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

Title: SU-F-T-577: Comparison of Small Field Dosimetry Measurements in Fields Shaped with Conical Applicators On Two Different Accelerating Systems

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate small field dosimetry measurements and associated uncertainties when conical applicators are used to shape treatment fields from two different accelerating systems. Methods: Output factor measurements are made in water in beams from the CyberKnife radiosurgery system, which uses conical applicators to shape fields from a (flattening filter-free) 6 MV beam, and in a 6 MV beam from the Elekta Precise linear accelerator (with flattening filter) with BrainLab external conical applicators fitted to shape the field. The measurements use various detectors: (i) an Exradin A16 ion chamber, (ii) two Exradin W1 plastic scintillation detectors, (iii) a Sun Nuclear Edge diode, and (iv) two PTW microDiamond synthetic diamond detectors. Profiles are used for accurate detector positioning and to specify field size (FWHM). Output factor measurements are corrected with detector specific correction factors taken from the literature where available and/or from Monte Carlo simulations using the EGSnrc code system. Results: Differences in measurements of up to 1.7% are observed with a given detector type in the same beam (i.e., intra-detector variability). Corrected results from different detectors in the same beam (inter-detector differences) show deviations up to 3 %. Combining data for all detectors and comparing results from the two acceleratorsmore » results in a 5.9% maximum difference for the smallest field sizes (FWHM=5.2–5.6 mm), well outside the combined uncertainties (∼1% for the smallest beams) and/or differences among detectors. This suggests that the FWHM of a measured profile is not a good specifier to compare results from different small fields with the same nominal energy. Conclusion: Large differences in results for both intra-detector variability and inter-detector differences suggest potentially high uncertainties in detector-specific correction factors. Differences between the results measured in circular fields from different accelerating systems provide insight into sources of variability in small field dosimetric measurements reported in the literature.« less

Authors:
;  [1]; ;  [2];  [3]
  1. National Research Council, Ottawa, ON (Canada)
  2. Ottawa Hospital General Campus, Ottawa, ON (Canada)
  3. Carleton University, Ottawa, ON (Canada)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22649152
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:
07 ISOTOPES AND RADIATION SOURCES; 60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; BEAMS; COMPUTERIZED SIMULATION; CORRECTIONS; DOSIMETRY; IONIZATION CHAMBERS; LINEAR ACCELERATORS; MONTE CARLO METHOD

Citation Formats

Muir, B, McEwen, M, Belec, J, Vandervoort, E, and Christiansen, E. SU-F-T-577: Comparison of Small Field Dosimetry Measurements in Fields Shaped with Conical Applicators On Two Different Accelerating Systems. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956762.
Muir, B, McEwen, M, Belec, J, Vandervoort, E, & Christiansen, E. SU-F-T-577: Comparison of Small Field Dosimetry Measurements in Fields Shaped with Conical Applicators On Two Different Accelerating Systems. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956762.
Muir, B, McEwen, M, Belec, J, Vandervoort, E, and Christiansen, E. 2016. "SU-F-T-577: Comparison of Small Field Dosimetry Measurements in Fields Shaped with Conical Applicators On Two Different Accelerating Systems". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956762.
@article{osti_22649152,
title = {SU-F-T-577: Comparison of Small Field Dosimetry Measurements in Fields Shaped with Conical Applicators On Two Different Accelerating Systems},
author = {Muir, B and McEwen, M and Belec, J and Vandervoort, E and Christiansen, E},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To investigate small field dosimetry measurements and associated uncertainties when conical applicators are used to shape treatment fields from two different accelerating systems. Methods: Output factor measurements are made in water in beams from the CyberKnife radiosurgery system, which uses conical applicators to shape fields from a (flattening filter-free) 6 MV beam, and in a 6 MV beam from the Elekta Precise linear accelerator (with flattening filter) with BrainLab external conical applicators fitted to shape the field. The measurements use various detectors: (i) an Exradin A16 ion chamber, (ii) two Exradin W1 plastic scintillation detectors, (iii) a Sun Nuclear Edge diode, and (iv) two PTW microDiamond synthetic diamond detectors. Profiles are used for accurate detector positioning and to specify field size (FWHM). Output factor measurements are corrected with detector specific correction factors taken from the literature where available and/or from Monte Carlo simulations using the EGSnrc code system. Results: Differences in measurements of up to 1.7% are observed with a given detector type in the same beam (i.e., intra-detector variability). Corrected results from different detectors in the same beam (inter-detector differences) show deviations up to 3 %. Combining data for all detectors and comparing results from the two accelerators results in a 5.9% maximum difference for the smallest field sizes (FWHM=5.2–5.6 mm), well outside the combined uncertainties (∼1% for the smallest beams) and/or differences among detectors. This suggests that the FWHM of a measured profile is not a good specifier to compare results from different small fields with the same nominal energy. Conclusion: Large differences in results for both intra-detector variability and inter-detector differences suggest potentially high uncertainties in detector-specific correction factors. Differences between the results measured in circular fields from different accelerating systems provide insight into sources of variability in small field dosimetric measurements reported in the literature.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956762},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Conformal dose coverage for accelerated partial breast irradiation or radiotherapy boost can be obtained with AccuBoost registered D-shaped brachytherapy applicators using a flattened surface positioned near the patient. Three D-shaped applicators (D45/D53/D60) were dosimetrically characterized using Monte Carlo methods (MCNP5), air ionization chambers (Farmer and Markus), and radiochromic film (GafChromic EBT) in polystyrene and ICRU 44 breast tissue. HDR {sup 192}Ir source dwell times were either constant or optimized to improve skin dose uniformity. Scatter dose decreased as depth decreased. 10 mm beyond the applicator aperture, dose reductions of 90% and 51% were observed at depths of 0 and 30more » mm, respectively. Similarly, planar dose uniformity improved as depth decreased and was also due to scatter and applicator geometry. Dose uniformity inside the applicator aperture was approximately 11% and 15% for all three applicators at the skin and 30 mm deep, respectively. Depth dose measurements in polystyrene using ion chamber and radiochromic film agreed with Monte Carlo results within 2%. Discrepancies between film and Monte Carlo dose profiles at 30 mm depth were within 1%.« less
  • A phase-free accelerating stage for charged particles has been constructed which makes use of electric ac-fields in a triangular shaped electrode system combined with ac-deflecting devices in the MHz-range. An elaborate calculation of the energy gain based on a time dependent Hamiltonian and a simplified calculation assuming perfect shielding within the electrodes were performed. The theoretical results are compared with measurements at a frequency of 13.55 MHz and at peak electrode voltages of 3 kV and 0.5 kV. The maximum energy gain of electrons with an incident energy of 20 keV was measured to be 140 eV at the 3more » kV peak voltage. Construction and properties of the retarding-field energy analyzer and of the resonant circuits are given. It is shown that rf-driven magnetic deflecting coils diminish the energy gain due to induced electric fields. Rf-electric capacitor fields seem to be superior to the rf-magnetic fields because they reduce the energy gain very little and furthermore offer a simultaneous phase-free particle acceleration in opposite directions. The possible applications of such a phase-free accelerating stage for heating up a plasma and for producing in intense ring of relativistic electrons are discussed. (orig.)« less
  • Purpose: To investigate the effect of plaque design and radionuclides on eye plaque dosimetry. Methods: The Monte Carlo N-particle Code version 6 (MCNP6) was used for radiation transport simulations. The 14 mm and 16 mm diameter COMS plaques and the model EP917 plaque were simulated using brachytherapy seeds containing I-125, Pd-103, and Cs-131 radionuclides. The origin was placed at the scleral inner surface. The central axis (CAX) doses of both COMS plaques at −1 mm, 0 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm, 5 mm, 10 mm, 15 mm, 20 mm, and 22.6 mm were compared to the model EP917 plaque. Dosemore » volume histograms (DVHs) were also created for both COMS plaques for the tumor and outer sclera then compared to results for the model EP917 plaque. Results: For all radionuclides, the EP917 plaque delivered higher dose (max 343%) compared to the COMS plaques, except for the 14 mm COMS plaque with Cs-131 at 1 mm and 2 mm depths from outer sclera surface. This could be due to source design. For all radionuclides, the 14 mm COMS plaque delivered higher doses compared to the 16 mm COMS plaque for the depths up to 5 mm. Dose differences were not significant beyond depths of 10 mm due to ocular lateral scatter for the different plaque designs. Tumor DVHs for the 16 mm COMS plaque with Cs-131 provided better dose homogeneity and conformity compared to other COMS plaques with I-125 and Pd-103. Using Pd-103, DVHs for the 16 mm COMS plaque delivered less dose to outer sclera compared to other plaques. Conclusion: This study identified improved tumor homogeneity upon considering radionuclides and plaque designs, and found that scleral dose with the model EP917 plaque was higher than for the 16 mm COMS plaque for all the radionuclides studied.« less
  • Purpose: The provided output factors for Elekta Nucletron’s skin applicators are based on Monte Carlo simulations. These outputs have not been independently verified, and there is no recognized method for output verification of the vendor’s applicators. The purpose of this work is to validate the outputs provided by the vendor experimentally. Methods: Using a Flexitron Ir-192 HDR unit, three experimental methods were employed to determine dose with the 30 mm diameter Valencia applicator: first a gradient method using extrapolation ionization chamber (Far West Technology, EIC-1) measurements in solid water phantom at 3 mm SCD was used. The dose was derivedmore » based on first principles. Secondly a combination of a parallel plate chamber (Exradin A-10) and the EIC-1 was used to determine air kerma at 3 mm SCD. The air kerma was converted to dose to water in line with TG-61 formalism by using a muen ratio and a scatter factor measured with the skin applicators. Similarly a combination of the A-10 parallel plate chamber and gafchromic film (EBT 3) was also used. The Nk factor for the A-10 chamber was obtained through linear interpolation between ADCL supplied Nk factors for Cs-137 and M250. Results: EIC-1 measurements in solid water defined the outputs factor at 3 mm as 0.1343 cGy/U hr. The combination of A-10/ EIC-1 and A-10/EBT3 lead to output factors of 0.1383 and 0.1568 cGy/U hr, respectively. For comparison the output recommended by the vendor is 0.1659 cGy/U hr. Conclusion: All determined dose rates were lower than the vendor supplied values. The observed discrepancy between extrapolation chamber and film methods can be ascribed to extracameral gradient effects that may not be fully accounted for by the former method.« less