Szczegóły publikacji
Opis bibliograficzny
Are gamma passing rate and dose-volume histogram QA metrics correlated? / Mateusz BARAN, Zbisɫaw TABOR, Monika Tulik, Damian Kabat, Krzysztof RZECKI, Tomasz SOŚNICKI, Michael Waligórski // Medical Physics ; ISSN 0094-2405. — 2021 — vol. 48 iss. 9, s. 4743-4753. — Bibliogr. s. 4753, Abstr. — Dod. afiliacja Autorów: Cracow University of Technology, Krakow, Poland
Autorzy (7)
- AGHBaran Mateusz
- AGHTabor Zbisław
- Tulik Monika
- Kabat Damian
- AGHRzecki Krzysztof
- AGHSośnicki Tomasz
- Waligórski Michael P. R.
Słowa kluczowe
Dane bibliometryczne
| ID BaDAP | 136769 |
|---|---|
| Data dodania do BaDAP | 2021-10-07 |
| Tekst źródłowy | URL |
| DOI | 10.1002/mp.15142 |
| Rok publikacji | 2021 |
| Typ publikacji | artykuł w czasopiśmie |
| Otwarty dostęp |  |
| Czasopismo/seria | Medical Physics |
Abstract
Purpose The quality of a measured distribution of dose delivered against its corresponding radiotherapy plan is routinely assessed by gamma index (GI) and dose–volume histogram (DVH) metrics. Any correlation between error detection rates, as based on either of these approaches, while argued, has never been convincingly demonstrated. The dependence of the strength of correlation between the GI passing rate (urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0001) and DVH quality assurance (QA) metrics on various elements of the therapy plan has not been systematically investigated. Methods A formal analysis of the relation between urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0002 and DVH metrics has been undertaken, leading to a relationship which may partly approximate urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0003 with respect to the DVH. This relationship was further validated by studying examples of simulated clinical radiotherapy plans and by studying the correlation between urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0004 and the derived relationship using a simple two-dimensional representations of the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR), where penumbra regions, distance-to-agreement tolerances and dose delivery errors were systematically varied. Results It is shown formally that there cannot be any correlation between urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0005 and other commonly applied DVH-derived QA measures. However, urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0006 may be partly approximated given the planned and measured DVH. The derived urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0007 approximation (the “urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0008-slope indicator”) may be clinically useful in some practical cases of radiotherapy plan QA. Conclusions Inoformal terms, there cannot be any correlation between urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0009 and any common DVH-calculated patient-specific measures, with respect to PTV or OAR. However, as demonstrated analytically and further confirmed in our simulation studies, the urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0010 approximation derived in this study (the “urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0011-slope indicator”) may in some cases offer a degree of correlation between urn:x-wiley:00942405:media:mp15142:mp15142-math-0012 and the PTV and OAR DVH QA metrics in measured and planned patient-specific dose distributions—which may be potentially useful in clinical practice.