Estimation of Jaw and MLC Transmission Factor Obtained by the Auto-modeling Process in the Pinnacle3 Treatment Planning System.
- Author:
Taejin HWANG
1
;
Sei Kwon KANG
;
Kwang Ho CHEONG
;
Soah PARK
;
Meyeon LEE
;
Kyoung Ju KIM
;
Do Hoon OH
;
Hoonsik BAE
;
Tae Suk SUH
Author Information
1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Hallym University College of Medicine, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Jaw transmission factor;
MLC transmission factor;
Auto-modeling process
- MeSH:
Hand;
Humans;
Jaw;
Water
- From:Korean Journal of Medical Physics
2009;20(4):269-276
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Radiation treatment techniques using photon beam such as three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) as well as intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment (IMRT) demand accurate dose calculation in order to increase target coverage and spare healthy tissue. Both jaw collimator and multi-leaf collimators (MLCs) for photon beams have been used to achieve such goals. In the Pinnacle3 treatment planning system (TPS), which we are using in our clinics, a set of model parameters like jaw collimator transmission factor (JTF) and MLC transmission factor (MLCTF) are determined from the measured data because it is using a model-based photon dose algorithm. However, model parameters obtained by this auto-modeling process can be different from those by direct measurement, which can have a dosimetric effect on the dose distribution. In this paper we estimated JTF and MLCTF obtained by the auto-modeling process in the Pinnacle3 TPS. At first, we obtained JTF and MLCTF by direct measurement, which were the ratio of the output at the reference depth under the closed jaw collimator (MLCs for MLCTF) to that at the same depth with the field size 10x10 cm2 in the water phantom. And then JTF and MLCTF were also obtained by auto-modeling process. And we evaluated the dose difference through phantom and patient study in the 3D-CRT plan. For direct measurement, JTF was 0.001966 for 6 MV and 0.002971 for 10 MV, and MLCTF was 0.01657 for 6 MV and 0.01925 for 10 MV. On the other hand, for auto-modeling process, JTF was 0.001983 for 6 MV and 0.010431 for 10 MV, and MLCTF was 0.00188 for 6 MV and 0.00453 for 10 MV. JTF and MLCTF by direct measurement were very different from those by auto-modeling process and even more reasonable considering each beam quality of 6 MV and 10 MV. These different parameters affect the dose in the low-dose region. Since the wrong estimation of JTF and MLCTF can lead some dosimetric error, comparison of direct measurement and auto-modeling of JTF and MLCTF would be helpful during the beam commissioning.
