skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-F-T-78: Minimum Data Set of Measurements for TG 71 Based Electron Monitor-Unit Calculations

Abstract

Purpose: Building up a TG-71 based electron monitor-unit (MU) calculation protocol usually involves massive measurements. This work investigates a minimum data set of measurements and its calculation accuracy and measurement time. Methods: For 6, 9, 12, 16, and 20 MeV of our Varian Clinac-Series linear accelerators, the complete measurements were performed at different depth using 5 square applicators (6, 10, 15, 20 and 25 cm) with different cutouts (2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 15 and 20 cm up to applicator size) for 5 different SSD’s. For each energy, there were 8 PDD scans and 150 point measurements for applicator factors, cutout factors and effective SSDs that were then converted to air-gap factors for SSD 99–110cm. The dependence of each dosimetric quantity on field size and SSD was examined to determine the minimum data set of measurements as a subset of the complete measurements. The “missing” data excluded in the minimum data set were approximated by linear or polynomial fitting functions based on the included data. The total measurement time and the calculated electron MU using the minimum and the complete data sets were compared. Results: The minimum data set includes 4 or 5 PDD’s and 51 to 66 point measurementsmore » for each electron energy, and more PDD’s and fewer point measurements are generally needed as energy increases. Using only <50% of complete measurement time, the minimum data set generates acceptable MU calculation results compared to those with the complete data set. The PDD difference is within 1 mm and the calculated MU difference is less than 1.5%. Conclusion: Data set measurement for TG-71 electron MU calculations can be minimized based on the knowledge of how each dosimetric quantity depends on various setup parameters. The suggested minimum data set allows acceptable MU calculation accuracy and shortens measurement time by a few hours.« less

Authors:
; ; ;  [1]
  1. University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22642326
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ACCURACY; APPROXIMATIONS; DEPTH; LINEAR ACCELERATORS; POLYNOMIALS; RADIATION MONITORING; RADIATION MONITORS

