Comparison of three film analysis softwares using EBT2 and EBT3 films in radiotherapy
, , , , and | Aug 05, 2020
About this article
Article Category: Research Article
Published Online: Aug 05, 2020
Page range: 505 - 512
Received: Feb 23, 2020
Accepted: Jun 27, 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2020-0049
© 2020 Tamás Pócza, Zsuzsánna Zongor, Barbara Melles-Bencsik, Dóra Zita Tatai-Szabó, Tibor Major, Csilla Pesznyák, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Pass rates of the gamma analysis using three software products; the negligible threshold dose was 10% and the normalization of gamma analysis was performed on global dose maximum. (RA: RapidArc, SIB: simultaneous integrated boost)
| 3DCRT | IMRT | RA | RA – SIB | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2%,2mm | 3%,3mm | 2%,2mm | 3%,3mm | 2%,2mm | 3%,3mm | 2%,2mm | 3%,3mm | ||
| PTW Mephysto | 87.1 % | 95.5 % | 89.2 % | 98.2 % | 83.9 % | 91.5 % | 86.3 % | 98.3 % | |
| EBT2 | FilmQA Pro | 98.9 % | 100.0 % | 75.7 % | 93.4 % | 99.9 % | 100.0 % | 87.3 % | 92.8 % |
| 87.2 % | 98.1 % | 80.2 % | 93.1 % | 90.4 % | 98.5 % | 84.2 % | 95.3 % | ||
| PTW Mephysto | 86.6 % | 94.4 % | 78.3 % | 93.8 % | 92.0 % | 97.8 % | 86.8 % | 93.4 % | |
| EBT3 | FilmQA Pro | 99.0 % | 99.9 % | 82.6 % | 95.0 % | 98.3 % | 99.4 % | 87.9 % | 91.9 % |
| 91.0 % | 98.8 % | 80.2 % | 94.4 % | 95.4 % | 98.7 % | 87.5 % | 92.1 % | ||
Pass rates of gamma analysis of small stereotactic fields; the negligible threshold dose was 10% for EBT 3 films (CA: Conformal Arc, RA: RapidArc, NC: non-coplanar)
| CA | RA | NC - CA | NC – RA | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2%,2mm | 3%,3mm | 2%,2mm | 3% ,3mm | 2%,2mm | 3%,3mm | 2%,2mm | 3%,3mm | ||
| PTW Mephysto | 97.0 % | 99.2 % | 87.9 % | 90.2 % | 95.1 % | 98.6 % | 89.2 % | 93.5 % | |
| global | FilmQA Pro | 100.0 % | 100.0 % | 98.5 % | 100.0 % | 99.8 % | 100.0 % | 99.2 % | 100.0 % |
| 98.2 % | 99.9 % | 97.2 % | 99.8 % | 95.0 % | 99.7 % | 96.4 % | 99.6 % | ||
| PTW Mephysto | 95.2 % | 97.2 % | 87.4 % | 89.9 % | 93.1 % | 97.9 % | 76.8 % | 83.1 % | |
| local | FilmQA Pro | 99.9 % | 99.9 % | 95.7 % | 99.9 % | 99.5 % | 100.0 % | 98.7 % | 99.5 % |
| 96.9 % | 98.5 % | 93.3 % | 97.5 % | 91.5 % | 97.3 % | 91.2 % | 97.8 % | ||
Statistical evaluation and visualisation of the gamma passing rates for the three different softwares, according to all analysed cases
| Gamma passing rate statistics (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Mephysto PTW | FilmQA Pro | ||
| Minimum | 76.8 | 75.7 | 80.2 |
| Maximum | 99.2 | 100.0 | 99.9 |
| Median | 92.6 | 99.5 | 95.9 |
| Mean | 91.4 | 96.6 | 94.2 |
| Std. Deviation | 5.9 | 5.8 | 5.5 |
| Lower 95% CI | 89.3 | 94.5 | 92.3 |
| Upper 95% CI | 93.5 | 98.8 | 96.2 |
| comparisons Dunn’s multiple test | Adjusted P Value | Significant? | |
| PTW FilmQA Mephysto Pro vs. | <0,0001 | Yes | |
| PTW Mephysto vs. | 0.1824 | No | |
| FilmQA Pro vs. | 0.0005 | Yes | |