Reference dataset of users' photon beam modeling parameters for the Eclipse, Pinnacle, and RayStation treatment planning systems. Issue 1 (15th November 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Glenn, Mallory C.; Peterson, Christine B.; Followill, David S.; Howell, Rebecca M.; Pollard‐Larkin, Julianne M.; Kry, Stephen F.
• Is Part Of: Medical physics. Volume 47:Issue 1(2020)
• Page Start: 282
• Page End: 288
• Publication Date: 2019-11-15
• Subjects: beam modeling -- commissioning -- IROC -- quality assurance -- treatment planning system; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Medical physics; Geneeskunde; Natuurkunde; Toepassingen; Biophysics; Periodicals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/mp.13892
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0094-2405

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: The aim of this work was to provide a novel description of how the radiotherapy community configures treatment planning system (TPS) radiation beam models for clinically used treatment machines. Here we describe the results of a survey of self‐reported TPS beam modeling parameter values across different C‐arm linear accelerators, beam energies, and multileaf collimator (MLC) configurations. Acquisition and validation methods: Beam modeling data were acquired via electronic survey implemented through the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) Houston Quality Assurance Center's online facility questionnaire. The survey was open to participation from January 2018 through January 2019 for all institutions monitored by IROC. After quality control, 2818 beam models were collected from 642 institutions. This survey, designed for Eclipse, Pinnacle, and RayStation, instructed physicists to report parameter values used to model the radiation source and MLC for each treatment machine and beam energy used clinically for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy. Parameters collected included the effective source/spot size, MLC transmission, dosimetric leaf gap, tongue and groove effect, and other nondosimetric parameters specific to each TPS. To facilitate survey participation, instructions were provided on how to identify requested beam modeling parameters within each TPS environment. Data format and usage notes: Numeric values of the beam modeling parameters are compiled and tabulated according to TPS and calculation algorithm, linear accelerator model class, beam energy, and MLC configuration. Values are also presented as distributions, ranging from the 2.5th to the 97.5th percentile. Potential applications: These data provide an independent guide describing how the radiotherapy community mathematically represents its clinical radiation beams. These distributions may be used by the community for comparison during the commissioning or verification of their TPS beam models. Ultimately, we hope that the current work will allow institutions to spot potentially suspicious parameter values and help ensure more accurate radiotherapy delivery.