Cross Verification Of Independent Dose Recalculation, Log Files Based, And Phantom Measurement-Based Pretreatment Quality Assurance For Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy

Independent treatment planning system (TPS) check with Mobius3D software, log files based quality assurance (QA) with MobiusFX, and phantom measurement-based QA with ArcCHECK were performed and cross verified for head-and-neck (17 patients), chest (16 patients), and abdominal (19 patients) cancer patients who underwent volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Dosimetric differences and percentage gamma passing rates (%GPs) were evaluated and compared for this cross verification. For the dosimetric differences in planning target volume (PTV) coverage, there was no significant difference among TPS vs. Mobius3D, TPS vs. MobiusFX, and TPS vs. ArcCHECK. For the dosimetric differences in organs at risks (OARs), the number of metrics with an average dosimetric differences higher than +/- 3% for TPS vs Mobius3D, TPS vs MobiusFX, and TPS vs ArcCHECK were 1, 1, 7; 2, 1, 4; 1, 1, 5 for the patients with head-and-neck, abdomen, and chest cancer, respectively. The %GPs of global gamma indices for Mobius3D and MobiousFX were above 97%, while it ranged from 92% to 96% for ArcCHECK. The %GPs of individual volume-based gamma indices were around 98% for Mobius3D and MobiousFX, except for gamma PTV for chest and abdominal cancer (88.9% to 92%); while it ranged from 86% to 99% for ArcCHECK. In conclusion, some differences in dosimetric metrics and gamma passing rates were observed with ArcCHECK measurement-based QA in comparison with independent dosecheck and log files based QA. Care must be taken when considering replacing phantom measurement-based IMRT/VMAT QA.