Search

The aim of this work is to present the numerical design optimization, construction, and experimental proof of concept of a graphite probe calorimeter (GPC) conceived for dose measurement in the clinical environment (U.S. provisional patent 61/652,540). A finite element method (FEM) based numerical heat transfer study was conducted using a commercial software package to explore the feasibility of the GPC and to optimize the shape, dimensions, and materials used in its design. A functioning prototype was constructed inhouse and used to perform dose to water measurements under a 6MV photon beam at 400 and 1000 MU/min, in a thermally insulated water phantom. Heat loss correction factors were determined using FEM analysis while the radiation field perturbation and the graphite to water absorbed dose conversion factors were calculated using Monte Carlo simulations. The difference in the average measured dose to water for the 400 and 1000 MU/min runs using the TG-51 protocol and the GPC was 0.2% and 1.2%, respectively. Heat loss correction factors ranged from 1.001 to 1.002, while the product of the perturbation and dose conversion factors was calculated to be 1.130. The combined relative uncertainty was estimated to be 1.4%, with the largest contributors being the specific heat capacity of the graphite (type B, 0.8%) and the reproducibility, defined as the standard deviation of the mean measured dose (type A, 0.6%). By establishing the feasibility of using the GPC as a practical clinical absolute photon dosimeter, this work lays the foundation for further device enhancements, including the development of an isothermal mode of operation and an overall miniaturization, making it potentially suitable for use in small and composite radiation fields. It is anticipated that, through the incorporation of isothermal stabilization provided by temperature controllers, a subpercent overall uncertainty will be achieved.

PURPOSE: Despite numerous advantages of radiochromic film dosimeter (high spatial resolution, near tissue equivalence, low energy dependence) to measure a relative dose distribution with film, one needs to first measure an absolute dose (following previously established reference dosimetry protocol) and then convert measured absolute dose values into relative doses. In this work, we present result of our efforts to obtain a functional form that would linearize the inherently nonlinear dose–response curve of the radiochromic film dosimetry system. METHODS: Functional form [ζ = (−1)·netOD((2/3))/ln(netOD)] was derived from calibration curves of various previously established radiochromic film dosimetry systems. In order to test the invariance of the proposed functional form with respect to the film model used we tested it with three different GAFCHROMIC™ film models (EBT, EBT2, and EBT3) irradiated to various doses and scanned on a same scanner. For one of the film models (EBT2), we tested the invariance of the functional form to the scanner model used by scanning irradiated film pieces with three different flatbed scanner models (Epson V700, 1680, and 10000XL). To test our hypothesis that the proposed functional argument linearizes the response of the radiochromic film dosimetry system, verification tests have been performed in clinical applications: percent depth dose measurements, IMRT quality assurance (QA), and brachytherapy QA. RESULTS: Obtained R(2) values indicate that the choice of the functional form of the new argument appropriately linearizes the dose response of the radiochromic film dosimetry system we used. The linear behavior was insensitive to both film model and flatbed scanner model used. Measured PDD values using the green channel response of the GAFCHROMIC™ EBT3 film model are well within ±2% window of the local relative dose value when compared to the tabulated Cobalt-60 data. It was also found that criteria of 3%/3 mm for an IMRT QA plan and 3%/2 mm for a brachytherapy QA plan are passing 95% gamma function points. CONCLUSIONS: In this paper, we demonstrate the use of functional argument to linearize the inherently nonlinear response of a radiochromic film based reference dosimetry system. In this way, relative dosimetry can be conveniently performed using radiochromic film dosimetry system without the need of establishing calibration curve.

Purpose: Gafchromic film and ionometric calibration procedures for HDR 192Ir brachytherapy sources in terms of dose rate to water are presented and the experimental results are compared to the TG-43 protocol as well as with the absolute dose measurement results from a water calorimetry-based primary standard. Methods: EBT-1 Gafchromic films, an A1SL Exradin miniature Shonka thimble type chamber, and an SI HDR 1000 Plus well-type chamber (Standard Imaging, Inc., Middleton, WI) with an ADCL traceable Sk calibration coefficient (following the AAPM TG-43 protocol) were used. The Farmer chamber and Gafchromic film measurements were performed directly in water. All results were compared to direct and absolute absorbed dose to water measurements from a 4 °C stagnant water calorimeter. Results: Based on water calorimetry, the authors measured the dose rate to water to be 361±7 μGy/(h U) at a 55 mm source-to-detector separation. The dose rate normalized to air-kerma strength for all the techniques agree with the water calorimetry results to within 0.83%. The overall 1-sigma uncertainty on water calorimetry, ionization chamber, Gafchromic film, and TG-43 dose rate measurement amounts to 1.90%, 1.44%, 1.78%, and 2.50%, respectively. Conclusions: This work allows us to build a more realistic uncertainty estimate for absorbed dose to water determination using the TG-43 protocol. Furthermore, it provides the framework necessary for a shift from indirect HDR 192Ir brachytherapy dosimetry to a more accurate, direct, and absolute measurement of absorbed dose to water.

Purpose: For the purpose of nonstandard beam reference dosimetry, the current concept of reporting absorbed dose at a point in water located at a representative position in the chamber volume is investigated in detail. As new nonstandard beam reference dosimetry protocols are under development, an evaluation of the role played by the definition of point of measurement could lead to conceptual improvements prior to establishing measurement procedures. Methods: The present study uses the current definition of reporting absorbed dose to calculate ionization chamber perturbation factors for two cylindrical chamber models [Exradin A12 and A14] using the Monte Carlo method. The EGSnrc based user-code EGS_chamber is used to calculate chamber dose responses of 14 IMRT beams chosen to cause considerable dose gradients over the chamber volume as previously used by Bouchard and Seuntjens [“Ionization chamber-based reference dosimetry of intensity modulated radiation beams,” Med. Phys. 31(9), 2454–5465 (2004)]. Results: The study shows conclusively the relative importance of each physical effect involved in the nonstandard beam correction factors of 14 IMRT beams. Of all correction factors involved in the dosimetry of the beams studied, the gradient perturbation correction factor has the highest magnitude, on average, 11% higher compared to reference conditions for the Exradin A12 chamber and about 5% higher for the Extradin A14 chamber. Other perturbation correction factors (i.e., Pwall, Pstem, and Pcel) are, on average, less than 0.8% different from reference conditions for the chambers and beams studied. The current approach of reporting measured absorbed dose at a point in water coinciding with the location of the centroid of the chamber is the main factor responsible for large correction factors in nonstandard beam deliveries (e.g., intensity modulated radiation therapy) reported in literature. Conclusions: To reduce or eliminate the magnitude of perturbation correction factors in nonstandard beam reference dosimetry, two possible ways to report absorbed dose are suggested: (1) Reporting average dose to the sensitive volume of the chamber filled with water, combined with removing the reference field implicit gradient effect when measuring output factors, and (2) reporting average dose to the chamber itself during output factor verifications. The first option could be adopted if clinical beam correction factors are negligible. The second option could simplify quality assurance procedures when correction factors are not negligible and have to be calculated using Monte Carlo simulations.