<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.4 20241031//EN"
        "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.4/JATS-journalpublishing1-4.dtd">
<article  article-type="research-article"        dtd-version="1.4">
            <front>

                <journal-meta>
                                                                <journal-id>ktd</journal-id>
            <journal-title-group>
                                                                                    <journal-title>Kocatepe Tıp Dergisi</journal-title>
            </journal-title-group>
                                        <issn pub-type="epub">3061-9904</issn>
                                                                                            <publisher>
                    <publisher-name>Afyonkarahisar Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi</publisher-name>
                </publisher>
                    </journal-meta>
                <article-meta>
                                        <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18229/kocatepetip.1236007</article-id>
                                                                <article-categories>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="en">
                                                            <subject>Clinical Sciences</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="tr">
                                                            <subject>Klinik Tıp Bilimleri</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                    </article-categories>
                                                                                                                                                        <title-group>
                                                                                                                        <article-title>ÇOKLU VMAT ALANLARININ KALİTE GÜVENİLİRLİĞİ (KG) İÇİN BELİRLENEN DÜŞÜK DOZ EŞİKLERİNDE GAMA ANALİZİ BAĞIMLILIĞI</article-title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <trans-title-group xml:lang="en">
                                    <trans-title>GAMMA ANALYSIS DEPENDENCE ON SPECIFIED LOW DOSE THRESHOLDS FOR MULTIPL VMAT FIELDS QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA)</trans-title>
                                </trans-title-group>
                                                                                                    </title-group>
            
                                                    <contrib-group content-type="authors">
                                                                        <contrib contrib-type="author">
                                                                    <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">
                                        https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3559-8933</contrib-id>
                                                                <name>
                                    <surname>Erdoğan</surname>
                                    <given-names>Taha</given-names>
                                </name>
                                                                    <aff>AFYONKARAHİSAR SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ</aff>
                                                            </contrib>
                                                                                </contrib-group>
                        
                                        <pub-date pub-type="pub" iso-8601-date="20240429">
                    <day>04</day>
                    <month>29</month>
                    <year>2024</year>
                </pub-date>
                                        <volume>25</volume>
                                        <issue>2</issue>
                                        <fpage>180</fpage>
                                        <lpage>188</lpage>
                        
                        <history>
                                    <date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="20230116">
                        <day>01</day>
                        <month>16</month>
                        <year>2023</year>
                    </date>
                                                    <date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="20230820">
                        <day>08</day>
                        <month>20</month>
                        <year>2023</year>
                    </date>
                            </history>
                                        <permissions>
                    <copyright-statement>Copyright © 1999, Kocatepe Tıp Dergisi</copyright-statement>
                    <copyright-year>1999</copyright-year>
                    <copyright-holder>Kocatepe Tıp Dergisi</copyright-holder>
                </permissions>
            
