SU-F-T-372: Surface and Peripheral Dose in Compensator-Based FFF Beam IMRT

Journal Article · Wed Jun 15 04:00:00 EDT 2016 · Medical Physics

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4956557· OSTI ID:22648970

Zhang, D ^[1]; Feygelman, V; Moros, E; Latifi, K; Hoffe, S; Frakes, J; Zhang, G ^[2]

---

1. University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA (United States)
2. H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL (United States)

Purpose: Flattening filter free (FFF) beams produce higher dose rates. Combined with compensator IMRT techniques, the dose delivery for each beam can be much shorter compared to the flattened beam MLC-based or compensator-based IMRT. This ‘snap shot’ IMRT delivery is beneficial to patients for tumor motion management. Due to softer energy, surface doses in FFF beam treatment are usually higher than those from flattened beams. Because of less scattering due to no flattening filter, peripheral doses are usually lower in FFF beam treatment. However, in compensator-based IMRT using FFF beams, the compensator is in the beam pathway. Does it introduce beam hardening effects and scattering such that the surface dose is lower and peripheral dose is higher compared to FFF beam MLC-based IMRT? Methods: This study applied Monte Carlo techniques to investigate the surface and peripheral doses in compensator-based IMRT using FFF beams and compared it to the MLC-based IMRT using FFF beams and flattened beams. Besides various thicknesses of copper slabs to simulate various thicknesses of compensators, a simple cone-shaped compensator was simulated to mimic a clinical application. The dose distribution in water phantom by the cone-shaped compensator was then simulated by multiple MLC defined FFF and flattened beams with various openings. After normalized to Dmax, the surface and peripheral dose was compared between the FFF beam compensator-based IMRT and FFF/flattened beam MLC-based IMRT. Results: The surface dose at the central 0.5mm depth was close between the compensator and 6FFF MLC dose distributions, and about 8% (of Dmax) higher than the flattened 6MV MLC dose. At 8cm off axis at dmax, the peripheral dose between the 6FFF and flattened 6MV MLC demonstrated similar doses, while the compensator dose was about 1% higher. Conclusion: Compensator does not reduce the surface doses but slightly increases the peripheral doses due to scatter inside compensator.

• OSTI ID: 22648970
• Journal Information: Medical Physics, Journal Name: Medical Physics Journal Issue: 6 Vol. 43; ISSN 0094-2405; ISSN MPHYA6
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY
BEAMS
DOSE RATES
MONTE CARLO METHOD
RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS
RADIOTHERAPY
SCATTERING
SIMULATION