Citation Formats

Xu, H, Guerrero, M, Prado, K, and Yi, B. SU-F-T-78: Minimum Data Set of Measurements for TG 71 Based Electron Monitor-Unit Calculations. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956214.
Xu, H, Guerrero, M, Prado, K, & Yi, B. SU-F-T-78: Minimum Data Set of Measurements for TG 71 Based Electron Monitor-Unit Calculations. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956214.
Xu, H, Guerrero, M, Prado, K, and Yi, B. Wed . "SU-F-T-78: Minimum Data Set of Measurements for TG 71 Based Electron Monitor-Unit Calculations". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956214.
@article{osti_22642326,
title = {SU-F-T-78: Minimum Data Set of Measurements for TG 71 Based Electron Monitor-Unit Calculations},
author = {Xu, H and Guerrero, M and Prado, K and Yi, B},
abstractNote = {Purpose: Building up a TG-71 based electron monitor-unit (MU) calculation protocol usually involves massive measurements. This work investigates a minimum data set of measurements and its calculation accuracy and measurement time. Methods: For 6, 9, 12, 16, and 20 MeV of our Varian Clinac-Series linear accelerators, the complete measurements were performed at different depth using 5 square applicators (6, 10, 15, 20 and 25 cm) with different cutouts (2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 15 and 20 cm up to applicator size) for 5 different SSD’s. For each energy, there were 8 PDD scans and 150 point measurements for applicator factors, cutout factors and effective SSDs that were then converted to air-gap factors for SSD 99–110cm. The dependence of each dosimetric quantity on field size and SSD was examined to determine the minimum data set of measurements as a subset of the complete measurements. The “missing” data excluded in the minimum data set were approximated by linear or polynomial fitting functions based on the included data. The total measurement time and the calculated electron MU using the minimum and the complete data sets were compared. Results: The minimum data set includes 4 or 5 PDD’s and 51 to 66 point measurements for each electron energy, and more PDD’s and fewer point measurements are generally needed as energy increases. Using only <50% of complete measurement time, the minimum data set generates acceptable MU calculation results compared to those with the complete data set. The PDD difference is within 1 mm and the calculated MU difference is less than 1.5%. Conclusion: Data set measurement for TG-71 electron MU calculations can be minimized based on the knowledge of how each dosimetric quantity depends on various setup parameters. The suggested minimum data set allows acceptable MU calculation accuracy and shortens measurement time by a few hours.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956214},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}
  • Purpose: Monitor units calculated by electron Monte Carlo treatment planning systems are often higher than TG-71 hand calculations for a majority of patients. Here I’ve calculated tables of geometry and heterogeneity correction factors for correcting electron hand calculations. Method: A flat water phantom with spherical volumes having radii ranging from 3 to 15 cm was created. The spheres were centered with respect to the flat water phantom, and all shapes shared a surface at 100 cm SSD. D{sub max} dose at 100 cm SSD was calculated for each cone and energy on the flat phantom and for the spherical volumesmore » in the absence of the flat phantom. The ratio of dose in the sphere to dose in the flat phantom defined the geometrical correction factor. The heterogeneity factors were then calculated from the unrestricted collisional stopping power for tissues encountered in electron beam treatments. These factors were then used in patient second check calculations. Patient curvature was estimated by the largest sphere that aligns to the patient contour, and appropriate tissue density was read from the physical properties provided by the CT. The resulting MU were compared to those calculated by the treatment planning system and TG-71 hand calculations. Results: The geometry and heterogeneity correction factors range from ∼(0.8–1.0) and ∼(0.9–1.01) respectively for the energies and cones presented. Percent differences for TG-71 hand calculations drop from ∼(3–14)% to ∼(0–2)%. Conclusion: Monitor units calculated with the correction factors typically decrease the percent difference to under actionable levels, < 5%. While these correction factors work for a majority of patients, there are some patient anatomies that do not fit the assumptions made. Using these factors in hand calculations is a first step in bringing the verification monitor units into agreement with the treatment planning system MU.« less
  • Purpose: To determine the AAPM TG-43 brachytherapy dosimetry parameters of a new titanium-encapsulated Yb-169 source designed to maximize the dose enhancement during gold nanoparticle-aided radiation therapy (GNRT). Methods: An existing Monte Carlo (MC) model of the titanium-encapsulated Yb-169 source, which was described in the current investigators’ published MC optimization study, was modified based on the source manufacturer’s detailed specifications, resulting in an accurate model of the titanium-encapsulated Yb-169 source that was actually manufactured. MC calculations were then performed using the MCNP5 code system and the modified source model, in order to obtain a complete set of the AAPM TG-43 parametersmore » for the new Yb-169 source. Results: The MC-calculated dose rate constant for the new titanium-encapsulated Yb-169 source was 1.05 ± 0.03 cGy per hr U, indicating about 10% decrease from the values reported for the conventional stainless steel-encapsulated Yb-169 sources. The source anisotropy and radial dose function for the new source were found similar to those reported for the conventional Yb-169 sources. Conclusion: In this study, the AAPM TG-43 brachytherapy dosimetry parameters of a new titanium-encapsulated Yb-169 source were determined by MC calculations. The current results suggested that the use of titanium, instead of stainless steel, to encapsulate the Yb-169 core would not lead to any major change in the dosimetric characteristics of the Yb-169 source, while it would allow more low energy photons being transmitted through the source filter thereby leading to an increased dose enhancement during GNRT. Supported by DOD/PCRP grant W81XWH-12-1-0198 This investigation was supported by DOD/PCRP grant W81XWH-12-1- 0198.« less
