Comparison of measured and computed portal dose for IMRT treatment.

A new 2D array Seven 29T model (PTW, Freiburg), equipped with 729 vented plane-parallel ion chambers, projected for pretreatment verification of radiotherapy plans, was used as a detector for the transmitted or portal dose measurements below a Rando phantom. The dosimetric qualities of the 2D array make it attractive for measuring transmitted dose maps from step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). It is well known that for step-and-shoot IMRT beams that use a small number of monitor units (MUs) per sequence, the early and recent electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) present a different response at X-ray start-up that affects the accuracy of the measured transmitted dose. The comparison of portal doses measured to those calculated by a commercial treatment-planning system (TPS) can verify correct dose delivery during treatment. This direct validation was tested by irradiating a simulated head tumor in a Rando anthropomorphic phantom by step-and-shoot IMRT beams. The absolute transmitted doses on a plane orthogonal to the beam central axis below the phantom were measured by the 2D array calibrated in terms of dose to water and compared with the computed portal dose extracted by custom software. In a previous paper, the comparison between the IMRT portal doses, computed by a commercial TPS and measured by a linear array that supplied a 1 mm spatial dose resolution, was carried out. The gamma-index analysis supplied an agreement of more than 95% of the dose point with acceptance criteria, in terms of dose difference, DeltaDmax, and distance agreement, deltadmax, equal to 4% and 4 mm, respectively. In this paper, we verify the possible use of the PTW 2D array for measurements of the transmitted doses during several fractions of head and neck tumor radiotherapy. There are two advantages in the use of this 2D array as a portal dose device for the IMRT quality assurance program: first is the ability to perform absolute dose comparisons for hundreds of measurement positions to verify the correct dose delivery in several fractions of the therapy; second is the efficiency in time to detect these kinds of dose distributions within the field of view area of the CT scanner.