Abstract
PURPOSE: Secondary dose calculation (SDC) with an independent algorithm is one option to perform plan-specific quality assurance (QA). While measurement-based QA can potentially detect errors in plan delivery, the dose values are typically only compared to calculations on homogeneous phantom geometries instead of patient CT data. We analyzed the sensitivity and specificity of an SDC software by purposely introducing different errors and determined thresholds for optimal decisions. METHODS: Thirty head and neck VMAT plans and 30 modifications of those plans, including errors related to density and beam modelling, were recalculated using RadCalc with a Monte Carlo algorithm. Decision thresholds were obtained by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. For comparison, measurement-based QA using the ArcCHECK phantom was carried out and evaluated in the same way. RESULTS: Despite optimized decision thresholds, none of the systems was able to reliably detect all errors. ArcCHECK analysis using a 2%/2 mm criterion with a threshold of 91.1% had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80. Evaluating differences in recalculated and planned DVH parameter of the target structures in RadCalc with a 2% threshold an AUC of 0.86 was achieved. Out-of-field deviations could be attributed to weaknesses in the beam model. CONCLUSIONS: Secondary dose calculation with RadCalc is an alternative to established measurement-based phantom QA. Different tools catch different errors; therefore, a combination of approaches should be preferred.