A multi-institutional evaluation of small field output factor determination following the recommendations of IAEA/AAPM TRS-483.

PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to test the implementation of small field dosimetry following TRS-483 and to develop quality assurance procedures for the experimental determination of small field output factors (SFOFs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve different centers provided SFOFs determined with various detectors. Various linac models using the beam qualities 6 MV and 10 MV with flattening filter and without flattening filter were utilized to generate square fields down to a nominal field size of 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm. The detectors were positioned at 10 cm depth in water. Depending on the local situation, the source-to-surface distance was either set to 90 cm or 100 cm. The SFOFs were normalized to the output of the 10 cm × 10 cm field. The spread of SFOFs measured with different detectors was investigated for each individual linac beam quality and field size. Additionally, linac-type specific SFOF curves were determined for each beam quality and the SFOFs determined using individual detectors were compared to these curves. Example uncertainty budgets were established for a solid state detector and a micro ionization chamber. RESULTS: The spread of SFOFs for each linac and field was below 5% for all field sizes. With the exception of one linac-type, the SFOFs of all investigated detectors agreed within 10% with the respective linac-type SFOF curve, indicating a potential inter-detector and inter-linac variability. CONCLUSION: Quality assurance on the SFOF measurements can be done by investigation of the spread of SFOFs measured with multiple detectors and by comparison to linac-type specific SFOFs. A follow-up of a measurement session should be conducted if the spread of SFOFs is larger than 5%, 3%, and 2% for field sizes of 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm, 1 cm × 1 cm, and field sizes larger than 2 cm × 2 cm, respectively. Additionally, deviations of measured SFOFs to the linac-type-curves of more than 7%, 3%, and 2% for field sizes 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm, 1 cm × 1 cm, and field sizes larger than 1 cm × 1 cm, respectively, should be followed up.

Characterization of the plastic scintillation detector Exradin W2 for small field dosimetry.

PURPOSE: Small field dosimetry has been an active area of research for over a decade. It is now known that large dosimetric errors can be introduced if proper detectors or correction factors are not used. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) through the technical report series No. 483 provides guidelines for small field dosimetry procedures as well as correction factors for most detectors available in the market. The plastic scintillator detector (PSD) Exradin W1 has been found to have a correction factor close to unity; however, it is not designed for beam scanning. To overcome this limitation, the new PSD Exradin W2 has been developed to be used as a scanning as well as a relative dosimeter. Characterization of this detector in small field dosimetry is presented in this study. METHODS: A 6 MV beam from a Varian-Edge linac was used to collect data for the characterization of a W2 detector. Cerenkov light ratio (CLR) is corrected through a separate new electrometer system that comes with the W2 detector. The parameters investigated include the dose and dose rate linearity, beam profiles, percent depth dose (PDD), field output factors, and temperature response. The results were compared with Gafchromic film (EBT-3 film) for beam profiles. The field output factor and temperature response were compared to the Exradin W1 detector. RESULTS: The dose linearity measured with 600 MU/min dose rate showed minimal variations (<0.5%) even for small MU, and similar results were seen for dose rate linearity. The comparison of field output factors between the W2 and W1 showed small differences for various depth and field sizes. The temperature response showed small variation when the temperature was varied from 6 ∘ C to 50 ∘ C . The slope was - 0.0017 / ∘ C and - 0.0016 / ∘ C for the W2 and the W1 detector, respectively. The differences in profiles are 0.5% in umbra and penumbra region for 1 × 1 cm 2 field size when compared to the EBT-3 film profile. CONCLUSIONS: The W2 scintillator detector showed similar dosimetric and temperature properties to the W1 scintillator detector. The main advantage of the W2 detector among other plastic scintillators is the beam scanning capabilities that, combined with its correction factor of 1.0, make it an ideal detector for commissioning of SRS and SBRT techniques.