                                                                                                <abstract><p>AMAÇ: Amerikan Tıp Fizikçileri Derneği (AAPM) TG-119 numaralı raporunda, düzlemsel doz dağılımı gama analizi için kalite güvenilirliği (KG) verilerini değerlendirirken %10&#039;luk düşük doz eşiği veya kolimatör tarafından belirlenen bir değerlendirme alanı kullanılmasını önermektedir. Bu çalışmada, standart ve daha rijit kabul kriterlerine göre (%3/3 mm, %2/2mm ve %1/1mm) %0 ile %15 aralığında çeşitli düşük doz eşiklerinin tedavi planları kalite kontrollerindeki etkisinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır.GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: VarianEclipse® tedavi planlama sisteminden (TPS) 11 baş ve boyun, 11 beyin, 11 akciğer ve 11 prostat kanseri vakası olmak üzere toplam 44 çoklu VMAT (Hacimsel Modülasyonlu Ark Terapi) tedavi planı rastgele seçildi. Daha sonra portal dozimetri yazılımı kullanılarak gama analizleri gerçekleştirildi.BULGULAR: Global normalizasyon kullanımında; gama geçiş oranı (%GP), düşük doz eşiğinin değeri arttıkça azaldı. Kullanılan düşük doz eşiklerin de %3/3 mm ve %2/2 mm kriteri için; akciğer kanseri hariç, %GP değerleri %95&#039;in üzerine çıkmıştır.%GP&#039;deki değişim yüzdesi; düşük doz eşiği %15 için, %3/3mm %2/2mm ve %1/1 mm kriterlerine göre akciğer kanseri planlarında sırasıyla %1.69, %5.65ve %20.03 olarak gözlenmiştir. Lokal gama analizinde, düşük doz eşiği arttıkça %GP artmıştır, bu global gama yönteminin tam tersi bir sonucudur. Tüm vakalarda, %3/3mm ve %5 düşük doz eşiği ve üzeri için %95&#039;in üzerinde çıkmıştır. Lokal gama yönteminde, %GP&#039;deki değişim yüzdesi düşük doz eşiği %15 için %3/3mm %2/2mm ve % 1/1 mmkriterlerine göre akciğer kanseri planlarında sırasıyla %2.98, %7.88ve %23.86 olarak gözlenmiştir. Rijit kabul kriterleri uygulandığında %GP sonucu azalmaya başlamıştır. Hem %2/2mm hem de%1/1mm kriterleri için ortalama GP, tüm düşük doz eşiklerinde %95&#039;in altında bulunmuştur.SONUÇ: Global normalizasyonda, farklı düşük doz eşik seviyesi kullanarak gama analizi uygulamanın, KG sonuçları üzerinde kritik bir etkisinin olmadığını göstermektedir. Lokalnormalizasyonda, düşük doz eşik seviyesi dikkatli seçilmelidir, düşük doz noktaları ortalama %GP&#039;nin hızla artmasına neden olabilmektedir.</p></abstract>
                                                                                                                                    <trans-abstract xml:lang="en">
                            <p>OBJECTIVE: In its report TG-119, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) recommends the use of a 10% low-dose threshold or a collimator-determined assessment area when evaluating quality assurance (QA) data for planar dose distribution gamma analysis. In this study, it was aimed to examine the effect of various low-dose thresholds ranging from 0% to 15% according to standard and more rigid acceptance criteria (3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, and 1%/1 mm) on quality control of treatment plans.MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 44 multiple VMAT (Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy) treatment plans including 11 head and neck, 11 brain, 11 lung and 11 prostate cancer cases were randomly selected from the Varian Eclipse® treatment planning system (TPS). Gamma analysis was then performed using portal dosimetry software.RESULTS: Using global normalization, the gamma pass through rate (%GP) decreased as the value of the low dose threshold increased. For the low dose thresholds used, the %GP values exceeded 95% for the 3%/3mm and 2%/2mm criteria, except for lung cancer. The percentage change in %GP was 1.69%, 5.65% and 20.03% for lung cancer plans for the 3%/3mm, 2%/2mm and 1%/1mm criteria, respectively, for a low dose threshold of 15%. In the local gamma analysis, the %GP increased as the low dose threshold increased, which is the opposite result of the global gamma method. In all cases, it was above 95% for 3%/3mm and 5% low dose threshold and above. For the local gamma method, the percentage change in %GP was 2.98%, 7.88% and 23.86% for lung cancer plans for a low dose threshold of 15%, 3%/3mm, 2%/2mm and 1%/1mm, respectively. When rigid acceptance criteria were applied, the %GP result started to decrease. For both the 2%/2mm and 1%/1mm criteria, the average GP was below 95% at all low dose thresholds.CONCLUSIONS: Global normalization shows that applying gamma analysis using different low-dose threshold levels has no critical impact on the QA results. In local normalization, the low dose threshold level should be chosen carefully, as low dose points can cause the average %GP to increase rapidly.</p></trans-abstract>
                                                            
            
                                                            <kwd-group>
                                                    <kwd>Düşük Doz Eşiği</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Gama Analizi</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  VMAT</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  EPID</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                        
                                                                            <kwd-group xml:lang="en">
                                                    <kwd>LowDoseThreshold</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Gamma Analysis</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  VMAT</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  EPID.</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                                                                            </article-meta>
    </front>
    <back>
                            <ref-list>
                                    <ref id="ref1">
                        <label>1</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">1. Liang B, Liu B, Zhou1 F, Yin F, WuQ.Comparisons of volumetric modulated arctherapy (VMAT) quality assurance (QA) systems: sensitivity analysis to machine errors. Radiation Oncology. 2016;11(1):146.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref2">
                        <label>2</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">2. Low DA, Harms WB, Mutic S, Purdy JA. A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. Med 
Phys. 1998;25(5):656–61.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref3">
                        <label>3</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">3. Stasi M, Bresciani S, Miranti A, Maggio A, Sapino V, Gabriele P. Pretreatment patient-specific IMRT quality 
assurance: a correlation study between gamma index and patient clinical dose volume histogram. Med Phys. 
2012;39(12):7626–34.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref4">
                        <label>4</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">4. Lee SR, Park JY, Suh TS, Park HJ, Lee JW, Jung WG. Impact of gamma analysis parameters on dose 
evaluation using Gafchromic EBT2 films. J Korean Phys Soc. 2012;61(8):1319–24.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref5">
                        <label>5</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">5. Rajasekaran D, Jeevanandam P, Sukumar P, Ranganathan A, Johnjothi S, Nagarajan V. A study on 
correlation between 2D and 3D gamma evaluation metrics in patient-specific quality assurance for VMAT. 
Med Dosim. 2014;39(4):300–8.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref6">
                        <label>6</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">6. Pulliam KB, Huang JY, Howell RM, et al. Comparison of 2D and 3D gamma analyses. Med Phys. 2014;41(2):21.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref7">
                        <label>7</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">7. Bresciani S, Dia AD, Maggio A, et al. Tomotherapy treatment plan quality assurance: The impact of applied 
criteria on passing rate in gamma index method. Med Phys. 2013;40(12):11.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref8">
                        <label>8</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">8. Nelms BE, Simon JA. A survey on planar IMRT QA analysis. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2007;8(3):76–90.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref9">
                        <label>9</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">9. Van Elmpt W, McDermott L, Nijsten S, Wendling M, Lambin P, Mijnheer B. A literatüre review of electronic 
portal imaging for radiotherapy dosimetry. Radiother Oncol. 2008;88(3):289–309.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref10">
                        <label>10</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">10. Starlack J,Shedlock D. A piecewise-focused high DQE detectorfor MV imaging. Med Phys. 2015;42(9):5084–
99.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref11">
                        <label>11</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">11. Das IJ, Cao M, Cheng CW, et al. A quality assurance phantom for electronic portal imaging devices. J Appl 
Clin Med Phys. 2011;12(2):391–403.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref12">
                        <label>12</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">12. Varian Medical Systems. Portal Dosimetry Reference Guide, B502204R01.https://www.varian.com/ec203-
portal-dosimetry. Erişim Tarihi: 20.11.2022.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref13">
                        <label>13</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">13. Vieira SC, Dirkx ML, Heijmenand BJ, Boer HC.SIFT: a method to verify the IMRT fulence delivered during 
patient treatment using an electronic portal imaging device.Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004:981-93.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref14">
                        <label>14</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">14. Sharma DS, Mhatre V, Heigrujam M, Talapatra K, Mallik S. Portal dosimetry for pretreatment verification of 
IMRT plan: a comparis on with 2D ion chamber array. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2010;11(4):238–48.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref15">
                        <label>15</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">15. Varian Medical Systems. Eclipse Algorithm Reference Guide. 
https://jpneylon.github.io/ABR/PDFs/Add_052418/EclipseAlgorithms13.6_RefGuide.pdf.
Erişim Tarihi: 20.11.2022.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref16">
                        <label>16</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">16. Van Esch A, Huyskens DP, Hirschi L. Optimized Varian aSi portal dosimetry: Development of data sets for 
col¬lective use. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013;14(6):82–99.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref17">
                        <label>17</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">17. Khan FM. The Physics of Radiation Therapy. 4th edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Press. 
2010:286-94.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref18">
                        <label>18</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">18. Darby SC, McGale P, Taylor CW, Peto R. Long-term mortality from heart disease and lung cancer after 
radio¬therapy for early breast cancer: Prospective cohort study of about 300,000 women in US SEER cancer 
registries. Lancet Oncol. 2005;6(8):557–65.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref19">
                        <label>19</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">19. Dörr W, Herrmann T. Cancer induction by radiotherapy: dose dependence and spatial relationship to 
irradiatedvolume. J Radiol Prot. 2002;22(3A):117–21.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref20">
                        <label>20</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">20. Dörr W, Herrmann T. Second primary tumor safter radiotherapy for malignancies: Treatment-related 
param eters. StrahlentherOnkol. 2002;178(7):357–62.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref21">
                        <label>21</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">21. Hall EJ. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, protons, andthe risk of second cancers. Int J Radiat Oncol 
Biol Phys. 2006;65(1):1–7.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref22">
                        <label>22</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">22. Poppe B, Blechschmidt A, Djouguela A, et al. Two-dimensional ionization chamber arrays for IMRT plan 
verification. Med Phys. 2006;33(4):1005–15.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref23">
                        <label>23</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">23. Heilemann G, Poppe B, Laub W. On thesensitivity of common gamma-index evaluation methods to MLC 
mis¬alignments in Rapidarc quality assurance. Med Phys. 2013;40(3):3-5.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                            </ref-list>
                    </back>
    </article>
