Determination of the quenching correction factors for plastic scintillation detectors in therapeutic high-energy proton beams.

Plastic scintillation detectors (PSDs) have many advantages over other detectors in small field dosimetry due to their high spatial resolution, excellent water equivalence and instantaneous readout. However, in proton beams, the PSDs undergo a quenching effect which makes the signal level reduced significantly when the detector is close to the Bragg peak where the linear energy transfer (LET) for protons is very high. This study measures the quenching correction factor (QCF) for a PSD in clinical passive-scattering proton beams and investigates the feasibility of using PSDs in depth-dose measurements in proton beams. A polystyrene-based PSD (BCF-12, ϕ0.5 mm × 4 mm) was used to measure the depth-dose curves in a water phantom for monoenergetic unmodulated proton beams of nominal energies 100, 180 and 250 MeV. A Markus plane-parallel ion chamber was also used to get the dose distributions for the same proton beams. From these results, the QCF as a function of depth was derived for these proton beams. Next, the LET depth distributions for these proton beams were calculated by using the MCNPX Monte Carlo code, based on the experimentally validated nozzle models for these passive-scattering proton beams. Then the relationship between the QCF and the proton LET could be derived as an empirical formula. Finally, the obtained empirical formula was applied to the PSD measurements to get the corrected depth-dose curves and they were compared to the ion chamber measurements. A linear relationship between the QCF and LET, i.e. Birks' formula, was obtained for the proton beams studied. The result is in agreement with the literature. The PSD measurements after the quenching corrections agree with ion chamber measurements within 5%. PSDs are good dosimeters for proton beam measurement if the quenching effect is corrected appropriately.

Replacement correction factors for cylindrical ion chambers in electron beams.

PURPOSE: In the TG-21 dosimetry protocol, for cylindrical chambers in electron beams the replacement correction factor Prepl (or the product PdisPcav in the IAEA's notation), was conceptually separated into two components: the gradient correction (Pgr) accounting for the effective point of measurement and the fluence correction (Pfl) dealing with the change in the electron fluence spectrum. At the depth of maximum dose (dmax), Pgr is taken as 1. There are experimental data available at dmax for the values of Pfl (or Prepl). In the TG-51 dosimetry protocol, the calibration is at the reference depth dref=0.6R50-0.1 (cm) where Pgr is required for cylindrical chambers and Pfl is unknown and so the measured values at dmax are used with the corresponding mean electron energy at dref. Monte Carlo simulations are employed in this study to investigate the replacement correction factors for cylindrical chambers in electron beams. METHODS: Using previously established Monte Carlo calculation methods, the values of Prepl and Pfl are calculated with high statistical precision (<0.1%) for cylindrical cavities of a variety of diameters and lengths in a water phantom irradiated by various electron beams. The values of Pgr as defined in the TG-51 dosimetry protocol are also calculated. RESULTS: The calculated values of the fluence correction factors Pfl are in good agreement with the measured values when the wall correction factors are taken into account for the plane-parallel chambers used in the measurements. An empirical formula for Pfl for cylindrical chambers at dref in electron beams is derived as a function of the chamber radius and the beam quality specifier R50. CONCLUSIONS: The mean electron energy at depth is a good beam quality specifier for Pfl. Thus TG-51's adoption of Pfl at dmax with the same mean electron energy for use at dref is proven to be accurate. The values of Pgr for a Farmer-type chamber as defined in the TG-51 dosimetry protocol may be wrong by 0.3% for high-energy electron beams and by more than 1% for low-energy electron beams.

Study of the effective point of measurement for ion chambers in electron beams by Monte Carlo simulation.

