It is known that intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans that are highly complex might be less accurate in dose calculation and treatment delivery. Multiple complexity metrics have been proposed, but the relationships between them have not been thoroughly investigated. This study investigated these relationships in multi-institutional comparisons of treatment plans, where plans from multiple treatment planning systems (TPSs) are typically evaluated. A program was developed to compute several complexity indices and provide analysis of dynamic plan parameters. This in-house software was used to analyse plans from a recent multi-institutional audit. Additionally, 100 clinical volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans from two institutions using different TPSs were analysed. All plans produced satisfactory pre-treatment verification results and, hence, complexity metrics could not be used to predict plans failing QA. Regarding the relationship among complexity indices, some very strong correlations were found (r > 0.9 with p < 0.01). However, some relevant discrepancies between complexity indices were obtained, even with negative correlation coefficients (r ∼ −0.6) which were expected to be positive. These discrepancies could be explained because each complexity index focused on different features of the plan and different TPSs prioritised modulation of different plan parameters. Some complexity indices provided similar information and can be considered equivalent. However, indices that focused on different plan parameters yielded different results and it was unclear which complexity index should be used. Careful consideration should be given to the use of complexity metrics in multi-institutional studies.

The dosimetric leaf gap (DLG) and tongue‐and‐groove (T&G) effects are critical aspects in the modeling of multileaf collimators (MLC) in the treatment planning system (TPS). In this study, we investigated the dosimetric impact of limitations associated with the T&G modeling in stereotactic plans and its relationship with the need for tuning the DLG in the Eclipse TPS. Measurements were carried out using Varian TrueBeam STx systems from two different institutions. Test fields presenting MLC patterns with several MLC gap sizes (meanGap) and different amounts of T&G effect (TGi) were first evaluated. Secondly, dynamic conformal arc (DCA) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) deliveries of stereotactic cases were analyzed in terms of meanGap and TGi. Two DLG values were used in the TPS: the measured DLG (DLG_meas) and an optimal DLG (DLG_opt). Measured and calculated doses were compared according to dose differences and gamma passing rates (GPR) with strict local gamma criteria of 2%/2 mm. The discrepancies were analyzed for DLG_meas and DLG_opt, and their relationships with both TGi and meanGap were investigated. DCA arcs involved significantly lower TGi and larger meanGap than VMAT arcs (P < 0.0001). By using DLG_meas in the TPS, the dose discrepancies increased as TGi increased and meanGap decreased for both test fields and clinical plans. Dose discrepancies dramatically increased with the ratio TGi/meanGap. Adjusting the DLG value was then required to achieve acceptable calculations and configuring the TPS with DLG_opt led to an excellent agreement with median GPRs (2%/2 mm) > 99% for both institutions. We also showed that DLG_opt could be obtained from the results of the test fields. We demonstrated that the need for tuning the DLG is due to the limitations of the T&G modeling in the Eclipse TPS. A set of sweeping gap tests modified to incorporate T&G effects can be used to determine the optimal DLG value.

Modelling of the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) in treatment planning systems (TPS) is crucial for the dose calculation accuracy of intensity-modulated radiation therapy plans. However, no standardised methodology for their configuration exists to date. In this study we present a method that separates the effect of each dosimetric characteristic of the MLC, offering comprehensive equations for the determination of the configuration parameters used in the TPS model. The main advantage of the method is that it only requires prior knowledge of the nominal leaf width and is based on doses measured with a Farmer chamber, which is a very well established and robust methodology. Another significant advantage is the required time, since measuring the tests takes only about 30 minutes per energy. Firstly, we provide a theoretical general formalism in terms of the primary fluence constructed from the transmission map obtained from an MLC model for synchronous and asynchronous sweeping beams. Secondly, we apply the formalism to the RayStation TPS as a proof of concept and we derive analytical expressions that allow the determination of the configuration parameters (leaf tip width, tongue-and-groove width, x-position offset and MLC transmission) and describe how they intertwine. Finally, we apply the method to Varian’s Millennium120 and HD120 MLCs in a TrueBeam linear accelerator for different energies and determine the optimal configuration parameters. The proposed procedure is much faster and streamlined than the typical trial-and-error methods and increases the accuracy of dose calculation in clinical plans. Additionally, the procedure can be useful for standardising the MLC configuration process and it exposes the limitations of the implemented MLC model, providing guidance for further improvement of these models in TPSs.