An analytical formalism for the assessment of dose uncertainties due to positioning uncertainties

The IAEA remote audit of small field dosimetry for testing the implementation of the TRS-483 code of practice

BACKGROUND

The TRS‑483, an IAEA/AAPM International Code of Practice on dosimetry of small static photon fields, underwent testing via an IAEA coordinated research project (CRP). Alongside small field output factors (OFs) measurements using active dosimeters by CRP participants, the IAEA Dosimetry Laboratory received a mandate to formulate a remote small field dosimetry audit method using its passive dosimetry systems.

PURPOSE

This work aimed to develop a small field dosimetry audit methodology employing radiophotoluminescent dosimeters (RPLDs) and radiochromic films. The methodology was subsequently evaluated through a multicenter pilot study with CRP participants.

METHODS

The developments included designing and manufacturing a dosimeter holder set and the characterization of an RPLD system for measurements in small photon fields using the new holder. The audit included verification of small field OFs and lateral beam profiles for small fields. At first, treatment planning system (TPS) calculated OFs were checked against a reference data set that was available for conventional linacs. Second, calculated OFs were verified through the RPLD measurement of point doses in a machine-specific reference field, 4 cm × 4 cm, 2 cm × 2 cm, and 1 cm × 1 cm, corresponding size circular fields or nearest achievable field sizes. Lastly, profile checks in in-plane and cross-plane directions were done for the two smallest fields by comparing film measurements with TPS calculations at 20%, 50%, and 80% isodose levels.

RESULTS

RPLD correction factors for small field measurements were approximately unity. However, they influenced the dose determination's overall uncertainty in small fields, estimated at 2.30% (k = 1 level). Considering the previous experience in auditing reference beam output following the TRS-398 Code of Practice, the acceptance limit of 5% for the ratio of the dose determined by RPLD to the dose calculated by TPS, DRPLD/DTPS, was considered adequate. The multicenter pilot study included 15 participants from 14 countries (39 beams). Consistent with the previous findings, the results of the OF check against the reference data confirmed that TPSs tend to overestimate OFs for the smallest fields included in this exercise. All except three RPLD measurement results were within the acceptance limit, and the spread of results increased for smaller field sizes. The differences between the film measured and TPS calculated dose profiles were within 3 mm for most of the beams checked; deviated results revealed problems with TPS commissioning and calibration of the treatment unit collimation systems.

CONCLUSION

The newly developed small field dosimetry audit methodology proved effective and successfully complemented the CRP OF measurements by participants with RPLD audit results.

Grid/lattice therapy: consideration of small field dosimetry

Small-field dosimetry used in special procedures such as gamma knife, Cyberknife, Tomotherapy, IMRT, and VMAT has been in evolution after several radiation incidences with very significant (70%) errors due to poor understanding of the dosimetry. IAEA-TRS-483 and AAPM-TG-155 have provided comprehensive information on small-fields dosimetry in terms of code of practice and relative dosimetry. Data for various detectors and conditions have been elaborated. It turns out that with a suitable detectors dose measurement accuracy can be reasonably (±3%) achieved for 6 MV beams for fields >1×1 cm2. For grid therapy, even though the treatment is performed with small fields created by either customized blocks, multileaf collimator (MLC), or specialized devices, it is multiple small fields that creates combined treatment. Hence understanding the dosimetry in collection of holes of small field is a separate challenge that needs to be addressed. It is more critical to understand the scattering conditions from multiple holes that form the treatment grid fields. Scattering changes the beam energy (softer) and hence dosimetry protocol needs to be properly examined for having suitable dosimetric parameters. In lieu of beam parameter unavailability in physical grid devices, MLC-based forward and inverse planning is an alternative path for bulky tumours. Selection of detectors in small field measurement is critical and it is more critical in mixed beams created by scattering condition. Ramification of small field concept used in grid therapy along with major consideration of scattering condition is explored. Even though this review article is focussed mainly for dosimetry for low-energy megavoltage photon beam (6 MV) but similar procedures could be adopted for high energy beams. To eliminate small field issues, lattice therapy with the help of MLC is a preferrable choice.