In current dosimetry protocols for electron beams, for plane-parallel chambers, the effective point of measurement is at the front face of the cavity, and, for cylindrical chambers, it is at a point shifted 0.5r upstream from the cavity center. In this study, Monte Carlo simulations are employed to study the issue of effective point of measurement for both plane-parallel chambers and cylindrical thimble chambers in electron beams. It is found that there are two ways of determining the position of the effective point of measurement: One is to match the calculated depth-ionization curve obtained from a modeled chamber to a calculated depth-dose curve; the other is to match the electron fluence spectrum in the chamber cavity to that in the phantom. For plane-parallel chambers, the effective point of measurement determined by the first method is generally not at the front face of the chamber cavity, which is obtained by the second method, but shifted downstream toward the cavity center by an amount that could be larger than one-half a millimeter. This should not be ignored when measuring depth-dose curves in electron beams. For cylindrical chambers, these two methods also give different positions of the effective point of measurement: The first gives a shift of 0.5r, which is in agreement with measurements for high-energy beams and is the same as the value currently used in major dosimetry protocols; the latter gives a shift of 0.8r, which is closer to the value predicted by a theoretical calculation assuming no-scatter conditions. The results also show that the shift of 0.8r is more appropriate if the cylindrical chamber is to be considered as a Spencer-Attix cavity. In electron beams, since the water/air stopping-power ratio changes with depth in a water phantom, the difference of the two shifts (0.3r) will lead to an incorrect evaluation of the water/air stopping-power ratio at the point of measurement, thus resulting in a systematic error in determining the absorbed dose by cylindrical chambers. It is suggested that a shift of 0.8r be used for electron beam calibrations with cylindrical chambers and a shift of 0.4r-0.5r be used for depth-dose measurements.

Systematic uncertainties in the Monte Carlo calculation of ion chamber replacement correction factors.

In a previous study [Med. Phys. 35, 1747-1755 (2008)], the authors proposed two direct methods of calculating the replacement correction factors (P(repl) or P(cav)P(dis)) for ion chambers by Monte Carlo calculation. By "direct" we meant the stopping-power ratio evaluation is not necessary. The two methods were named as the high-density air (HDA) and low-density water (LDW) methods. Although the accuracy of these methods was briefly discussed, it turns out that the assumption made regarding the dose in an HDA slab as a function of slab thickness is not correct. This issue is reinvestigated in the current study, and the accuracy of the LDW method applied to ion chambers in a 60Co photon beam is also studied. It is found that the two direct methods are in fact not completely independent of the stopping-power ratio of the two materials involved. There is an implicit dependence of the calculated P(repl) values upon the stopping-power ratio evaluation through the choice of an appropriate energy cutoff delta, which characterizes a cavity size in the Spencer-Attix cavity theory. Since the delta value is not accurately defined in the theory, this dependence on the stopping-power ratio results in a systematic uncertainty on the calculated P(repl) values. For phantom materials of similar effective atomic number to air, such as water and graphite, this systematic uncertainty is at most 0.2% for most commonly used chambers for either electron or photon beams. This uncertainty level is good enough for current ion chamber dosimetry, and the merits of the two direct methods of calculating P(repl) values are maintained, i.e., there is no need to do a separate stopping-power ratio calculation. For high-Z materials, the inherent uncertainty would make it practically impossible to calculate reliable P(repl) values using the two direct methods.

The replacement correction factors for cylindrical chambers in high-energy photon beams.

The values of the replacement correction factors (P(repl), or in the IAEA's notation p(dis)p(cav)) used for cylindrical chambers in high-energy photon beams represent one of the most significant differences between the AAPM and the IAEA dosimetry protocols. In a previous study (Wang L L W and Rogers D W O 2008 Med. Phys. 35 1747-55), we found that the AAPM protocol adopted incorrect values of P(repl) for cylindrical chambers in photon beams. For a (60)Co beam, the calculated P(repl) value is 0.5% higher than the AAPM value and about 1% higher than the IAEA value. It was still not clear why the IAEA values, which are based on measurements by Johansson et al, are incorrect. In this study, EGSnrc Monte Carlo simulation codes are used to simulate Johansson et al's experimental procedures for determining P(repl) values. The simulation results agree well with the measurements if the chamber responses versus depth are normalized at d(max) as was apparently done in the experiments as it was believed that the chambers of different radii gave the same maximum reading at the respective d(max). However, if the chamber responses are not normalized, then the simulated experimental results lead to a result which agrees well with the P(repl) values calculated by the standard Monte Carlo methods. This demonstrates that the normalization procedure used in the experiments is incorrect as is based on an incorrect assumption, and thus the interpretation of Johansson et al's experimental values as P(repl) (p(dis)) in the IAEA TRS-398 Code of Practice is wrong. The values of P(repl) for cylindrical chambers of different radii in various high-energy photon beams are calculated and an empirical formula is given.

