Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36217283›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2022

Challenges in modeling the Agility multileaf collimator in treatment planning systems and current needs for improvement.

V Hernandez, A Angerud, E Bogaert, M Hussein, M Lemire, J García-Miguel, J Saez

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

V HernandezDepartment of Medical Physics, Hospital Sant Joan de Reus, IISPV, Tarragona, Spain.
A AngerudRaySearch Laboratories AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
E BogaertDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
M HusseinMetrology for Medical Physics Centre, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, UK.
M LemireDepartment of Medical Physics, CIUSSS de l'Est-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
J García-MiguelDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain.
J SaezDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal · CAConsorci Sanitari de Terrassa · ESGhent University Hospital · BEHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ESInstitut de Recerca Biomèdica Catalunya Sud · ESNational Physical Laboratory · GBRaySearch Laboratories (Sweden) · SE

Funding

Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Agility multileaf collimator (MLC) mounted in Elekta linear accelerators features some unique design characteristics, such as large leaf thickness, eccentric curvature at the leaf tip, and defocused leaf sides ('tilting'). These characteristics offer several advantages but modeling them in treatment planning systems (TPSs) is challenging. PURPOSE: The goals of this study were to investigate the challenges faced when modeling the Agility in two commercial TPSs (Monaco and RayStation) and to explore how the implemented MLC models could be improved in the future.

methodsFour linear accelerators equipped with the Agility, located at different centers, were used for the study. Three centers use the RayStation TPS and the other one uses Monaco. For comparison purposes, data from four Varian linear accelerators with the Millennium 120 MLC were also included. Average doses measured with asynchronous sweeping gap tests were used to characterize and compare the characteristics of the Millennium and the Agility MLCs and to assess the MLC model in the TPSs. The FOURL test included in the ExpressQA package, provided by Elekta, was also used to evaluate the tongue-and-groove with radiochromic films. Finally, raytracing was used to investigate the impact of the MLC geometry and to understand the results obtained for each MLC.

resultsThe geometry of the Agility produces dosimetric effects associated with the rounded leaf end up to a distance 20 mm away from the leaf tip end measured at the isocenter plane. This affects the tongue-and-groove shadowing, which progressively increases along the distance to the tip end. The RayStation and Monaco TPSs did not account for this effect, which made trade-offs in the MLC parameters necessary and greatly varied the final MLC parameters used by different centers. Raytracing showed that these challenging leaf tip effects were directly related to the MLC geometry and that the characteristics mainly responsible for the large leaf tip effects of the Agility were its tilting design and its small source-to-collimator distance.

conclusionsThe MLC models implemented in RayStation and Monaco could not accurately reproduce the leaf tip effects for the Agility. Therefore, trade-offs are needed and the optimal MLC parameters are dependent on the specific characteristics of treatment plans. Refining the MLC models for the Agility to better approximate the measured leaf tip and tongue-and-groove effects would extend the validity of the MLC model, reduce the variability in the MLC parameters used by the community, and facilitate the standardization of the MLC configuration process.

Indexed as

Radiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedParticle AcceleratorsPhantoms, ImagingRadiometryRadiotherapy Dosage

Identifiers

PMID36217283
PMCPMC10092639
OpenAlexW4304165887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.