No abstract

Extended-range BSS, TEPCs, and the WENDI-II enable accurate measurements of stray neutrons while other rem-counters are not appropriate considering the high-energy range of neutrons involved in proton therapy.

In interventional radiology, for an accurate determination of effective dose to the staff, measurements with two dosemeters have been recommended, one located above and one under the protective apron. Such 'double dosimetry' practices and the algorithms used for the determination of effective dose were reviewed in this study by circulating a questionnaire and by an extensive literature search. The results indicated that regulations for double dosimetry almost do not exist and there is no firm consensus on the most suitable calculation algorithms. The calculation of effective dose is mainly based on the single dosemeter measurements, in which either personal dose equivalent, directly, (dosemeter below the apron) or a fraction of personal dose equivalent (dosemeter above the apron) is taken as an assessment of effective dose. The most recent studies suggest that there might not be just one double dosimetry algorithm that would be optimum for all interventional radiology procedures. Further investigations in several critical configurations of interventional radiology procedures are needed to assess the suitability of the proposed algorithms.

Proton beam therapy has advantages in comparison to conventional photon radiotherapy due to the physical properties of proton beams (e.g. sharp distal fall off, adjustable range and modulation). In proton therapy, there is the possibility of sparing healthy tissue close to the target volume. This is especially important when tumours are located next to critical organs and while treating cancer in paediatric patients. On the other hand, the interactions of protons with matter result in the production of secondary radiation, mostly neutrons and gamma radiation, which deposit their energy at a distance from the target. The aim of this study was to compare the response of different passive dosimetry systems in mixed radiation field induced by proton pencil beam inside anthropomorphic phantoms representing 5 and 10 years old children. Doses were measured in different organs with thermoluminescent (MTS-7, MTS-6 and MCP-N), radiophotoluminescent (GD-352 M and GD-302M), bubble and poly-allyl-diglycol carbonate (PADC) track detectors. Results show that RPL detectors are the less sensitive for neutrons than LiF TLDs and can be applied for in-phantom dosimetry of gamma component. Neutron doses determined using track detectors, bubble detectors and pairs of MTS-7/MTS-6 are consistent within the uncertainty range. This is the first study dealing with measurements on child anthropomorphic phantoms irradiated by a pencil scanning beam technique.

Systematic 3D mapping of out-of-field doses induced by a therapeutic proton pencil scanning beam in a 300  ×  300  ×  600 mm water phantom was performed using a set of thermoluminescence detectors (TLDs): MTS-7 (LiF:Mg,Ti), MTS-6 (LiF:Mg,Ti), MTS-N (LiF:Mg,Ti) and TLD-700 (LiF:Mg,Ti), radiophotoluminescent (RPL) detectors GD-352M and GD-302M, and polyallyldiglycol carbonate (PADC)-based (CHO) track-etched detectors. Neutron and gamma-ray doses, as well as linear energy transfer distributions, were experimentally determined at 200 points within the phantom. In parallel, the Geant4 Monte Carlo code was applied to calculate neutron and gamma radiation spectra at the position of each detector. For the cubic proton target volume of 100  ×  100  ×  100 mm (spread out Bragg peak with a modulation of 100 mm) the scattered photon doses along the main axis of the phantom perpendicular to the primary beam were approximately 0.5 mGy Gy at a distance of 100 mm and 0.02 mGy Gy at 300 mm from the center of the target. For the neutrons, the corresponding values of dose equivalent were found to be ~0.7 and ~0.06 mSv Gy, respectively. The measured neutron doses were comparable with the out-of-field neutron doses from a similar experiment with 20 MV x-rays, whereas photon doses for the scanning proton beam were up to three orders of magnitude lower.

The purpose of this study was to measure out-of-field organ doses in clinical conditions in anthropomorphic paediatric phantoms which received a simulated treatment of a brain tumour with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D CRT). Organ doses measured with radiophotoluminescent and thermoluminescent dosemeters were on average 1.6 and 3.0 times higher for the 5 y-old than for the 10 y-old phantom for IMRT and 3D CRT, respectively. A larger 5-y to 10-y organ dose ratio for 3D CRT can be explained because the use of a mechanical wedge for the 5-y-old 3D CRT phantom treatment increased out-of-field doses. Due to different configurations of the radiation fields, for both phantoms, the IMRT technique resulted in a higher non-target brain dose and higher eye doses but lower thyroid doses compared to 3D CRT. For 3D CRT (which used a non-coplanar field configuration), eye doses were 3-6% and for IMRT (which used a coplanar field configuration) 27-30% of the treatment dose, respectively. For thyroid and more distant organs, doses were less than 1% of the treatment dose. Comparison of measured doses and doses calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS) showed that the TPS underestimated out-of-field doses both for IMRT and 3D CRT.

In 2012 IRPA established a task group (TG) to identify key issues in the implementation of the revised eye lens dose limit. The TG reported its conclusions in 2013. In January 2015, IRPA asked the TG to review progress with the implementation of the recommendations from the early report and to collate current practitioner experience. This report presents the results of a survey on the view of the IRPA professionals on the new limit to the lens of the eye and on the wider issue of tissue reactions. Recommendations derived from the survey are presented. This report was approved by IRPA Executive Council on 31 January 2017.

We have developed a simple analytical model of absorbed dose from external beam radiotherapy treatments in the 6 to 25 MV beam energy range. The model has been tested on measured data from multiple treatment machines and techniques, and is broadly applicable to contemporary external beam radiation therapy.