Search

Small-field dosimetry used in advance treatment technologies poses challenges due to loss of lateral charged particle equilibrium (LCPE), occlusion of the primary photon source, and the limited choice of suitable radiation detectors. These challenges greatly influence dosimetric accuracy. Many high-profile radiation incidents have demonstrated a poor understanding of appropriate methodology for small-field dosimetry. These incidents are a cause for concern because the use of small fields in various specialized radiation treatment techniques continues to grow rapidly. Reference and relative dosimetry in small and composite fields are the subject of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) dosimetry code of practice that has been published as TRS-483 and an AAPM summary publication (IAEA TRS 483; Dosimetry of small static fields used in external beam radiotherapy: An IAEA/AAPM International Code of Practice for reference and relative dose determination, Technical Report Series No. 483; Palmans et al., Med Phys 45(11):e1123, 2018). The charge of AAPM task group 155 (TG-155) is to summarize current knowledge on small-field dosimetry and to provide recommendations of best practices for relative dose determination in small megavoltage photon beams. An overview of the issue of LCPE and the changes in photon beam perturbations with decreasing field size is provided. Recommendations are included on appropriate detector systems and measurement methodologies. Existing published data on dosimetric parameters in small photon fields (e.g., percentage depth dose, tissue phantom ratio/tissue maximum ratio, off-axis ratios, and field output factors) together with the necessary perturbation corrections for various detectors are reviewed. A discussion on errors and an uncertainty analysis in measurements is provided. The design of beam models in treatment planning systems to simulate small fields necessitates special attention on the influence of the primary beam source and collimating devices in the computation of energy fluence and dose. The general requirements for fluence and dose calculation engines suitable for modeling dose in small fields are reviewed. Implementations in commercial treatment planning systems vary widely, and the aims of this report are to provide insight for the medical physicist and guidance to developers of beams models for radiotherapy treatment planning systems., (© 2021 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Purpose: X-ray-induced luminescence (XIL) is a hybrid x-ray/optical imaging modality that employs nanophosphors that luminescence in response to x-ray irradiation. X-ray-activated phosphorescent nanoparticles have potential applications in radiation therapy as theranostics, nanodosimeters, or radiosensitizers. Extracting clinically relevant information from the luminescent signal requires the development of a robust imaging model that can determine nanophosphor distributions at depth in an optically scattering environment from surface radiance measurements. The applications of XIL in radiotherapy will be limited by the dose-dependent sensitivity at depth in tissue. We propose a novel geometry called selective plane XIL (SPXIL), and apply it to experimental measurements in optical gel phantoms and sensitivity simulations., Methods: An imaging model is presented based on the selective plane geometry which can determine the detected diffuse optical signal for a given x-ray dose and nanophosphor distribution at depth in a semi-infinite, optically homogenous material. The surface radiance in the model is calculated using an analytical solution to the extrapolated boundary condition. Y 2 O 3 :Eu 3+ nanoparticles are synthesized and inserted into various optical phantom in order to measure the luminescent output per unit dose for a given concentration of nanophosphors and calibrate an imaging model for XIL sensitivity simulations. SPXIL imaging with a dual-source optical gel phantom is performed, and an iterative Richardson-Lucy deconvolution using a shifted Poisson noise model is applied to the measurements in order to reconstruct the nanophosphor distribution., Results: Nanophosphor characterizations showed a peak emission at 611 nm, a linear luminescent response to tube current and nanoparticle concentration, and a quadratic luminescent response to tube voltage. The luminescent efficiency calculation accomplished with calibrated bioluminescence mouse phantoms determines 1.06 photons were emitted per keV of x-ray radiation absorbed per g/mL of nanophosphor concentration. Sensitivity simulations determined that XIL could detect a concentration of 1 mg/mL of nanophosphors with a dose of 1 cGy at a depth ranging from 2 to 4 cm, depending on the optical parameters of the homogeneous diffuse optical environment. The deconvolution applied to the SPXIL measurements could resolve two sources 1 cm apart up to a depth of 1.75 cm in the diffuse phantom., Conclusions: We present a novel imaging geometry for XIL in a homogenous, diffuse optical environment. Basic characterization of Y 2 O 3 :Eu 3+ nanophosphors are presented along with XIL/SPXIL measurements in optical gel phantoms. The diffuse optical imaging model is validated using these measurements and then calibrated in order to execute initial sensitivity simulations for the dose-depth limitations of XIL imaging. The SPXIL imaging model is used to perform a deconvolution on a dual-source phantom, which successfully reconstructs the nanophosphor distributions., (© 2017 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Medical products (devices, drugs, or biologics) contain information in their labeling regarding the manner in which the manufacturer has determined that the products can be used in a safe and effective manner. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves medical products for use for these specific indications which are part of the medical product's labeling. When medical products are used in a manner not specified in the labeling, it is commonly referred to as off-label use. The practice of medicine allows for this off-label use to treat individual patients, but the ethical and legal implications for such unapproved use can be confusing. Although the responsibility and, ultimately, the liability for off-label use often rests with the prescribing physician, medical physicists and others are also responsible for the safe and proper use of the medical products. When these products are used for purposes other than which they were approved, it is important for medical physicists to understand their responsibilities. In the United States, medical products can only be marketed if officially cleared, approved, or licensed by the FDA; they can be used if they are not subject to or specifically exempt from FDA regulations, or if they are being used in research with the appropriate regulatory safeguards. Medical devices are either cleared or approved by FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Drugs are approved by FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and biological products such as vaccines or blood are licensed under a biologics license agreement by FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. For the purpose of this report, the process by which the FDA eventually clears, approves, or licenses such products for marketing in the United States will be referred to as approval. This report summarizes the various ways medical products, primarily medical devices, can legally be brought to market in the United States, and includes a discussion of the approval process, along with manufacturers' responsibilities, labeling, marketing and promotion, and off-label use. This is an educational and descriptive report and does not contain prescriptive recommendations. This report addresses the role of the medical physicist in clinical situations involving off-label use. Case studies in radiation therapy are presented. Any mention of commercial products is for identification only; it does not imply recommendations or endorsements of any of the authors or the AAPM. The full report, containing extensive background on off-label use with several appendices, is available on the AAPM website (http://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/).