The replacement correction factor for the BIPM flat cavity ion chamber and the value of W/e.

A graphite flat cavity ionization chamber is used at the BIPM in France to determine the absorbed dose to graphite in a 60Co photon beam and thereby used to determine the product of the value of W/e, the average energy required to produce an ion pair in dry air, and the value of (LDelta/p)a(C), the mean restricted mass collision stopping-power ratio for graphite to air in a 60Co beam. The accuracy of the (W/e) (LDelta/p)a(C) value thus determined depends upon the accuracy of the perturbation correction factors adopted for this chamber. The perturbation effect of this chamber was accounted for by the replacement correction factor whose value was calculated by an analytical method and confirmed by an EGS4 Monte Carlo calculation. The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity of the analytical and the EGS4 calculations by using recently established methods and the EGSnrc Monte Carlo code, a much improved version of EGS4, to calculate the replacement correction factors for the graphite chamber. It is found that the replacement correction factors used for the BIPM chamber are not correct: the values used are smaller than they should be by about 1%. This leads to a 1% overestimation of the (W/e) (LDelta/p)a(C) value determined by using this chamber. This implies that 60Co air kerma standards that are directly proportional to this product need to be reduced by 1%. Based on the values of the replacement correction factors calculated in this study, and on the value of (LDelta/p)a(C) evaluated from ICRU Report No. 37 stopping power for graphite, the value of W/e determined by using the BIPM chamber should be 33.61 +/- 0.08 J/C. If a more recent value of mean excitation energy for graphite (86.8 eV) and grain density are used to evaluate the graphite stopping power, then the value obtained for W/e is 34.15 +/- 0.08 J/C.

Calculation of the replacement correction factors for ion chambers in megavoltage beams by Monte Carlo simulation.

This article describes four methods of calculating the replacement correction factor, P(repl0 (or the product p(cav)P(dis) in the IAEA's notation), for a plane-parallel chamber in both electron and photon beams, and for a Farmer chamber in photon beams, by using the EGSnrc Monte Carlo code. The accuracy of underlying assumptions and relative merits of each technique are assessed. With careful selection of parameters it appears that all four methods give reasonable answers although the direct methods are more intellectually satisfying and more accurate in some cases. The direct methods are shown to have an accuracy of 0.11% when appropriate calculation parameters are selected. The depth dependence of P(repl) for the NACP02 plane-parallel chamber has been calculated in both 6 and 18 MeV electron beams. At the reference depth (0.6R50-0.1 cm) P(repl) is 0.9964 for the 6 MeV beam and 1.0005 for the 18 MeV beam for this well-guarded chamber; at the depth of maximum dose for the 18 MeV beam, P(repl) is 1.0010. P(repl) is also calculated for the NACP02 chamber and a Farmer chamber (diameter 6 mm) at a depth of 5 cm in a 60Co photon beam, giving values of 1.0063 and 0.9964, respectively. For the Farmer chamber, P(repl) is about half a percent higher than the value (0.992) recommended by the AAPM dosimetry protocol. It is found that the dosimetry protocols may have adopted an incorrect value of P(repl) for cylindrical chambers in photon beams. The nonunity values of P(repl) for plane-parallel chambers in lower energy electron beams imply a variety of values used in dosimetry protocols must be reassessed.