Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGillis, Sofie
dc.contributor.authorDe Wagter, Carlos
dc.contributor.authorBohsung, J
dc.contributor.authorPerrin, Bruce A
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, Peter C
dc.contributor.authorMijnheer, Ben J
dc.date.accessioned2009-08-05T12:04:26Z
dc.date.available2009-08-05T12:04:26Z
dc.date.issued2005-09
dc.identifier.citationAn inter-centre quality assurance network for IMRT verification: results of the ESTRO QUASIMODO project. 2005, 76 (3):340-53 Radiother Oncolen
dc.identifier.issn0167-8140
dc.identifier.pmid16099521
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.radonc.2005.06.021
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10541/76330
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: IMRT necessitates extension of existing inter-centre quality assurance programs due to its increased complexity. We assessed the feasibility of an inter-centre verification method for different IMRT techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight European radiotherapy institutions of the QUASIMODO network, have designed an IMRT plan for a horseshoe-shaped PTV surrounding a cylindrical OAR in a simplified pelvic phantom. All centres applied common plan objectives but used their own equipment for planning and delivery. They verified the delivery of this plan according to a common protocol with radiographic film and ionisation chamber measurements. The irradiated films, the results of the ionisation chamber measurements and the computed dose distributions were sent to one analysis centre that compared the measured and computed dose distributions with the gamma method and composite dose-area histograms. RESULTS: 4% (relative to the prescribed dose) and 3mm (distance-to-agreement) were decided feasible gamma criteria. The composite dose-area histograms showed a maximum local deviation of 3.5% in the mean dose of the PTV and 5% in the OAR. Systematic differences could be identified, and in some cases explained. CONCLUSIONS: This multi-centre dosimetric verification study demonstrated both the feasibility of a multi-centre quality assurance network to evaluate any IMRT planning and delivery system combination, as well as the validity of the methodology involved.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectCanceren
dc.subject.meshCommunity Networks
dc.subject.meshDose Fractionation
dc.subject.meshHumans
dc.subject.meshModels, Theoretical
dc.subject.meshNeoplasms
dc.subject.meshQuality Assurance, Health Care
dc.subject.meshRadiometry
dc.subject.meshRadiotherapy
dc.subject.meshReproducibility of Results
dc.subject.meshUser-Computer Interface
dc.titleAn inter-centre quality assurance network for IMRT verification: results of the ESTRO QUASIMODO project.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Radiotherapy, Ghent University Hospital, Gent, Belgium. sifie.gillis@skynet.been
dc.identifier.journalRadiotherapy and Oncologyen
html.description.abstractBACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: IMRT necessitates extension of existing inter-centre quality assurance programs due to its increased complexity. We assessed the feasibility of an inter-centre verification method for different IMRT techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight European radiotherapy institutions of the QUASIMODO network, have designed an IMRT plan for a horseshoe-shaped PTV surrounding a cylindrical OAR in a simplified pelvic phantom. All centres applied common plan objectives but used their own equipment for planning and delivery. They verified the delivery of this plan according to a common protocol with radiographic film and ionisation chamber measurements. The irradiated films, the results of the ionisation chamber measurements and the computed dose distributions were sent to one analysis centre that compared the measured and computed dose distributions with the gamma method and composite dose-area histograms. RESULTS: 4% (relative to the prescribed dose) and 3mm (distance-to-agreement) were decided feasible gamma criteria. The composite dose-area histograms showed a maximum local deviation of 3.5% in the mean dose of the PTV and 5% in the OAR. Systematic differences could be identified, and in some cases explained. CONCLUSIONS: This multi-centre dosimetric verification study demonstrated both the feasibility of a multi-centre quality assurance network to evaluate any IMRT planning and delivery system combination, as well as the validity of the methodology involved.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record