Small field output factor measurement and verification for CyberKnife robotic radiotherapy and radiosurgery system using 3D polymer gel, ionization chamber, diode, diamond and scintillator detectors, Gafchromic film and Monte Carlo simulation

The dosimetry of small fields has become tremendously important with the advent of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery, where small field segments or very small fields are used to treat tumors. With high dose gradients in the stereotactic radiosurgery or radiotherapy treatment, small field dosimetry becomes challenging due to the lack of lateral electronic equilibrium in the field, x-ray source occlusion, and detector volume averaging. Small volume and tissue-equivalent detectors are recommended to overcome the challenges. With the lack of a perfect radiation detector, studies on available detectors are ongoing with reasonable disagreement and uncertainties. The joint IAEA and AAPM international code of practice (CoP) for small field dosimetry, TRS 483 (Alfonso et al., 2017) provides guidelines and recommendations for the dosimetry of small static fields in external beam radiotherapy. The CoP provides a methodology for field output factor (FOF) measurements and use of field output correction factors for a series of small field detectors and strongly recommends additional measurements, data collection and verification for CyberKnife (CK) robotic stereotactic radiotherapy/radiosurgery system using the listed detectors and more new detectors so that the FOFs can be implemented clinically. The present investigation is focused on using 3D gel along with some other commercially available detectors for the measurement and verification of field output factors (FOFs) for the small fields available in the CK system. The FOF verification was performed through a comparison with published data and Monte Carlo simulation. The results of this study have proved the suitability of an in-house developed 3D polymer gel dosimeter, several commercially available detectors, and Gafchromic films as a part of small field dosimetric measurements for the CK system.

A multi-institutional evaluation of small field output factor determination following the recommendations of IAEA/AAPM TRS-483

Purpose

The aim of this work was to test the implementation of small field dosimetry following TRS‐483 and to develop quality assurance procedures for the experimental determination of small field output factors (SFOFs).

Materials and methods

Twelve different centers provided SFOFs determined with various detectors. Various linac models using the beam qualities 6 MV and 10 MV with flattening filter and without flattening filter were utilized to generate square fields down to a nominal field size of 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm. The detectors were positioned at 10 cm depth in water. Depending on the local situation, the source‐to‐surface distance was either set to 90 cm or 100 cm. The SFOFs were normalized to the output of the 10 cm × 10 cm field. The spread of SFOFs measured with different detectors was investigated for each individual linac beam quality and field size. Additionally, linac‐type specific SFOF curves were determined for each beam quality and the SFOFs determined using individual detectors were compared to these curves. Example uncertainty budgets were established for a solid state detector and a micro ionization chamber.

Results

The spread of SFOFs for each linac and field was below 5% for all field sizes. With the exception of one linac‐type, the SFOFs of all investigated detectors agreed within 10% with the respective linac‐type SFOF curve, indicating a potential inter‐detector and inter‐linac variability.

Conclusion

Quality assurance on the SFOF measurements can be done by investigation of the spread of SFOFs measured with multiple detectors and by comparison to linac‐type specific SFOFs. A follow‐up of a measurement session should be conducted if the spread of SFOFs is larger than 5%, 3%, and 2% for field sizes of 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm, 1 cm × 1 cm, and field sizes larger than 2 cm × 2 cm, respectively. Additionally, deviations of measured SFOFs to the linac‐type‐curves of more than 7%, 3%, and 2% for field sizes 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm, 1 cm × 1 cm, and field sizes larger than 1 cm × 1 cm, respectively, should be followed up.

Evaluation of Acuros® XB accuracy for static small fields dose calculations based on the IAEA/AAPM TRS-483 recommendation

PURPOSE

Evaluate Acuros® XB dose calculation accuracy following TRS-483 recommendations in small static fields for flattened and un-flattened 6 MV X-ray beams.

