Impact of statistical uncertainty on esophagus cancer plan for dose to water and dose to medium / 中国辐射卫生

Objective To study the dosimetry effect of Dw and Dm middle and lower esophageal cancer in Monaco treatment planning system (TPS). Methods 30 patients with T3N0M0StageⅡa middle and lower esophageal cancer were selected for experiment. For each patient, optimize the plan using dose to water (Dw) and dose to medium (Dm) dose calculation mode, then rescale prescription dose to 95% volume of PTV. Compare the difference in the two mode, conformity index (CI), Homogeneity index (HI), Mean dose (Dmean), Minimum dose (Dmin), Maximum dose (D2), Dose to Organ at risk (OAR), MU, Optimization time, photon usage, and QA results of MatriXX and Arc Check. Use SPSS for multivariate analysis. Results In the dose evaluation of the middle and lower esophageal cancer cases under different dose calculation methods, the spinal cord, trachea, V20 of the whole lung, and D2 of the liver have significant dosimetric differences, the dose value, the sequential dose results were compared as (37.92 ± 1.11)/(35.85 ± 1.08), (59.91 ± 1.43)/(60.25 ± 0.98), (22.52 ± 1.75)/(21.38 ± 2.01), (42.89 ± 0.52)/(41.73 ± 0.58). In the comparison of dose cloud distribution, the difference is mainly located in the cavity and the inner wall of the lung in the target area, the dose in the target cavity in the Dw group is higher than that in the Dm group. The dose in the inner and outer walls of the lung cavity in the Dw group are slightly adducted than that in the Dm group, especially in the central area.Dose QA of MartiXX (3%-3 mm) and Arc Check (2%-2 mm) with different dose calculation methods of 60 plans of 30 cases have all passed clinical requirements. Dm Group is better than Dw group. Conclusion It is recommended to use Dm dose calculation method for Monaco 5.11 TPS in the condition of treatment planning for middle and lower esophageal cancer.

The differences between Monte Carlo calculated dose-to-medium and dose-to-water for lung cancer IMRT / 中华放射医学与防护杂志

Objective To investigate the differences between Monte Carlo (MC) calculated doseto-water (Dw) and dose-to-medium (Dm) for lung cancers treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).Methods A total of 10 lung carcinoma patients with 5-field IMRT treatment plans were stratified sampling randomly selected for this study,which were performed on Monaco treatment planning system (TPS) with MC algorithm.Using the patients' own CT images as quality assurance (QA) phantoms,two kinds of QA plan were calculated,one was the Dm,and another was the Dw plan.Dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters and the subtraction of two plans were used to evaluate the spatial distribution of the difference between the Dm and Dw.Results Differences between dose-volume indices computed with Dm and Dw for the PTV65 and PTV50 doses (D50％,D98％ and D2％) were-0.3％,-0.2％,0.3％ and 0.1％,-0.6％,0.4％,respectively,of which the D50％ of PTV65 and D98％ of PTV50 had statistical difference (t =-2.536,-3.776,P ＜ 0.05).For normal tissues,spinal cord,heart,lung and esophagus,the D50％ differences between Dm and Dw were 0.3％,1.1％,-0.2％ and -0.1％,of which the Dm of spinal cord and heart were slightly lower than the Dw (t =2.535,3.254,P ＜ 0.05).For the D2％ of the normal tissues,the differences were 0.3％,-0.6％,-0.7％ and 0.6％,the differences were statistically significant (t =2.311,-4.105,-3.878,6.214,P＜0.05).All the differences were within 2％.Meanwhile planned subtraction analysis showed the differences between the Dm and Dw varied very much with the other body parts of the patient,especially for bone tissues,and the two doses were significant difference (＞ 5％).Conclusion In the course of clinical application,the relative differences between Dm and Dw for lung cancers MC calculations should be noted when considering the dose limitations of bone tissue.

