Impact of inertia on possible fundamental drawbacks in radiochromic film dosimetry

The use of Pantherpix pixel detector in radiotherapy QA

There are various different detectors, which can be used for radiotherapy measurements, and more are about to be adopted. Hybrid pixel detectors (HPD) have been originally developed for the high energy physics. However, over the last few years they also expanded in the medical physics. Novel 2D detector Pantherpix is a HPD designed specifically for the radiotherapy. In this article, its properties are characterised and an assessment of its use in radiotherapy photon beams is provided. Properties such as response stability, response linearity, angular dependence and energy dependence were studied. In order to prove sufficient clinical quality for relative dosimetry, further measurements were undertaken (i.e. dose profiles and collimator scatter factors). Acquired results were compared with ion chamber and gafchromic film results. Namely the applicability of PhPix for cobalt beam therapy, which is still widely used (and will be used in near future) in economically less developed countries, is considered.

In vivo dosimetry in low-voltage IORT breast treatments with XR-RV3 radiochromic film

PURPOSE

The objectives of the study were to establish a procedure for in vivo film-based dosimetry for intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), evaluate the typical doses delivered to organs at risk, and verify the dose prescription.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In vivo dose measurements were studied using XR-RV3 radiochromic films in 30 patients with breast cancer undergoing IORT using the Axxent® device (Xoft Inc.). The stability of the radiochromic films in the energy ranges used was verified by taking measurements at different depths. The stability of the scanner response was tested, and 5 different calibration curves were constructed for different beam qualities. Six pieces of film were placed in each of the 30 patients. All the pieces were correctly sterilized and checked to ensure that the process did not affect the outcome. All calibration and dose measurements were analyzed using the Radiochromic.com software application.

RESULTS

The doses were measured for 30 patients. The doses in contact with the applicator (prescription zone) were 19.8 ± 0.9 Gy. In the skin areas, the doses were as follows: 1-2 cm from the applicator, 1.86 ± 0.77 Gy; 2-5 cm, 0.73 ± 0.14 Gy; and greater than 5 cm, 0.28 ± 0.17 Gy. The dose delivered to the pectoral muscle (tungsten shielding disc) was 0.51 ± 0.27 Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated the viability of XR-RV3 films for in vivo dose measurement in the dose and energy ranges applied in a complex procedure, such as breast IORT. The doses in organs at risk were far below the tolerances for cases such as those studied.

On the use of EBT3 film for relative dosimetry of kilovoltage X ray beams

EBT3 films were evaluated for relative dosimetry in water, in the energy range of therapeutic kV X ray beams. A film batch was calibrated in air for all nine beam qualities of a clinical unit (XStrahl 200). Monte Carlo (MC) simulations using MCNP v.6 facilitated the calculation of the film absorbed dose (f), and beam quality (k_bq) energy dependences in air. Results were found in agreement with corresponding data in the literature. Film samples from the same batch were irradiated in water along the central beam axis for each beam quality. Experimental percentage depth dose (PDD) results obtained using calibration data in air showed quality and depth dependent differences from corresponding MC simulations. These differences increased beyond film dosimetry uncertainty (<3.3%), reaching up to 8% at increased depth. The observed differences reduced only slightly when spectral variation as a function of measurement point was accounted for, using photon effective energy. PDD measurements and corresponding MC results facilitated the determination of f and k_bq in water. Results showed that the origin of the observed differences between experimental and MC PDD results is the difference between film response in air and water, as a result of radiation field perturbation from the film oriented along the central beam axis. This implies a directional dependence of film response which necessitates that the angular distribution of photons impinging on the film is the same in the calibration and measurement geometries.