METHODS

Field output factors were measured following TRS-483 recommendations using four radiation detectors. Two sets of field output factors were measured. One set was used to configure the beam model into Acuros® XB down to a jaw-defined field size of 1.0 cm × 1.0 cm. The second set was used to evaluate the differences between calculated and measured field output factors for MLC-fields down to a field size of 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm.

RESULTS

Acuros® XB showed an accuracy within 1.5% down to an MLC-field of 1.0 cm × 1.0 cm, for a focal spot size of 1.0 and 0.0 mm in the cross and in-plane directions. For an MLC-field of 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm, an agreement was found within 3% between calculated and measured field output factors. These results were addressed by optimizing the focal spot size to minimize the differences between calculated and measured dose profiles.

CONCLUSIONS

By optimizing the focal spot size, Acuros® XB showed an acceptable agreement within 3% down to an MLC-field of 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm. The results of this work suggest that if static and modulated delivery of very small targets is planned, then a field output factor table down to a field size of 1.0 cm is required in the beam configuration model.

Implementation and Challenges of International Atomic Energy Agency/American Association of Physicists in Medicine TRS 483 Formalism for Field Output Factors and Involved Uncertainties Determination in Small Fields for TomoTherapy

PURPOSE

International Atomic Energy Agency published TRS-483 to address the issues of small field dosimetry. Our study calculates the output factor in the small fields of TomoTherapy using different detectors and dosimetric conditions. Furthermore, it estimates the various components of uncertainty and presents challenges faced during implementation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Beam quality TPR20,10(10) at the hypothetical field size of 10 cm × 10 cm was calculated from TPR20,10(S). Two ionization chambers based on the minimum field width required to satisfy the lateral charge particle equilibrium and one unshielded electron field diode (EFD) were selected. Output factor measurements were performed in various dosimetric conditions.

RESULTS

Beam quality TPR20,10(10) has a mean value of 0.627 ± 0.001. The maximum variation of output factor between CC01 chamber and EFD diode at the smallest field size was 11.80%. In source to surface setup, the difference between water and virtual water was up to 9.68% and 8.13%, respectively, for the CC01 chamber and EFD diode. The total uncertainty in the ionization chamber was 2.43 times higher compared to the unshielded EFD diode at the smallest field size.

CONCLUSIONS

Beam quality measurements, chamber selection procedure, and output factors were successfully carried out. A difference of up to 10% in output factor can occur if density scaling for electron density in virtual water is not considered. The uncertainty in output correction factors dominates, while positional and meter reading uncertainty makes a minor contribution to total uncertainty. An unshielded EFD diode is a preferred detector in small fields because of lower uncertainty in measurements compared to ionization chambers.

Technical Note: Design and commissioning of a water phantom for proton dosimetry in magnetic fields

Purpose

To design and commission a water phantom suitable for constrained environments and magnetic fields for magnetic resonance (MR)‐guided proton therapy.

Methods

A phantom was designed, to enable precise, remote controlled detector positioning in water within the constrained environment of a magnet for MR‐guided proton therapy. The phantom consists of a PMMA enclosure whose outer dimensions of 81×40×12.5cm3 were chosen to optimize space usage inside the 13.5‐cm bore gap of the magnet. The moving mechanism is based on a low‐height H‐shaped non‐ferromagnetic belt drive, driven by stepper motors located outside of the magnetic field. The control system and the associated electronics were designed in house, with similar features as available in commercial water phantoms. Reproducibility as well as accuracy of the phantom positioning were tested using a high‐precision Leica AT 402 laser tracker. Laterally integrated depth dose curves and lateral beam profiles at three depths were acquired repeatedly for a 148.2 MeV proton beam in water.

Results

The phantom was successfully operated with and without applied magnetic fields. For complex movements, a positioning uncertainty within 0.16 mm was found with an absolute accuracy typically below 0.3 mm. Laterally integrated depth dose curves agreed within 0.1 mm with data taken using a commercial water phantom. The lateral beam offset determined from beam profile measurements agreed well with data from Monte Carlo simulations.

Conclusion

The phantom is optimally suited for detector positioning and dosimetric experiments within constrained environments in high magnetic fields.