Reference Dosimetry according to the New German Protocol DIN 6800-2 and Comparison with IAEA TRS 398 and AAPM TG 51*

The preceding DIN 6800-2 (1997) protocol has been revised by a German task group and its latest version was published in March 2008 as the national standard dosimetry protocol DIN 6800-2 (2008 March). Since then, in Germany the determination of absorbed dose to water for high-energy photon and electron beams has to be performed according to this new German dosimetry protocol. The IAEA Code of Practice TRS 398 (2000) and the AAPM TG-51 are the two main protocols applied internationally. The new German version has widely adapted the methodology and dosimetric data of TRS-398. This paper investigates systematically the DIN 6800-2 protocol and compares it with the procedures and results obtained by using the international protocols. The investigation was performed with 6 MV and 18 MV photon beams as well as with electron beams from 5 MeV to 21 MeV. While only cylindrical chambers were used for photon beams, the measurements of electron beams were performed by using cylindrical and plane-parallel chambers. It was found that the discrepancies in the determination of absorbed dose to water among the three protocols were 0.23% for photon beams and 1.2% for electron beams. The determination of water absorbed dose was also checked by a national audit procedure using TLDs. The comparison between the measurements following the DIN 6800-2 protocol and the TLD audit-procedure confirmed a difference of less than 2%. The advantage of the new German protocol DIN 6800-2 lies in the renouncement on the cross calibration procedure as well as its clear presentation of formulas and parameters. In the past, the different protocols evoluted differently from time to time. Fortunately today, a good convergence has been obtained in concepts and methods.

Evaluation of the Output Dose of a Linear Accelerator Photon Beams by Using the Ionization Chamber TM31010 Series through TG-51 Protocol to Postal Monitoring Output of RPC for 5 Years / 의학물리

This study is to keep the accuracy and stability of the output dose evaluations for linear accelerator photon beams by using the air ionization chambers (TM31010, 0.125 cc, PTW) through the Task Group 51 protocol. The absorbed dose to water calibration factor NdwCo-60 was delivered from the air kerma calibration factor Nk which was provided from manufacture through SSDL calibration for determination of output factor. The ionization chamber of TM31010 series was reviewed the calibration factor and other parameters for reduce the uncertainty within +/-2% discrepancy and we found the supplied NdwCo-60 which was derived from Nk has shown a -2.8% uncertainty compare to that of PSDL. The authors provided the program to perform the output dosimetry with TG-51 protocol as it is composed same screen of TG-51 worksheets. The evaluated dose by determination of output factor delivered to postal TLD block for comparison the output dose to that of MDACC (RPC) in postal monitoring program. The results have shown the 1.001+/-0.013 for 6 MV and 0.997+/-0.012 discrepancy for 15 MV X rays for 5 years followed. This study shows the evaluated outputs for linear accelerate photon beams are very close to that of international output monitor with small discrepancy of +/-1.3% with high reliability and showing the gradually stability after 2010.

Chamber-to-chamber Variations in the Same Type of a Cylindrical Chamber for the Measurements of Absorbed Doses / 의학물리

For the measurements of an absorbed dose using the standard dosimetry based on an absorbed dose to water the variety of factors, whether big, small, or tiny, may influence the accuracy of dosimetry. The beam quality correction factor kappa(Q, Q(0))of an ionization chamber might also be one of them. The cylindrical type of ionization chamber, the PTW30013 chamber, was chosen for this work and 9 chambers of the same type were collected from several institutes where the chamber types are used for the reference dosimetry. They were calibrated from the domestic Secondary Standard Dosimetry Laboratory with the same electrometer and cable. These calibrated chambers were used to measure absorbed doses to water in the reference condition for the photon beam of 6 MV and 10 MV and the electron beam of 12 MeV from Siemens ONCOR. The biggest difference among chambers amounts to 2.4% for the 6 MV photon beam, 0.8% for the 10 MV photon beam, and 2.4% for the 12 MeV electron beam. The big deviation in the photon of 6 MV demonstrates that if there had been no problems with the process of measurements application of the same kappa(Q, Q(0)) to the chambers used in this study might have influenced the deviation in the photon 6 MV and that how important an external audit is.

Study on Absorbed Dose Determination of Electron Beam Quality for Cross-calibration with Plane-parallel Ionization Chamber / 의학물리

Absorbed dose to water based protocols recommended that plane-parallel chambers be calibrated against calibrated cylindrical chambers in a high energy electron beam with R50>7 g/cm2 (E> or =16 MeV). However, such high-energy electron beams are not available at all radiotherapy centers. In this study, we are compared the absorbed dose to water determined according to cross-calibration method in a high energy electron beam of 16 MeV and in electron beam energies of 12 MeV below the cross-calibration quality remark. Absorbed dose were performed for PTW 30013, Wellhofer FC65G Farmer type cylindrical chamber and for PTW 34001, Wellhofer PPC40 Roos type plane-parallel chamber. The cylindrical and the plane-parallel chamber to be calibrated are compared by alternately positioning each at reference depth, zref=0.6R50-0.1 in water phantom. The DW of plane-parallel chamber are derived using across-calibration method at high-energy electron beams of 16, 20 MeV. Then a good agreement is obtained the DW of plane-parallel chamber in 12 MeV. The agreement between 20 MeV and 12 MeV are within 0.2% for IAEA TRS-398.

The Study on the Use of a Cylindrical Ionization Chamber for the Calibration of a 6 MeV Electron Beam / 의학물리

The standard dosimetry systems based on an absorbed dose to water recommend to use a planeparallel chamber for the calibration of such a low-megavoltage electron beam as a nominal energy of 6 MeV. For this energy ranges of an electron beam a cylindrical chamber should not be used for the routinely regular beam calibration, but the feasibility of the temporary use of a cylindrical chamber was studied to give temporary solutions for special situations users meet. The PTW30013 chambers and the electron beam quality of R(50)=2.25 g/cm2 were selected for this study. 10 PTW30013 chambers, a cylindrical type of chamber, were calibrated in KFDA, the secondary standards dosimetry laboratories, and given the absorbed dose-to-water calibration factors, respectively. A "temporary" kappa(Q,Q0) for each chamber were calculated using the absorbed dose determined by a cross-calibrated planeparallel chamber, with the result of an average 0.9352 for 10 chambers. This value for PTW30013 chamber was used to determine an absorbed dose to water at the reference depth. The absorbed doses determined by PTW30013 chambers were in an agreement within 2% with that by ROOS chamber. In a certain situation where a cylindrical chamber be used instead of a planeparellel chamber, the value of 0.9352 might be useful to determine an absorbed dose to water in the same beam quality of electron beam as this study.

Chamber to Chamber Variations of a Cylindrical Ionization Chamber for the Calibration of an (192)Ir Brachytherapy Source Based on an Absorbed Dose to Water Standards / 의학물리

This work is for the preliminary study for the calibration of an (192)Ir brachytherapy source based on an absorbed dose to water standards. In order to calibrate brachytherapy sources based on absorbed dose to water standards using a clyndirical ionization chamber, the beam quality correction factor kappa(Q,Q0) is needed. In this study kappa(Q,Q0)s were determined by both Monte carlo simulation and semiexperimental methods because of the realistic difficulties to use primary standards to measure an absolute dose at a specified distance. The 5 different serial numbers of the PTW30013 chamber type were selected for this study. While chamber to chamber variations ran up to maximum 4.0% with the generic kappa gen(Q,Q0), the chamber to chamber variations were within a maximum deviation of 0.5% with the individual kappa ind(Q,Q0). The results show why and how important ionization chambers must be calibrated individually for the calibration of (192)Ir brachytherapy sources based on absorbed dose to water standards. We hope that in the near future users will be able to calibrate the brachytherapy sources in terms of an absorbed dose to water, the quantity of interest in the treatment, instead of an air kerma strength just as the calibration in the high energy photon and electron beam.