  • Purpose: Total Skin Electron Irradiation (TSEI) is a radiotherapy treatment which involves irradiating the entire body surface as homogeneously as possible. It is composed of an extensive multi-step technique in which quality management requires high consumption of resources and a fluid communication between the involved staff, necessary to improve the safety of treatment. The TG-100 proposes a new perspective of quality management in radiotherapy, presenting a systematic method of risk analysis throughout the global flow of the stages through the patient. The purpose of this work has been to apply TG-100 approach to the TSEI procedure in our institution. Methods:more » A multidisciplinary team specifically targeting TSEI procedure was formed, that met regularly and jointly developed the process map (PM), following TG-100 guidelines of the AAPM. This PM is a visual representation of the temporal flow of steps through the patient since start until the end of his stay in the radiotherapy service. Results: This is the first stage of the full risk analysis, which is being carried out in the center. The PM provides an overview of the process and facilitates the understanding of the team members who will participate in the subsequent analysis. Currently, the team is implementing the analysis of failure modes and effects (FMEA). The failure modes of each of the steps have been identified and assessors are assigning a value of severity (S), frequency of occurrence (O) and lack of detection (D) individually. To our knowledge, this is the first PM made for the TSEI. The developed PM can be useful for those centers that intend to implement the TSEI technique. Conclusion: The PM of TSEI technique has been established, as the first stage of full risk analysis, performed in a reference center in this treatment.« less
  • Purpose: With increasing QA demands of medical physicists in clinical radiation oncology, the need for an effective method of tracking clinical data has become paramount. A tool was produced which scans through data automatically recorded by a 2D chamber array and extracts relevant information recommended by TG-142. Using this extracted information a timely and comprehensive analysis of QA parameters can be easily performed enabling efficient monthly checks on multiple linear accelerators simultaneously. Methods: A PTW STARCHECK chamber array was used to record several months of beam outputs from two Varian 2100 series linear accelerators and a Varian NovalisTx−. In conjunctionmore » with the chamber array, a beam quality phantom was used to simultaneously to determine beam quality. A minimalist GUI was created in MatLab that allows a user to set the file path of the data for each modality to be analyzed. These file paths are recorded to a MatLab structure and then subsequently accessed by a script written in Python (version 3.5.1) which then extracts values required to perform monthly checks as outlined by recommendations from TG-142. The script incorporates calculations to determine if the values recorded by the chamber array fall within an acceptable threshold. Results: Values obtained by the script are written to a spreadsheet where results can be easily viewed and annotated with a “pass” or “fail” and saved for further analysis. In addition to creating a new scheme for reviewing monthly checks, this application allows for able to succinctly store data for follow up analysis. Conclusion: By utilizing this tool, parameters recommended by TG-142 for multiple linear accelerators can be rapidly obtained and analyzed which can be used for evaluation of monthly checks.« less
  • Purpose: To investigate the influence of the minimum monitor unit (MU) on the quality of clinical treatment plans for scanned proton therapy. Methods: Delivery system characteristics limit the minimum number of protons that can be delivered per spot, resulting in a min-MU limit. Plan quality can be impacted by the min-MU limit. Two sites were used to investigate the impact of min-MU on treatment plans: pediatric brain tumor at a depth of 5-10 cm; a head and neck tumor at a depth of 1-20 cm. Three field intensity modulated spot scanning proton plans were created for each site with themore » following parameter variations: min-MU limit range of 0.0000-0.0060; and spot spacing range of 0.5-2.0σ of the nominal spot size at isocenter in water (σ=4mm in this work). Comparisons were based on target homogeneity and normal tissue sparing. Results: The increase of the min-MU with a fixed spot spacing decreases plan quality both in homogeneous target coverage and in the avoidance of critical structures. Both head and neck and pediatric brain plans show a 20% increase in relative dose for the hot spot in the CTV and 10% increase in key critical structures when comparing min-MU limits of 0.0000 and 0.0060 with a fixed spot spacing of 1σ. The DVHs of CTVs show min-MU limits of 0.0000 and 0.0010 produce similar plan quality and quality decreases as the min-MU limit increases beyond 0.0020. As spot spacing approaches 2σ, degradation in plan quality is observed when no min-MU limit is imposed. Conclusion: Given a fixed spot spacing of ≤ 1σ of the spot size in water, plan quality decreases as min- MU increases greater than 0.0020. The effect of min-MU should be taken into consideration while planning spot scanning proton therapy treatments to realize its full potential.« less