Prediction of VMAT delivery accuracy using plan modulation complexity score and log-files analysis. (1st September 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Viola, Pietro; Romano, Carmela; Craus, Maurizio; Macchia, Gabriella; Buwenge, Milly; Indovina, Luca; Valentini, Vincenzo; Morganti, Alessio G; Deodato, Francesco; Cilla, Savino
• Is Part Of: Biomedical physics & engineering express. Volume 8:Number 5(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-09-01
• Subjects: VMAT -- complexity index -- log-files; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Biophysics -- Periodicals; Biomedical engineering -- Periodicals; Medical sciences -- Periodicals; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1088/2057-1976/ac82c6
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2057-1976

Abstract

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to develop a predictive model based on plan complexity metrics and linac log-files analysis to classify the dosimetric accuracy of VMAT plans. A total of 612 VMAT plans, corresponding to 1224 arcs, were analyzed. All VMAT arcs underwent pre-treatment verification that was performed by means of the dynamic log-files generated by the linac. The comparison of predicted (by TPS) and measured (by log-files) integral fluences was performed using γ -analysis in terms of the percentage of points with γ -value smaller than one ( γ %) and using a stringent 2%(local)/2 mm criteria. This γ -analysis was performed by a commercial software LinacWatch. The action limits (AL) were derived from the mean values, standard deviations and the confidence limit (CL) of the γ % distribution. A plan complexity metric, the modulation complexity score (MCS), based on the aperture beam area variability and leaf sequence variability was used as input variable of the model. A binary logistic regression (LR) model was developed to classify QA results as 'pass' ( γ % ≥ AL) or 'fail' ( γ % < AL). Receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curves were used to determine the optimal MCS threshold to flag 'failed' plans that need to be re-optimized. The model reliability was evaluated stratifying the plans in training, validation and testing groups. The confidence and action limits for γ % were found 20.1% and 79.9%, respectively. The accuracy of the model for the training and testing dataset was 97.4% and 98.0%, respectively. The optimal MCS threshold value for the identification of failed plans was 0.142, providing a true positive rate able to flag the plans failing QA of 91%. In clinical routine, the use of this MCS threshold may allow the prompt identification of overly modulated plans, then reducing the number of QA failures and improving the quality of VMAT plans used for treatment.