Comparison of detector performance in small 6 MV and 6 MV FFF beams using a Versa HD accelerator.

1. BACKGROUND & PURPOSE: Investigate the applicability of a series of detectors in small field dosimetry and the possible differences between their responses to FF and FFF beams. This work extends upon the series of detectors used by other authors to also include metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs) detectors and radiochromic film. We also included a later correction of output factors (OFs) recommended by the recently published IAEA´s code of practice TRS 483 on dosimetry of small static fields used in external beam radiotherapy. 2. MATERIALS & METHODS: The OFs, profiles, and PDDs of 6 MV and 6 MV FFF beams were measured with 11 different detectors using field sizes between 0.6 × 0.6 cm2 and 10 × 10 cm2. 3. RESULTS: The OFs of the FFF beams were lower than those of the FF beams for field sizes larger than 3 × 3 cm2 but higher for field sizes smaller than 3 × 3 cm2. After applying the IAEA´s TRS 483 corrections, the final OFs were compatible with our initial results when considering uncertainties involved. Small-volume detectors are preferable for measuring the penumbra of these small fields where this attribute is higher in the crossline direction than in the inline direction. The R100 of equivalent-quality FFF beams was higher compared to the corresponding flattened beams. 4. CONCLUSIONS: We observed no difference for the dose responses between 6 MV and 6 MV FFF beams for any of the detectors. OF results, profiles and PDDs were clearly consistent with the previously published literature regarding the Versa HD linac. Correcting our first OFs, taken as ratio of detector charges, with the IAEA´s TRS 483 corrections to obtain the final OFs, did not make the former significantly different.

Statistical process control for electron beam monitoring.

PURPOSE: To assess the electron beam monitoring statistical process control (SPC) in linear accelerator (linac) daily quality control. We present a long-term record of our measurements and evaluate which SPC-led conditions are feasible for maintaining control. METHODS: We retrieved our linac beam calibration, symmetry, and flatness daily records for all electron beam energies from January 2008 to December 2013, and retrospectively studied how SPC could have been applied and which of its features could be used in the future. A set of adjustment interventions designed to maintain these parameters under control was also simulated. RESULTS: All phase I data was under control. The dose plots were characterized by rising trends followed by steep drops caused by our attempts to re-center the linac beam calibration. Where flatness and symmetry trends were detected they were less-well defined. The process capability ratios ranged from 1.6 to 9.3 at a 2% specification level. Simulated interventions ranged from 2% to 34% of the total number of measurement sessions. We also noted that if prospective SPC had been applied it would have met quality control specifications. CONCLUSIONS: SPC can be used to assess the inherent variability of our electron beam monitoring system. It can also indicate whether a process is capable of maintaining electron parameters under control with respect to established specifications by using a daily checking device, but this is not practical unless a method to establish direct feedback from the device to the linac can be devised.

Validation of a deformable image registration produced by a commercial treatment planning system in head and neck.

In recent years one of the areas of interest in radiotherapy has been adaptive radiation therapy (ART), with the most efficient way of performing ART being the use of deformable image registration (DIR). In this paper we use the distances between points of interest (POIs) in the computed tomography (CT) and the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition images and the inverse consistence (IC) property to validate the RayStation treatment planning system (TPS) DIR algorithm. This study was divided into two parts: Firstly the distance-accuracy of the TPS DIR algorithm was ascertained by placing POIs on anatomical features in the CT and CBCT images from five head and neck cancer patients. Secondly, a method was developed for studying the implication of these distances on the dose by using the IC. This method compared the dose received by the structures in the CT, and the structures that were quadruply-deformed. The accuracy of the TPS was 1.7 ± 0.8 mm, and the distance obtained with the quadruply-deformed IC method was 1.7 ± 0.9 mm, i.e. the difference between the IC method multiplied by two, and that of the TPS validation method, was negligible. Moreover, the IC method shows very little variation in the dose-volume histograms when comparing the original and quadruply-deformed structures. This indicates that this algorithm is useful for planning adaptive radiation treatments using CBCT in head and neck cancer patients, although these variations must be taken into account when making a clinical decision to adapt a treatment plan.

In vivo dosimetry in intraoperative electron radiotherapy: microMOSFETs, radiochromic films and a general-purpose linac.

INTRODUCTION: In vivo dosimetry is desirable for the verification, recording, and eventual correction of treatment in intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT). Our aim is to share our experience of metal oxide semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs) and radiochromic films with patients undergoing IOERT using a general-purpose linac. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used MOSFETs inserted into sterile bronchus catheters and radiochromic films that were cut, digitized, and sterilized by means of gas plasma. In all, 59 measurements were taken from 27 patients involving 15 primary tumors (seven breast and eight non-breast tumors) and 12 relapses. Data were subjected to an outliers' analysis and classified according to their compatibility with the relevant doses. Associations were sought regarding the type of detector, breast and non-breast irradiation, and the radiation oncologist's assessment of the difficulty of detector placement. At the same time, 19 measurements were carried out at the tumor bed with both detectors. RESULTS: MOSFET measurements ([Formula: see text] = 93.5 %, sD = 6.5 %) were not significantly shifted from film measurements ([Formula: see text] = 96.0 %, sD = 5.5 %; p = 0.109), and no associations were found (p = 0.526, p = 0.295, and p = 0.501, respectively). As regards measurements performed at the tumor bed with both detectors, MOSFET measurements ([Formula: see text] = 95.0 %, sD = 5.4 % were not significantly shifted from film measurements ([Formula: see text] = 96.4 %, sD = 5.0 %; p = 0.363). CONCLUSION: In vivo dosimetry can produce satisfactory results at every studied location with a general-purpose linac. Detector choice should depend on user factors, not on the detector performance itself. Surgical team collaboration is crucial to success.