Keywords
PTW Isoball Phantom
isocentre
IsoCal
Artiscan
How to Cite
Abstract
The aim of the presented work was to compare two methods of verification of the medical accelerator’s isocenter and determine the imaging offset. Two methods were used for verification - Machine Performence Check (MPC) application with the IsoCal phantom and the Artiscan software with the PTW Isoball Phantom. Each of the analyzed methods provides an alternative way to the time-consuming and costly verification of the isocenter on radiochromic or gafchromic dosimetry films.
Measurements were performed for ten days and the obtained data were compared for both methods. Using statistical tests, concordance was determined for the results obtained by the two methods. The data were presented in trend function graphs.
Analysis of the results shows that it is not possible to unequivocally state that the methods are not equivalent. In addition, the AAPM TG 142 report assumes that MPC is not a sufficient test for checking medical linear accelerator’s isocentre.
References
Raport. Radioterapia w Polsce w świetle zmian systemowych – analiza i rekomendacje 2021.https://docplayer.pl/209607317-Warszawa-2021-raport-radioterapia-w-polsce-w-swietle-zmian-systemowych-analiza-i-rekomendacje.html, dostęp 13.10.2022 r.
Raport roczny. Nowotwory złośliwe w Polsce w 2019 roku. Narodowy Instytut Onkologii, http://onkologia.org.pl/wp-content/uploads/Nowotwory_2019.pdf, dostęp 13.10.2022 r.
Rowshanfarzad P, Sabet, M, O'Connor, D.J. and Greer. Isocenter verification for linac-based stereotactic radiation therapy: review of principles and techniques. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. 2011;11.15;12(4):3645
Report No. 142 - Task Group 142 report: Quality assurance of medical accelerators; 2009
Bayer Ch. An independent verification of linac isocenter, Georgia Institute of Technology; 2019.
Szweda H, Graczyk K, Radomiak D, Matuszewski K, Pawałowski B. Comparison of three different phantoms used for Winston-Lutz test with Artiscan software. Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy. 2020;25:351-354.
Varian Medical Systems. Machine performance check reference guide V2.7. Varian Associates Inc. Oncology Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA; 2019.
Jitendra N. Evaluation and validation of the machine performance check application for TrueBeam 2.5 Linac. Indian Journal of Science and Technology; 2020.13:1470-1475.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Letters in Oncology Science