Assessment of pencil beam scanning proton therapy beam delivery accuracy through machine learning and log file analysis

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.104854
{"title":"Assessment of pencil beam scanning proton therapy beam delivery accuracy through machine learning and log file analysis","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.104854","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Comprehensive Quality Assurance (QA) protocols are necessary for complex beam delivery systems like Pencil Beam Scanning (PBS) proton therapy. This study focuses on automating the evaluation of beam delivery accuracy using irradiation log files and machine learning (ML) models.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Irradiation log files of 935 clinical treatment fields and routine QA beams were analysed to evaluate spot parameters and Monitor Unit (MU) accuracy. ML models predicted spot size along the X, Y, major, and minor axes. In-house scripts automated log file analysis and spot size predictions. Predicted spot sizes were compared with expected baselines, and the accuracy of spot position, symmetry, and MU for each spot in the beam was evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>More than 99.5 % of spot positions were accurate within a 1 mm. The mean and Standard Deviation (SD) of X positional error were −0.021 mm (SD: 0.181 mm), and for Y positional error, they were −0.002 mm (SD: 0.132 mm). ML models accurately predicted spot sizes, with over 95 % of spots demonstrating size variations within 10 % of the baseline. The Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) of X and Y spot size differences were 0.15 mm and 0.16 mm, respectively. Spot symmetry was within 10 %, and MU accuracy showed 95 % of spots with MU per spot variation less than 2 %.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This method can validate the vendor’s beam delivery safety interlock system and serve as a quick alternative to patient-specific QA in adaptive treatment, where time is limited, as well as for routine QA spot parameter evaluations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56092,"journal":{"name":"Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physica Medica-European Journal of Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1120179724011116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Comprehensive Quality Assurance (QA) protocols are necessary for complex beam delivery systems like Pencil Beam Scanning (PBS) proton therapy. This study focuses on automating the evaluation of beam delivery accuracy using irradiation log files and machine learning (ML) models.

Methods

Irradiation log files of 935 clinical treatment fields and routine QA beams were analysed to evaluate spot parameters and Monitor Unit (MU) accuracy. ML models predicted spot size along the X, Y, major, and minor axes. In-house scripts automated log file analysis and spot size predictions. Predicted spot sizes were compared with expected baselines, and the accuracy of spot position, symmetry, and MU for each spot in the beam was evaluated.

Results

More than 99.5 % of spot positions were accurate within a 1 mm. The mean and Standard Deviation (SD) of X positional error were −0.021 mm (SD: 0.181 mm), and for Y positional error, they were −0.002 mm (SD: 0.132 mm). ML models accurately predicted spot sizes, with over 95 % of spots demonstrating size variations within 10 % of the baseline. The Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) of X and Y spot size differences were 0.15 mm and 0.16 mm, respectively. Spot symmetry was within 10 %, and MU accuracy showed 95 % of spots with MU per spot variation less than 2 %.

Conclusion

This method can validate the vendor’s beam delivery safety interlock system and serve as a quick alternative to patient-specific QA in adaptive treatment, where time is limited, as well as for routine QA spot parameter evaluations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过机器学习和日志文件分析评估铅笔束扫描质子疗法的束流输送准确性。
目的:对于像铅笔束扫描(PBS)质子治疗这样复杂的射束传输系统,全面的质量保证(QA)协议是必要的。本研究的重点是利用辐照日志文件和机器学习(ML)模型自动评估射束传输的准确性:方法:分析了935个临床治疗场和常规QA束的辐照记录文件,以评估光斑参数和监测单元(MU)的准确性。ML 模型沿 X、Y、主轴和次轴预测光斑大小。内部脚本自动进行日志文件分析和光斑大小预测。将预测的光斑尺寸与预期基线进行比较,并评估光束中每个光斑的光斑位置、对称性和 MU 的准确性:结果:99.5% 以上的光斑位置精确度在 1 毫米以内。X 位置误差的平均值和标准偏差(SD)分别为-0.021 毫米(SD:0.181 毫米),Y 位置误差的平均值和标准偏差(SD)分别为-0.002 毫米(SD:0.132 毫米)。ML 模型能准确预测光斑尺寸,95% 以上的光斑尺寸变化在基线的 10% 以内。X 和 Y 光斑尺寸差异的均方根误差(RMSE)分别为 0.15 毫米和 0.16 毫米。光斑对称性在 10% 以内,MU 精确度显示 95% 的光斑每个光斑的 MU 变化小于 2%:该方法可验证供应商的光束传输安全联锁系统,在时间有限的适应性治疗中可快速替代针对患者的质量检测,也可用于常规质量检测光斑参数评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
14.70%
发文量
493
审稿时长
78 days
期刊介绍: Physica Medica, European Journal of Medical Physics, publishing with Elsevier from 2007, provides an international forum for research and reviews on the following main topics: Medical Imaging Radiation Therapy Radiation Protection Measuring Systems and Signal Processing Education and training in Medical Physics Professional issues in Medical Physics.
期刊最新文献
Potential dose reduction and image quality improvement in chest CT with a photon-counting CT compared to a new dual-source CT Dosimetric study of bevel factors in IOERT with mobile linacs: Towards a unified code of practice Assessment of pencil beam scanning proton therapy beam delivery accuracy through machine learning and log file analysis Exploring the impact of filament density on the responsiveness of 3D-Printed bolus materials for high-energy photon radiotherapy Needle artifact redistribution technique (Needle-ART): A method for metal artifact reduction during CT interventionism based on gantry tilt
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1