» Articles » PMID: 35950259

AAPM MEDICAL PHYSICS PRACTICE GUIDELINE 5.b: Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations-Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams

Overview
Date 2022 Aug 11
PMID 35950259
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education, and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: Must and Must Not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. While must is the term to be used in the guidelines, if an entity that adopts the guideline has shall as the preferred term, the AAPM considers that must and shall have the same meaning. Should and Should Not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances.

Citing Articles

Commissioning and implementation of a pencil-beam algorithm with a Lorentz correction as a secondary dose calculation algorithm for an Elekta Unity 1.5T MR linear accelerator.

Taneja S, Wang H, Barbee D, Galavis P, Sosa M, Byun D J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2024; 26(3):e14590.

PMID: 39625056 PMC: 11905237. DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14590.


Tuning a secondary dose verification software for a CT-guided online adaptive delivery system.

Zhao X, Baur M, Wall P, Laugeman E J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2024; 26(2):e14563.

PMID: 39611813 PMC: 11799919. DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14563.


Evaluation and comparison of synthetic computed tomography algorithms with 3T MRI for prostate radiotherapy: AI-based versus bulk density method.

Karhula S, Karppinen P, Hietala H, Nikkinen J J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2024; 26(3):e14581.

PMID: 39611806 PMC: 11905239. DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14581.


AAPM task group report 135.B: Quality assurance for robotic radiosurgery.

Wang L, Descovich M, Wilcox E, Yang J, Cohen A, Fuerweger C Med Phys. 2024; 52(1):45-76.

PMID: 39453412 PMC: 11700000. DOI: 10.1002/mp.17478.


The impact of plan complexity on calculation and measurement-based pre-treatment verifications for sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

Li S, Luo H, Tan X, Qiu T, Yang X, Feng B Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2024; 31:100622.

PMID: 39220115 PMC: 11364123. DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100622.


References
1.
Kry S, Molineu A, Kerns J, Faught A, Huang J, Pulliam K . Institutional patient-specific IMRT QA does not predict unacceptable plan delivery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014; 90(5):1195-201. PMC: 4276500. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.08.334. View

2.
Gerbi B, Antolak J, Deibel F, Followill D, Herman M, Higgins P . Recommendations for clinical electron beam dosimetry: supplement to the recommendations of Task Group 25. Med Phys. 2009; 36(7):3239-79. DOI: 10.1118/1.3125820. View

3.
Casanova Borca V, Pasquino M, Ozzello F, Tofani S . The use of a diode matrix in commissioning activities for electron energies > or = 9 MeV: a feasibility study. Med Phys. 2009; 36(4):1144-54. DOI: 10.1118/1.3081414. View

4.
Almond P, Biggs P, Coursey B, Hanson W, Huq M, Nath R . AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams. Med Phys. 1999; 26(9):1847-70. DOI: 10.1118/1.598691. View

5.
Davidson S, Popple R, Ibbott G, Followill D . Technical note: Heterogeneity dose calculation accuracy in IMRT: study of five commercial treatment planning systems using an anthropomorphic thorax phantom. Med Phys. 2009; 35(12):5434-9. PMC: 2736720. DOI: 10.1118/1.3006353. View