetric arc: Therapy (VMAT)",
abstract = "The purpose of this study was to create AAPM TG 119 benchmark plans for volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) and to compare VMAT plans with IMRT plan data. AAPM TG 119 proposes a set of test clinical cases for testing the accuracy of IMRT planning and delivery system. For these test cases, we generated two treatment plans, the first plan using 7-9 static dMLC IMRT fields and a second plan utilizing one- or two-arc VMAT technique. Dose optimization and calculations performed using 6MV photons and Eclipse treatment planning system. Dose prescription and planning objectives were set according to the TG 119 goals. Plans were scored based on TG 119 planning objectives. Treatment plans were compared using conformity index (CI) for reference dose and homogeneity index (HI) (for D 5-D 95). For test cases prostate, head-and-neck, C-shape and multitarget prescription dose are 75.6Gy, 50.4 Gy, 50 Gy and 50 Gy, respectively. VMAT dose distributions were comparable to dMLC IMRT plans. Our planning results matched TG 119 planning results. For treatment plans studied, conformity indices ranged from 1.05-1.23 (IMRT) and 1.04-1.23 (VMAT). Homogeneity indices ranged from 4.6{\%}-11.0{\%} (IMRT) and 4.6{\%}-10.5{\%} (VMAT). The ratio of total monitor units necessary for dMLC IMRT to that of VMAT was in the range of 1.1-2.0. AAPM TG 119 test cases are useful to generate VMAT benchmark plans. At preclinical implementation stage, plan comparison of VMAT and IMRT plans of AAPM TG 119 test case allowed us to understand basic capabilities of VMAT technique.",
keywords = "IMRT, Quality assurance, TG 119, VMAT",
author = "Mynampati, {Dinesh Kumar} and Ravindra Yaparpalvi and Linda Hong and Hsiang-Chi Kuo and Dennis Mah",
year = "2012",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "108--116",
journal = "Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics",
issn = "1526-9914",
publisher = "American Institute of Physics Publising LLC",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Application of AAPM TG 119 to volumetric arc

T2 - Therapy (VMAT)

AU - Mynampati, Dinesh Kumar

AU - Yaparpalvi, Ravindra

AU - Hong, Linda

AU - Kuo, Hsiang-Chi

AU - Mah, Dennis

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - The purpose of this study was to create AAPM TG 119 benchmark plans for volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) and to compare VMAT plans with IMRT plan data. AAPM TG 119 proposes a set of test clinical cases for testing the accuracy of IMRT planning and delivery system. For these test cases, we generated two treatment plans, the first plan using 7-9 static dMLC IMRT fields and a second plan utilizing one- or two-arc VMAT technique. Dose optimization and calculations performed using 6MV photons and Eclipse treatment planning system. Dose prescription and planning objectives were set according to the TG 119 goals. Plans were scored based on TG 119 planning objectives. Treatment plans were compared using conformity index (CI) for reference dose and homogeneity index (HI) (for D 5-D 95). For test cases prostate, head-and-neck, C-shape and multitarget prescription dose are 75.6Gy, 50.4 Gy, 50 Gy and 50 Gy, respectively. VMAT dose distributions were comparable to dMLC IMRT plans. Our planning results matched TG 119 planning results. For treatment plans studied, conformity indices ranged from 1.05-1.23 (IMRT) and 1.04-1.23 (VMAT). Homogeneity indices ranged from 4.6%-11.0% (IMRT) and 4.6%-10.5% (VMAT). The ratio of total monitor units necessary for dMLC IMRT to that of VMAT was in the range of 1.1-2.0. AAPM TG 119 test cases are useful to generate VMAT benchmark plans. At preclinical implementation stage, plan comparison of VMAT and IMRT plans of AAPM TG 119 test case allowed us to understand basic capabilities of VMAT technique.

AB - The purpose of this study was to create AAPM TG 119 benchmark plans for volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) and to compare VMAT plans with IMRT plan data. AAPM TG 119 proposes a set of test clinical cases for testing the accuracy of IMRT planning and delivery system. For these test cases, we generated two treatment plans, the first plan using 7-9 static dMLC IMRT fields and a second plan utilizing one- or two-arc VMAT technique. Dose optimization and calculations performed using 6MV photons and Eclipse treatment planning system. Dose prescription and planning objectives were set according to the TG 119 goals. Plans were scored based on TG 119 planning objectives. Treatment plans were compared using conformity index (CI) for reference dose and homogeneity index (HI) (for D 5-D 95). For test cases prostate, head-and-neck, C-shape and multitarget prescription dose are 75.6Gy, 50.4 Gy, 50 Gy and 50 Gy, respectively. VMAT dose distributions were comparable to dMLC IMRT plans. Our planning results matched TG 119 planning results. For treatment plans studied, conformity indices ranged from 1.05-1.23 (IMRT) and 1.04-1.23 (VMAT). Homogeneity indices ranged from 4.6%-11.0% (IMRT) and 4.6%-10.5% (VMAT). The ratio of total monitor units necessary for dMLC IMRT to that of VMAT was in the range of 1.1-2.0. AAPM TG 119 test cases are useful to generate VMAT benchmark plans. At preclinical implementation stage, plan comparison of VMAT and IMRT plans of AAPM TG 119 test case allowed us to understand basic capabilities of VMAT technique.

KW - IMRT

KW - Quality assurance

KW - TG 119

KW - VMAT

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84867093023&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84867093023&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 22955639

AN - SCOPUS:84867093023

VL - 13

SP - 108

EP - 116

JO - Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics

JF - Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics

SN - 1526-9914

IS - 5

ER -