Dataset Information

Constancy checks of well-type ionization chambers with external-beam radiation units.

ABSTRACT: Constancy checks of a well-type ionization chamber should be performed regularly as part of a quality assurance regime. The goal of this work was to test the feasibility of using a linear accelerator and an orthovoltage unit to check the constancy of a well-type chamber's response to an external radiation source. The reproducibility, linearity with dose, variation with dose-rate, and variation between energy-matched units of the well-type chamber response when exposed to 6 MV beams was examined. The robustness to errors in establishing the measurement conditions, including setting the source-to-surface distance and gantry angle, rotation of the chamber around the central axis of the beam, and the effect of changing the length of the chamber cable exposed to the field, were tested. The reproducibility and linearity with dose of the chamber response, and robustness to errors in establishing the measurement conditions for 100 kVp and 250 kVp beams from an orthovoltage unit, were also examined. The combined uncertainty, including contributions from errors in establishing the reference conditions, for well-type chamber measurements using a 6 MV beam from a linear accelerator is 1.0%. The combined uncertainties for measurements using 100 and 250 kVp beams were 1.8% and 1.5%, respectively. When focus-source distance errors were reduced to ? 1 mm, the combined uncertainties for the 100 and 250 kVp beams were 1.2% and 1.1%, respectively, when the dose to the chamber was confined to the linear region of the dose-response curve. The response of a well-type chamber should remain constant to within 1.2% when exposed to a constant dose from an external beam unit, if reference conditions can be reproducibly established. However, the uncertainty for establishing reference conditions for output measurements for an orthovoltage unit can be reduced, which would justify a reduction of the tolerance for constancy measurements.

SUBMITTER: Hackett SL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5691027 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Constancy checks of well-type ionization chambers with external-beam radiation units.

Hackett Sara L SL Davis Benjamin B Nixon Andrew A Wyatt Ruth R

Journal of applied clinical medical physics 20151108 6

Constancy checks of a well-type ionization chamber should be performed regularly as part of a quality assurance regime. The goal of this work was to test the feasibility of using a linear accelerator and an orthovoltage unit to check the constancy of a well-type chamber's response to an external radiation source. The reproducibility, linearity with dose, variation with dose-rate, and variation between energy-matched units of the well-type chamber response when exposed to 6 MV beams was examined. ...[more]

PMID: 26699571

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeBeam angle optimization is a critical issue for modern radiotherapy (RT) and is a challenging task, especially for large body sizes and noncoplanar designs. Noncoplanar RT techniques may have dosimetric advantages but increase the risk of mechanical collision. We propose a software solution to accurately predict colliding/noncolliding configurations for coplanar and noncoplanar beams.Materials and methodsIndividualized software models for two different linear accelerators were built to simulate noncolliding gantry orientations for phantom/patient subjects. The sizes and shapes of the accelerators were delineated based on their manuals and on-site measurements. The external surfaces of the subjects were automatically contoured based on computed tomography (CT) simulations. An Alderson Radiation Therapy phantom was used to predict the accuracy of spatial collision prediction by the software. A gantry collision problem encountered by one patient during initial setup was also used to test the validity of the software. Results: In the comparison between the software estimates and on-site measurements, the noncoplanar collision angles were all predicted within a 5-degree difference in gantry position. The confusion matrix was calculated for each of the two empty accelerator models, and the accuracies were 98.7% and 97.3%. The true positive rates were 97.7% and 96.9%, while the true negative rates were 99.8% and 97.9%, respectively. For the phantom study, the collision angles were predicted within a 5-degree difference. The software successfully predicted the collision problem encountered by the breast cancer patient in the initial setup position and generated shifted coordinates that were validated to correspond to a noncolliding geometry.ConclusionThe developed software effectively and accurately predicted collisions for accelerator-only, phantom, and patient setups. This software may help prevent collisions and expand the range of spatially applicable beam angles.

Project description:PurposeTo compare patient-reported disease-specific functional outcomes after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and EBRT combined with low-dose-rate brachytherapy prostate boost (EB-LDR) among men with localized prostate cancer.Methods and materialsThe prospective, population-based Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation study enrolled men with localized prostate cancer in 2011 to 2012. The 26-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite measured patient-reported disease-specific function at baseline and at 6, 12, and 36 months. Higher domain scores indicate better function. Minimal clinically important difference was defined as 6 for urinary incontinence, 5 for urinary irritative function, 4 for bowel function, 12 for sexual function, and 4 for hormonal function. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were fit to estimate the effect of treatment on patient-reported outcomes.ResultsFive-hundred seventy-eight men received EBRT and 109 received EB-LDR. Median patient age was 69 years, and 70% had intermediate- or high-risk disease. Men in the EB-LDR group were younger (P < .001) and less likely to receive androgen deprivation therapy (P < .001). Baseline urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal function was similar between treatment groups (P > .05). On multivariable analyses, men receiving EB-LDR reported worse urinary irritative function at 6 months (adjusted mean difference [AMD] -14.4, P < .001), 12 months (AMD -12.9, P < .001), and 36 months (AMD -4.7, P = .034) than men receiving EBRT. At 12 months, men receiving EB-LDR reported worse bowel function (AMD -5.8, P = .002), but these differences were not seen at 36 months. There were no significant differences in sexual or hormone function between treatment groups.ConclusionsMen treated with EB-LDR report worse bowel function at 1 year and worse urinary irritative function through 3 years compared with men treated with EBRT alone. These side effect profiles should be discussed with patients when considering EB-LDR versus EBRT treatment.

Dataset Information

Constancy checks of well-type ionization chambers with external-beam radiation units.

Publications

Constancy checks of well-type ionization chambers with external-beam radiation units.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure