ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of IMRT in our clinic from based on TG119 procedure and establish action level. Five IMRT test cases were described in TG119: multi-target, head&neck, prostate, and two C-shapes (easy&hard). There were used and delivered to water-equivalent solid phantom for IMRT. Absolute dose for points in target and OAR was measured by using an ion chamber (CC13, IBA). EBT2 film was utilized to compare the measured two-dimensional dose distribution with the calculated one by treatment planning system. All collected data were analyzed using the TG119 specifications to determine the confidence limit. The mean of relative error (%) between measured and calculated value was 1.2+/-1.1% and 1.2+/-0.7% for target and OAR, respectively. The resulting confidence limits were 3.4% and 2.6%. In EBT2 film dosimetry, the average percentage of points passing the gamma criteria (3%/3 mm) was 97.7+/-0.8%. Confidence limit values determined by EBT2 film analysis was 3.9%. This study has focused on IMRT commissioning and quality assurance based on TG119 guideline. It is concluded that action level were +/-4% and +/-3% for target and OAR and 97% for film measurement, respectively. It is expected that TG119-based procedure can be used as reference to evaluate the accuracy of IMRT for each institution.
Subject(s)
Film Dosimetry , ProstateABSTRACT
Currently, the dose distribution calculation used by commercial treatment planning systems (TPSs) for high-dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy is derived from point and line source approximation method recommended by AAPM Task Group 43 (TG-43). However, the study of Monte Carlo (MC) simulation is required in order to assess the accuracy of dose calculation around three-dimensional Ir-192 source. In this study, geometry factor was calculated using segmented sources integration method by dividing microSelectron HDR Ir-192 source into smaller parts. The Monte Carlo code (MCNPX 2.5.0) was used to calculate the dose rate D(r,theta) at a point (r,theta) away from a HDR Ir-192 source in spherical water phantom with 30 cm diameter. Finally, anisotropy function and radial dose function were calculated from obtained results. The obtained geometry factor was compared with that calculated from line source approximation. Similarly, obtained anisotropy function and radial dose function were compared with those derived from MCPT results by Williamson. The geometry factor calculated from segmented sources integration method and line source approximation was within 0.2% for r> or =0.5 cm and 1.33% for r=0.1 cm, respectively. The relative-root mean square error (R-RMSE) of anisotropy function obtained by this study and Williamson was 2.33% for r=0.25 cm and within 1% for r>0.5 cm, respectively. The R-RMSE of radial dose function was 0.46% at radial distance from 0.1 to 14.0 cm. The geometry factor acquired from segmented sources integration method and line source approximation was in good agreement for r> or =0.1 cm. However, application of segmented sources integration method seems to be valid, since this method using three-dimensional Ir-192 source provides more realistic geometry factor. The anisotropy function and radial dose function estimated from MCNPX in this study and MCPT by Williamson are in good agreement within uncertainty of Monte Carlo codes except at radial distance of r=0.25 cm. It is expected that Monte Carlo code used in this study could be applied to other sources utilized for brachytherapy.