The sensitivity of patient-specific IMRT QA methods in detecting systematic errors: field-by-field versus single-gantry-angle composite

This study evaluated the effect of small systematic errors, such as those from a multileaf collimator (MLC), on the quality of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment plan delivery. Two IMRT quality assurance (QA) verification techniques, field-by-field (FBF) and singe-gantry-angle composite (SGAC), were performed to evaluate both original and modified plans using a 2D ion chamber array detector. The dose distributions measured by the array detector for both FBF and SGAC were compared with the dose distribution calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS). FBF was found to be more sensitive than SGAC at detecting small systematic errors such as the opening and closing of the MLC's segments, which were evaluated with respect to a gamma-index of 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm. The systematic errors involved in closing the segments of the anterior field by 2 mm and 3 mm showed a significant difference compared with the original field (unmodified): 83.1 ± 1.7% and 42.9 ± 1.9% gamma-index passing rates, respectively, for FBF. For SGAC, the magnitude of closing the MLC by 2 mm remained unnoticed and resulted in a 95.1 ± 2.61% gamma-index passing rate. Opening the MLC by 2 mm gave a false negative, but more than 5% of the rectum received 75 Gy, which exceeded the tolerance radiation dose recommended by the Quantitative Analysis of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic (QUANTEC). (paper)