A multinational audit of small field output factors calculated by treatment planning systems used in radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: An audit methodology for verifying the implementation of output factors (OFs) of small fields in treatment planning systems (TPSs) used in radiotherapy was developed and tested through a multinational research group and performed on a national level in five different countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Centres participating in this study were asked to provide OFs calculated by their TPSs for 10 × 10 cm2, 6 × 6 cm2, 4 × 4 cm2, 3 × 3 cm2 and 2 × 2 cm2 field sizes using an SSD of 100 cm. The ratio of these calculated OFs to reference OFs was analysed. The action limit was ±3% for the 2 × 2 cm2 field and ±2% for all other fields. RESULTS: OFs for more than 200 different beams were collected in total. On average, the OFs for small fields calculated by TPSs were generally larger than measured reference data. These deviations increased with decreasing field size. On a national level, 30% and 31% of the calculated OFs of the 2 × 2 cm2 field exceeded the action limit of 3% for nominal beam energies of 6 MV and for nominal beam energies higher than 6 MV, respectively. CONCLUSION: Modern TPS beam models generally overestimate the OFs for small fields. The verification of calculated small field OFs is a vital step and should be included when commissioning a TPS. The methodology outlined in this study can be used to identify potential discrepancies in clinical beam models.

Methods of verification and measurement of MLC-defined small field output factors for eight medical accelerators in Henan province / 中华放射医学与防护杂志

Objective To investigate muli-leaf collimator (MLC)-defined small field output factors calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS), and to study the measuring method of small field output factors verified by 0.015 cc PinPoint ionization chamber.Methods Eight medical accelerators for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) were investigated in Henan province, and TPS-calculated output factors for various small fields (6 cm ×6 cm,4 cm ×4 cm,3 cm ×3 cm and 2 cm ×2 cm) were compared with published values recommended by IAEA.If the relative deviation was more than ± 3％ for the 2 cm ×2 cm field size and ±2％ for the fields of 6 cm ×6 cm, 4 cm ×4 cm and 3 cm ×3 cm, which was beyond the scope of IAEA allowed, the output factors will be measured and verified using 0.015 cc PinPoint ionization chamber and Unidos electrometer.Results TPS-calculated small field output factors for eight medical accelerators were compared with published values.The relative deviation of small field output factors for five pieces of equipment, which accounted for 62.5％ of the total, met the IAEA's requirement, while the other three, which accounted for 37.5％ of the total, did not.After measuring with PinPoint ionization chamber, the results from only three pieces of equipment met minimum IAEA's requirement.Conclusions MLC-defined small field output factors calculated by TPS for some medical accelerators in Henan need to be measured and corrected using micro-ionization chamber, and the measured values could be taken as the basis of radiation treatment planning.

Development of the measurement method for MLC small field output factor in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) / 中华放射医学与防护杂志

Objective To develop the methods for using 0.015 cc pinpoint chambers, 0.007 cc miniature chambers and diode detector to measure Multi-leaf collimator (MLC) small field in IMRT.Methods MAX4000 and Unidos electrometers were connected with different types of small chambers and diode detectors.MLC shaped fields of10 cm×10 cm, 6 cm×6 cm, 4 cm×4 cm, 3 cm×3 cm, 2 cm× 2 cm were defined at 100 cm SSD.The field sizes for the Varian accelerator were defined by the tertiary MLC, while the secondary jaws were kept at 10 cm × 10 cm field, with the monitor units of 250 MU.Each field was measured three times to obtain the average value.The readings of all small fields were normalized to 10 cm × 10 cm field values for comparison of measured and published output factors.Results The relative deviations of the MLC small field output factors from the published outputs are 1.0％ , 1.7％ , 1.5％ and 2.4％, respectively, for Unidos electrometer connected with 0.015 cc pinpoint chamber;0.2％, 0.8％, 0.8％ and 1.4％, respectively, for Unidos electrometer connected with 0.007 cc miniature chamber;and 0.1％, 0.5％, 0.5％ and 0.9％, respectively, for MAX4000 electrometer connected with 0.007 cc miniature chamber.Conclusions The 0.015 cc chamber-measured MLC output factors for 3 cm × 3 cm and 2 cm × 2 cm fields are excellent.As required by IAEA, the relative deviations of the measured output factor from the published output factor are within ± 2％ for 2 cm × 2 cm fields and ± 3％ for larger fields.The results measured using 0.007 cc chamber are better than those measured using 0.015 cc chamber.The measured results using the diode detector, normalized to the 10 cm × 10 cm field, are consistent with the minimum requirements and excellent when being normalized to the 4 cm × 4 cm field.For dosimetric consideration, MLC small field output factor should be measured using small chamber and diode detector.The method is accurate and reliable, therefore, all measured output factors for MLC small fields should be input into radiation treatment plan system.