Application of IAEA TRS-398 Protocol to Gamma Knife Model C / 의학물리

Although Gamma Knife irradiates much more radiation in a single session than conventional radiotherapy, there were only a few studies to measure absolute dose of a Gamma Knife. Especially, there is no report of application of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) TRS-398 which requires to use a water phantom in radiation measurement to Gamma Knife. In this article, the authors reported results of the experiments to measure the absorbed dose to water of a Gamma Knife Model C using the IAEA TRS-398 protocol. The absorbed dose to water of a Gamma Knife model C was measured using a water phantom under conditions as close as possible to the IAEA TRS-398 protocol. The obtained results were compared with values measured using the plastic phantom provided by the Gamma Knife manufacturer. Two Capintec PR-05P mini-chambers and a PTW UNIDOS electrometer were used in measurements. The absorbed dose to water of a Gamma Knife model C inside the water phantom was 1.38% larger than that of the plastic phantom. The current protocol provided by the manufacturer has an intrinsic error stems from the fact that a plastic phantom is used instead of a water phantom. In conclusion, it is not possible to fully apply IAEA TRS-398 to measurement of absorbed dose of a Gamma Knife. Instead, it can be a practical choice to build a new protocol for Gamma Knife or to provide a conversion factor from a water phantom to the plastic phantom. The conversion factor can be obtained in one or two standard laboratories.

Development of Web-based Dosimetry Calibration Program for High Energy Radiation / 의학물리

Absorbed dose dosimetry protocols of high energy photon and electron beams, which are widely used and based on an air kerma calibration factors, have somewhat complex formalism and limitations for improving dosimetric accuracy due to uncertainty of the physical parameters used. Recently the IAEA and the AAPM published the absorbed dose to water-based dosimetry protocol. In this work web-based dose calibration program for IAEA TRS-398 and AAPM TG-51 protocols were developed. This program developed using the Visual C# language can be used in the internet. User selectable dosimetry protocol on the web allows the absorbed dose to water data of the two protocols at a reference point to be easily compared, and enables to conveniently manage and understand the current status of the dosimetry calibration performed at participating institutions in korea. This program and the resultant database from the web-based calibration can be useful in developing new dosimetry protocols in Korea.

Development of a Dose Calibration Program for Various Dosimetry Protocols in High Energy Photon Beams / 대한방사선종양학회지

PURPOSE: To develop a dose calibration program for the IAEA TRS-277 and AAPM TG-21, based on the air kerma calibration factor (or the cavity-gas calibration factor), as well as for the IAEA TRS-398 and the AAPM TG-51, based on the absorbed dose to water calibration factor, so as to avoid the unwanted error associated with these calculation procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Currently, the most widely used dosimetry protocols of high energy photon beams are the air kerma calibration factor based on the IAEA TRS-277 and the AAPM TG-21. However, this has somewhat complex formalism and limitations for the improvement of the accuracy due to uncertainties of the physical quantities. Recently, the IAEA and the AAPM published the absorbed dose to water calibration factor based, on the IAEA TRS-398 and the AAPM TG-51. The formalism and physical parameters were strictly applied to these four dose calibration programs. The tables and graphs of physical data and the information for ion chambers were numericalized for their incorporation into a database. These programs were developed user to be friendly, with the Visual C++ language for their ease of use in a Windows environment according to the recommendation of each protocols. RESULTS: The dose calibration programs for the high energy photon beams, developed for the four protocols, allow the input of informations about a dosimetry system, the characteristics of the beam quality, the measurement conditions and dosimetry results, to enable the minimization of any inter-user variations and errors, during the calculation procedure. Also, it was possible to compare the absorbed dose to water data of the four different protocols at a single reference points. CONCLUSION: Since this program expressed information in numerical and data-based forms for the physical parameter tables, graphs and of the ion chambers, the error associated with the procedures and different user could be solved. It was possible to analyze and compare the major difference for each dosimetry protocol, since the program was designed to be user friendly and to accurately calculate the correction factors and absorbed dose. It is expected that accurate dose calculations in high energy photon beams can be made by the users for selecting and performing the appropriate dosimetry protocol.