Optically stimulated luminescent detectors, which are widely used in radiation protection, offer a number of potential advantages for application in radiation therapy dosimetry. Their introduction into this field has been somewhat hampered by the lack of information on their radiation response in megavoltage beams. Here the response of a commercially available optically stimulated luminescent detector (OSLD) is determined as a function of energy, absorbed dose to water, and linear energy transfer (LET). The detector response was measured as a function of energy for absorbed doses from 0.5 to 4.0 Gy over the following ranges: 125 kVp to 18 MV for photons, 6-20 MeV for electrons, 50-250 MeV for protons, and 290 MeV/u for the carbon ions. For the low LET beams, the response of the detector was linear up to 2 Gy with supralinearity occurring at higher absorbed doses. For the kilovoltage photons, the detector response relative to 6 MV increased with decreasing energy due to the higher atomic number of aluminum oxide (11.2) relative to water (7.4). For the megavoltage photons and electrons, the response was independent of energy. The response for protons was also independent of energy, but it was about 6% higher than its response to 6 MV photons. For the carbon ions, the dose response was linear for a given LET from 0.5 to 4.0 Gy, and no supralinearity was observed. However, it did exhibit LET dependence on the response relative to 6 MV photons decreasing from 1.02 at 1.3 keV/microm to 0.41 at 78 keV/microm. These results provide additional information on the dosimetric properties for this particular OSL detector and also demonstrate the potential for their use in photon, electron, and proton radiotherapy dosimetry with a more limited use in high LET radiotherapy dosimetry.

A novel intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) phantom for use in three-dimensional in vitro cell experiments, based on a commercially available system (CIRS Inc., Norfolk, VA), was designed and fabricated. The water-equivalent plastic phantom can, with a set of water-equivalent plastic inserts, enclose 1-3 multi-well tissue culture plates. Dosimetry within the phantom was assessed using thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLDs) and film. The phantom was loaded with three tissue culture plates, and an array of TLDs or a set of three films was placed underneath each plate within the phantom, and then irradiated using an IMRT plan created for it. Measured doses from each dosimeter were compared to those acquired from the treatment planning system. The percent differences between TLD measurements and the corresponding points in the treatment plan ranged from 1.3% to 2.9%, differences which did not show statistical significance. Average point-by-point percent dose differences for each film plane ranged from 1.6% to 3.1%. The percentage dose difference for which 95% of the points in the film matched those corresponding to the calculated dose plane to within 3.0% ranged from 2.8% to 4.2%. The good agreement between predicted and measured dose shows that the phantom is a useful and efficient tool for three-dimensional in vitro cell experiments.

For intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatments 6 MV photons are typically used, however, for deep seated tumors in the pelvic region, higher photon energies are increasingly being employed. IMRT treatments require more monitor units (MU) to deliver the same dose as conformal treatments, causing increased secondary radiation to tissues outside the treated area from leakage and scatter, as well as a possible increase in the neutron dose from photon interactions in the machine head. Here we provide in vivo patient and phantom measurements of the secondary out-of-field photon radiation and the neutron dose equivalent for 18 MV IMRT treatments. The patients were treated for prostate cancer with 18 MV IMRT at institutions using different therapy machines and treatment planning systems. Phantom exposures at the different facilities were used to compare the secondary photon and neutron dose equivalent between typical IMRT delivered treatment plans with a six field three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) plan. For the in vivo measurements LiF thermoluminescent detectors (TLDs) and Al2O3 detectors using optically stimulated radiation were used to obtain the photon dose and CR-39 track etch detectors were used to obtain the neutron dose equivalent. For the phantom measurements a Bonner sphere (25.4 cm diameter) containing two types of TLDs (TLD-600 and TLD-700) having different thermal neutron sensitivities were used to obtain the out-of-field neutron dose equivalent. Our results showed that for patients treated with 18 MV IMRT the photon dose equivalent is greater than the neutron dose equivalent measured outside the treatment field and the neutron dose equivalent normalized to the prescription dose varied from 2 to 6 mSv/Gy among the therapy machines. The Bonner sphere results showed that the ratio of neutron equivalent doses for the 18 MV IMRT and 3DCRT prostate treatments scaled as the ratio of delivered MUs. We also observed differences in the measured neutron dose equivalent among the three therapy machines for both the in vivo and phantom exposures.

The dosimetric effects of bone and air heterogeneities in head and neck IMRT treatments were quantified. An anthropomorphic RANDO phantom was CT-scanned with 16 thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) chips placed in and around the target volume. A standard IMRT plan generated with CORVUS was used to irradiate the phantom five times. On average, measured dose was 5.1% higher than calculated dose. Measurements were higher by 7.1% near the heterogeneities and by 2.6% in tissue. The dose difference between measurement and calculation was outside the 95% measurement confidence interval for six TLDs. Using CORVUS' heterogeneity correction algorithm, the average difference between measured and calculated doses decreased by 1.8% near the heterogeneities and by 0.7% in tissue. Furthermore, dose differences lying outside the 95% confidence interval were eliminated for five of the six TLDs. TLD doses recalculated by Pinnacle3's convolution/superposition algorithm were consistently higher than CORVUS doses, a trend that matched our measured results. These results indicate that the dosimetric effects of air cavities are larger than those of bone heterogeneities, thereby leading to a higher delivered dose compared to CORVUS calculations. More sophisticated algorithms such as convolution/superposition or Monte Carlo should be used for accurate tailoring of IMRT dose in head and neck tumours.

In electron beam dosimetry with an ionization chamber, a factor that corrects for the cavity perturbation of the medium, Prepl, and one to account for the disturbance due to the chamber wall material differing from the medium, Pwall, are required. The overall perturbation correction factor, p(q) = PreplPwall, has been introduced because of the difficulty in separately measuring these two components. An advantage of parallel-plate ionization chambers is that p(q) has been shown to be close to unity at dmax. However, many dosimetry applications require knowledge of the overall perturbation factor at depths greater than dmax. We determined p(q) for the NACP chamber at depths beyond dmax by intercomparing percentage depth dose measurements made with it with those obtained with a PTW/diamond detector for which p(q) was taken as unity at all the measurement depths. Data were obtained at depths corresponding to approximately the 90 and 80 per cent of the dose maxima for 20, 16, 12 and 6 MeV incident electrons. The beam energy at depth, Ed, and the percentage depth-dose gradient varied from 1.4 to 14.3 MeV and 0 to 5.8% mm(-1) respectively. Our results show that within the estimated uncertainty of 1.3%, p(q),NACP is unity over the range of energies and dose gradients studied.

A Monte Carlo simulation of the photon dose due to scattered x rays, head leakage photons, and capture gamma rays in the maze of an 18 MeV accelerator facility was carried out. The results of the Monte Carlo simulation were compared with dose measurements made in the maze and also with values calculated using an empirical equation. Agreement within +/-26% was found among the three techniques used to evaluate the capture gamma ray dose. It was found that the empirical equation overestimated the scattered x ray plus head leakage photon dose by a factor as large as 2.9 as compared to the other methods. It was concluded that the photon dose, for mazes greater than 3 m in length, is produced predominately by capture gamma rays.

In electron beam dosimetry the perturbation effect in the medium by the ionization chamber cavity is accounted for by introducing a replacement correction factor, P(repl). Another perturbation correction factor, denoted as P(wall), is due to the materials of the walls of the parallel-plate chamber differing from the phantom material. Because of the difficulties in separating these two components, we measure the overall perturbation factor, p(q) = P(repl)P(wall). A distinct advantage of parallel-plate ionization chambers over cylindrical chambers is that p(q) has been shown to be close to unity at the standard calibration depth, d(max). However, for many dosimetry applications it is necessary to know the overall perturbation factor at depths greater than d(max). We measured the overall perturbation factor at depths greater than d(max) (approximating the 95%, 90% and 50% depth dose) for a Farmer-type cylindrical ionization chamber and three parallel-plate ionization chambers. We assumed that p(q) for the NACP chamber is unity at these measurement depths. The depth dependence for the other chambers was then measured relative to the NACP chamber. The mean energy at depth, E(d), and percentage depth dose gradient ranges studied were 1.9-18.5 MeV and 0 to 4.5%/mm, respectively. For the other two parallel-plate chambers, we find p(q) to be unity at depths where the percent depth dose is greater than 90%, but it deviates from unity at deeper depths, where the dose gradients exceed about 2.5%/mm. For the cylindrical chamber, p(q) values at depths greater than d(max) were found to be in good agreement with those in TG 21, where the energy at depth, E(d), is used to evaluate p(q).

All dosimetry protocols for calibrating the output of electron beams recommend the use of parallel-plate ionization chambers, but the method of determining their value of Ngas is a matter of concern. The AAPM Protocol (TG 21) recommends a direct comparison with a calibrated cylindrical chamber in phantom at dmax with the highest available electron energy beam. This must be done by the user. Since all calibration laboratories traditionally use 60Co for megavoltage chamber calibrations, two alternate procedures based on exposures in-air, or in-phantom, have been proposed. All methods use correction factors in the data reduction. To verify the consistency of the three methods, we have measured Ngas using each of these techniques for six of the most commonly used and commercially-available parallel-plate ionization chambers. The paired cylindrical and parallel-plate ionization chambers, and phantom materials/buildup caps were matched to the wall composition of the plane chambers, as recommended in TG 39. A 22 MeV electron beam was used for the electron irradiations. The ionization chambers were then taken to an Accredited Dosimetry Calibration Laboratory (ADCL), where 60Co calibrations were performed. The results demonstrate that, by using the appropriate correction factors for the chambers described in this work, all three methods yield values for Ngas that are within 1% of each other.

The calibration of parallel-plate chambers for absolute dosimetry is an unsettled matter. The medical physics community has not yet agreed on a practical method of obtaining Ngas, although several researchers are working on this problem. If the photon and electron fluence perturbation factors, KwallKcomp, were known for chambers of standard construction with full buildup provision, then an in-air Co-60 calibration could be applied to these, as is done with cylindrical chambers. We have obtained such correction factors for five commercially available chambers based on measurements in air and in homogeneous phantoms relative to matched cylindrical chambers of known dosimetric parameters. For three of the chambers (Markus, Holt and Exradin) we find that KwallKcomp = 1.000 +/- 0.008, in excellent agreement with available results from Monte Carlo calculations. The values for the other two chambers (NACP and Capintec) are different than 1. Our results are compared to recently published values, both calculated and measured.

A patient previously treated with radiation for base-of-tongue cancer presented with recurrent disease seven years later. The spinal cord had received tolerance dose. Using state-of-the-art treatment planning techniques, including beam's-eye-view and volumetrics, dose-volume histograms, split field technique, mixed energies, and beam intensity modulation (with a compensator), we achieved uniform dose coverage of the target in 3-D. This was verified in vivo with thermoluminescence dosimeters positioned in the esophagus by means of a nasogastric tube that ran centrally through the target volume. The various techniques applied will be presented with a discussion of the rationale used in each step of plan optimization and verification.

When parallel-plate chambers are used for dosimetry in electron fields, the AAPM dosimetry protocol recommends a value of 1.0 for the replacement correction factor, P(repl),pp,E, until further data become available. Here, P(repl),pp,E for five commercially available parallel-plate chambers was measured as a function of electron energy from a nominal value of 5.5 to 22 MeV by comparison with a cylindrical chamber whose P(repl),cyl,E was obtained from data in the protocol. Since this method is based on the concept of a constant value for Ngas,pp, the energy and modality dependence of Ngap,pp is also investigated for these chambers for Co-60, 4-, 6-, 24-MV photons and for 22-MeV electrons. It is found that for three of the chambers P(repl),pp,E is independent of energy, consistent with unity within one or two standard deviations (s.d.). For the fourth chamber P(repl),pp,E is similarly consistent with one above 10 MeV, but decreases at lower energies, while for the fifth one it shows a systematic drop with decreasing energy.

Sr-90 ophthalmic applicators are commonly used for the treatment of superficial eye disorders. Although a variety of dosimetric devices such as film, thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's), ion chambers, and radiochromic foils have been used to measure the peak dose at the applicator surface, there is no internationally agreed upon calibration procedure. Recently, large discrepancies among calibrations of the same applicator at three institutions have been reported. Here we describe a technique to obtain the peak dose rate at the applicator surface using LiF TLD's. The technique can be used for the calibration of flat as well as curved surface applicators. Results for two flat and three concave applicators are presented. Our measurement of the surface dose rate for one of the flat applicators is compared with those obtained by four other institutions, each using different dosimetric devices.

Proton-induced degradation of vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) transmittance of LiF and MgF(2) was measured for 85- and 600-MeV protons for a fluence up to 2.8 x 10(13)p/cm(2). Transmittances were measured from 105 to 210 nm. When the irradiation level for a given material is expressed in terms of absorbed energy per unit of volume of crystal, 85- and 600-MeV protons produce the same degradation. MgF(2) is substantially more radiation resistant than LiF in the VUV. Irradiation of LiF with 1.8 x 10(13)p/cm(2) at 85 MeV changed the transmittance of the hydrogen Lyman-alpha line at 121.6 nm from 55 to 23%. The corresponding change for MgF(2) was from 52 to 42% for 2.8 x 10(13)p/cm(2).

We have investigated the energy and field-size dependence of the source position of the electron beams from a Varian Clinac-2,500 accelerator. Three independent experimental methods were used: (1) multipinhole camera (MPC), (2) back projection of the full width at half maximum (FWHM), and (3) the inverse square law (ISL). The positions of the virtual and effective sources were calculated using the multiple Coulomb scattering (MCS) formalism. The results obtained from the MPC agree, within the experimental uncertainties, with the calculated values for the virtual source position. Similarly, the results from the FWHM method agree with the calculations with the exception of those for small field sizes at the lower energies. This is consistent with the fact that both kinds of measurements are not very sensitive to scattering in the photon and electron collimators. In contrast, the source position determined by the ISL method shows strong dependence on field size and energy, and does not agree with the values predicted by the MCS formalism. This is due to contamination from electrons scattered in the x ray and electron collimation system. The techniques and results reported here should be generally applicable to other scatter foil linear accelerators.

The AAPM Protocol recommends the use of water, polystyrene or acrylic media for measuring the output of high energy photon beams. It provides the appropriate restricted mass stopping powers and mass energy absorption coefficients for converting the dose to these media to dose to water. A water-equivalent solid has been developed for dosimetric applications [C. Constantinou, F. Attix, and B. Paliwal, Med. Phys. 9, 436 (1982)]. Calculated values for the restricted mass stopping powers and mass energy absorption coefficients have been published for this material [A. Ho and B. Paliwal, Med. Phys. 13, 403 (1986)]. The accuracy of these calculations was investigated by making output measurements, following the Protocol, with a Farmer type chamber in four materials for Co-60, 4, 6, 10, 18, and 24 MV photon beams. The results show that the scaled dose to water for the different media agree to better than 1%, and the analysis supports the methodology of the Protocol for obtaining the dose to water from the different media.

Depth-ionization measurements were performed using a thin wall parallel plate chamber in water at nominal electron energies of 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 22 MeV for the standard available square field sizes. The characteristic parameters of the central axis depth-dose distributions were derived and compared to corresponding values for other accelerators. Vacuum packed therapy-verification films were used in water to obtain isodose distributions in a plane containing the central axis of the beam. The uniformity index and penumbra of the beams were measured from isodose distributions obtained in planes perpendicular to the beam central axis, at depths of 1/2R85 in water.