Variations of the altitude and changes in the weather conditions may produce significant density corrections, and that effect should be taken into account. This effect is chamber-dependent, indicating that a specific calibration is necessary for each particular chamber. To our knowledge, this correction has not been considered so far for SourceCheck ionization chambers, but its magnitude cannot be neglected in clinical practice. The atmospheric pressure and temperature at which the chamber was calibrated need to be taken into account, and they should be reported in the calibration certificate. In addition, each institution should analyze the particular response of its SourceCheck ionization chamber and compute the adequate correction factors. In the absence of a suitable pressure chamber, a possibility for this assessment is to take measurements at different altitudes, spanning a wide enough air density range.

Purpose: The objective of this study was to characterize the Best Medical Canada microMOSFET detectors for their application in in vivo dosimetry for high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT) with 192 Ir. We also developed a mathematical model to correct dependencies under the measurement conditions of these detectors. Methods: We analyzed the linearity, reproducibility, and interdetector variability and studied the microMOSFET response dependence on temperature, source-detector distance, and angular orientation of the receptor with respect to the source. The correction model was applied to 19 measurements corresponding to five simulated treatments in a custom phantom specifically designed for this purpose. Results: The detectors (high bias applied in all measurements) showed excellent linearity up to 160 Gy. The response dependence on source-detector distance varied by (8.65 AE 0.06)% (k = 1) for distances between 1 and 7 cm, and the variation with temperature was (2.24 AE 0.05)% (k = 1) between 294 and 310 K. The response difference due to angular dependence can reach (10.3 AE 1.3)% (k = 1). For the set of measurements analyzed, regarding angular dependences, the mean difference between administered and measured doses was À4.17% (standard deviation of 3.4%); after application of the proposed correction model, the mean difference was À0.1% (standard deviation of 2.2%). For the treatments analyzed, the average difference between calculations and measures was 4.7% when only the calibration coefficient was used, but it is reduced to 0.9% when the correction model is applied. Conclusion: Important response dependencies of microMOSFET detectors used for in vivo dosimetry in HDRBT treatments, especially the angular dependence, can be adequately characterized by a correction model that increases the accuracy of this system in clinical applications.

No abstract

Purpose: Schemes with high doses per fraction and small number of fractions are commonly used in high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) for prostate cancer. Our aim was to analyze the differences between published clinical results and the predictions of radiobiological models for absorbed dose required in a single fraction monotherapy HDR-BT. Material and methods: Published HDR-BT clinical results for low-and intermediate-risk patients with prostate cancer were revised. For 13 clinical studies with 16 fractionation schedules between 1 and 9 fractions, a dose-response relation in terms of the biochemical control probability (BC) was established using Monte Carlo-based statistical methods. Results: We obtained a value of α/β = 22.8 Gy (15.1-60.2 Gy) (95% CI) much larger than the values in the range 1.5-3.0 Gy that are usually considered to compare the results of different fractionation schemes in prostate cancer radiotherapy using doses per fraction below 6 Gy. The doses in a single fraction producing BC = 90% and 95% were 22.3 Gy (21.5-24.2 Gy) and 24.3 Gy (23.0-27.9 Gy), respectively. Conclusions: The α/β obtained in our analysis of 22.8 Gy for a range of dose per fraction between 6 and 20.5 Gy was much greater than the one currently estimated for prostate cancer using low doses per fraction. This high value of α/β explains reasonably well the data available in the region of high doses per fraction considered.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract