Program Information
A Multi-Institutional Study of Independent Dose Verification Using Golden Beam Data
M Itano1*, R Tachibana2 , M Yamashita3 , H Shimizu4 , Y Sugawara5 , K Kotabe6 , T Kamima7 , R Takahashi8 , S Ishibashi9 , Y Uchida10 , T Yamazaki11 , H Tachibana12 , (1) Inagi Municipal Hospital, Inagi, Tokyo, (2) National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Chiba, (3) Kobe City Medical Center General Hospital, Kobe, Hyogo, (4) Kitasato University Medical Center, Kitamoto, Saitama, (5) National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Shinjuku, Tokyo, (6) National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Shinjuku, Tokyo, (7) Cancer Institute Hospital Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Koto, Tokyo, (8) Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Koto, Tokyo, (9) Sasebo City General Hospital, Sasebo, Nagasaki, (10) National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Chiba, (11) Inagi Municipal Hospital, Inagi, Tokyo, (12) National Cancer Center, Kashiwa, Chiba
Presentations
SU-F-T-494 (Sunday, July 31, 2016) 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM Room: Exhibit Hall
Purpose:In general, beam data of individual linac is measured for independent dose verification software program and the verification is performed as a secondary check. In this study, independent dose verification using golden beam data was compared to that using individual linac’s beam data.
Methods:Six institutions were participated and three different beam data were prepared. The one was individual measured data (Original Beam Data, OBD) .The others were generated by all measurements from same linac model (Model-GBD) and all linac models (All-GBD). The three different beam data were registered to the independent verification software program for each institute. Subsequently, patient’s plans in eight sites (brain, head and neck, lung, esophagus, breast, abdomen, pelvis and bone) were analyzed using the verification program to compare doses calculated using the three different beam data.
Results:1116 plans were collected from six institutes. Compared to using the OBD, the results shows the variation using the Model-GBD based calculation and the All-GBD was 0.0 ± 0.3% and 0.0 ± 0.6%, respectively. The maximum variations were 1.2% and 2.3%, respectively. The plans with the variation over 1% shows the reference points were located away from the central axis with/without physical wedge.
Conclusion:The confidence limit (2SD) using the Model-GBD and the All-GBD was within 0.6% and 1.2%, respectively. Thus, the use of golden beam data may be feasible for independent verification. In addition to it, the verification using golden beam data provide quality assurance of planning from the view of audit.
Funding Support, Disclosures, and Conflict of Interest: This research is partially supported by Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development(AMED)
Contact Email: