Method and system for evaluating quality assurance criteria in delivery of a treatment plan

• US 7,773,788 B2
• Filed: 07/21/2006
• Issued: 08/10/2010
• Est. Priority Date: 07/22/2005
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Accuray Incorporated
• Original Assignee: TomoTherapy Incorporated (Accuray Incorporated)
• Inventors: Hughes, John H., Ruchala, Kenneth J., Lu, Weiguo, Schnarr, Eric, Mackie, Thomas R., Kapatoes, Jeffrey M., Reckwerdt, Paul J., Olivera, Gustavo H.
• Primary Examiner(s): Strege; John B
• Application Number:
  US11/459,152
• Publication Number:
  US 20070041499A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,481 Days
• Field of Search: 382/128, 382/131, 382/132, 600/427
• US Class Current: 382/128
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 5/103 Treatment planning systems
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 5/1042 with spatial modulation of the radiation beam within the treatment head
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 5/1048 Monitoring, verifying, controlling systems and methods
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 5/1049 for verifying the position of the patient with respect to the radiation beam
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 5/1065 Beam adjustment
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 5/1067 in real time, i.e. during treatment
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 5/1069 Target adjustment, e.g. moving the patient support
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 5/107 in real time, i.e. during treatment
• CPC Class Codes: A61N 5/1075 for testing, calibrating, or quality assurance of the radiation treatment apparatus

Abstract

System and method of evaluating quality assurance criteria related to the delivery of a radiation therapy treatment plan. The method includes the acts of acquiring image data of a patient, generating a treatment plan for the patient based at least in part on the image data, the treatment plan including a calculated radiation dose to be delivered to the patient, acquiring an on-line image of the patient in substantially a treatment position, delivering at least a portion of the calculated radiation dose to the patient, monitoring quality assurance criteria related to the delivery of the treatment plan, calculating the radiation dose received by the patient, and determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended based on the quality assurance criteria and the radiation dose received by the patient.

Claims

1. A method of system-level quality assurance, the method comprising:

acquiring image data of a patient;

generating a treatment plan for the patient based at least in part on the image data, the treatment plan including a calculated radiation dose to be delivered to the patient;

acquiring an on-line CT image of the patient in substantially a treatment position;

delivering at least a portion of the calculated radiation dose to the patient;

monitoring quality assurance criteria related to the delivery of the treatment plan;

calculating the radiation dose received by the patient using the on-line CT image; and

determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended based on the quality assurance criteria and the radiation dose received by the patient.

2. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein at least one of the steps is performed automatically.

3. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein calculating the radiation dose includes radiation doses received during imaging.

4. A method as set forth in claim 1 and further comprising maintaining a database of common values and wherein the act of determining is based at least in part on the common values.

5. A method as set forth in claim 1 and further comprising generating a notification to stop the delivery of the treatment.

6. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein monitoring quality assurance criteria includes using feedback data from the system used to deliver the treatment plan to determine whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended.

7. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended includes identifying a problem occurring during delivery of the treatment plan.

8. A method as set forth in claim 7 wherein the problem is identified as a machine error.

9. A method as set forth in claim 7 wherein the problem is identified as an anatomical error.

10. A method as set forth in claim 7 wherein the problem is identified as a clinical error.

11. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended includes the use of deformable registration to accumulate data regarding the delivered dose.

12. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended includes the use of deformable registration to develop a contour of patient anatomy.

13. A method as set forth in claim 12 wherein deformable registration renders images amenable to dose calculation.

14. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended further comprises using recorded patient set up data or motion data.

15. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended is based on a combination of newly-acquired image data and pre-recorded image data.

16. A method as set forth in claim 15 wherein the newly-acquired image data and pre-recorded image data are merged to develop a composite image.

17. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended further comprises assessing other forms of treatment delivered and adjusting the treatment plan in response to the assessment.

18. A method as set forth in claim 1 and further comprising revising the treatment plan based on whether the delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended and wherein the revision also accounts for predictive trends for any of the quality assurance criteria.

19. A method as set forth in claim 18 wherein revising the treatment plan further comprises generating predictive trends for at least a portion of the quality assurance criteria and evaluating the predictive trends.

20. A method as set forth in claim 19 wherein the predictive trends include predictive trends of clinical information.

21. A method as set forth in claim 1 and further comprising acquiring data relating to clinical dose delivered and patient effects, and applying a biological model that relates the clinical dose to the patient effect.

22. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein calculating the radiation dose received by the patient includes an accumulated radiation dose received by the patient.

23. A method as set forth in claim 22 wherein calculating the radiation dose is performed automatically.

24. A method as set forth in claim 22 wherein the accumulated radiation dose is a combination of a scattered dose and an image dose.

25. A method as set forth in claim 1 and further comprising generating a notification for user error or treatment error.

26. A method as set forth in claim 25 and further comprising recalibrating the system components or parameter based upon the notification.

27. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended includes identifying whether the system requires service.

28. A method as set forth in claim 1 wherein determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended includes identifying alternative treatments.

29. A unified system for verifying delivery of a radiation therapy treatment plan to a patient, the system comprising:

a radiation therapy treatment device including a computer processor, the radiation therapy treatment device operable to deliver radiation to a patient; and

a software program stored in a computer readable medium accessible by the computer processor, the software being operable to

acquire image data of a patient,

generate a treatment plan for the patient based at least in part on the image data,

the treatment plan including a calculated radiation dose to be delivered to the patient,

acquire an on-line CT image of the patient in substantially a treatment position,

deliver at least a portion of the calculated radiation dose to the patient,

monitor quality assurance criteria related to the delivery of the treatment plan,

calculate the radiation dose received by the patient using the on-line CT image, and

determine whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended based on the quality assurance criteria and the radiation dose received by the patient.

30. A system as set forth in claim 29 wherein the software program is operable to automatically perform at least one of the steps.

31. A system as set forth in claim 29 wherein the software program is further operable to identify a problem occurring during delivery of the treatment plan.

32. A method as set forth in claim 31 wherein the problem is identified as a machine error.

33. A method as set forth in claim 31 wherein the problem is identified as an anatomical error.

34. A method as set forth in claim 31 wherein the problem is identified as a clinical error.

35. A system as set forth in claim 29 wherein the software program is operable to acquire feedback data from the radiation therapy treatment device to determine whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended.

36. A system as set forth in claim 29 wherein the software program is further operable to identify a problem occurring during delivery of the treatment plan and wherein the problem is related to one of a radiation therapy treatment device error, an anatomical error, and a clinical error.

37. A system as set forth in claim 29 wherein determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended includes the use of deformable registration to accumulate data regarding the delivered dose.

38. A method of system-level quality assurance, the method comprising:

acquiring a first image of a patient;

generating a treatment plan for the patient based at least in part on the image data, the treatment plan including a calculated radiation dose to be delivered to the patient;

acquiring an on-line CT image of the patient in substantially a treatment position;

generating a deformation map between the first image and the on-line image;

delivering at least a portion of the calculated radiation dose to the patient;

monitoring quality assurance criteria related to the delivery of the treatment plan;

determining the radiation dose received by the patient using the on-line CT image and based on the deformation map; and

determining whether delivery of the treatment plan occurred as intended based on the quality assurance criteria and the radiation dose received by the patient.