In recent years, the use of tissue-equivalent materials has become quite common in fast-neutron dosimetry, with the A-150 plastic developed by Shonka et al. probably the most popular. Information on this specific plastic is scantily reported in the literature and as a consequence a preponderance of authors unknowingly reference an article by Shonka describing an early version of a tissue substitute plastic but having a different elemental composition than the present A-150 formulation. We have reviewed the results of 21 chemical analyses which have occurred over a time span of four years on a total of 14 samples of A-150 plastic and based on these data and the formulation of the plastic, have arrived at a suggested composition for A-150 tissue-equivalent plastic. The ambiguities of water absorption by nylon, one of the components of the plastic, and the uncertainty this reflects in the composition of the plastic were evaluated.
This work evaluates the application of AAPM task group 25 (TG25) methodology for determination of central axis depth dose for a radiotherapy linear accelerator, whose dual scattering foil system and applicators were recently modified. The percent depth dose (%DD) and the dose output factor have been measured for square and rectangular fields at 100- and 110-cm source-to-surface distance (SSDs). At 100-cm SSD, results showed that %DD for a specific energy and field size can vary with applicator, the largest variation being for the 20-MeV, 10 x 10-cm field where a spread of +/- 2.5% or +/- 3 mm about the mean %DD is observed. The square-root method determines rectangular field %DD within 1%. Output factors for rectangular fields are calculated from square field values more accurately using a square-root method than the equivalent-square method recommended by TG25. At 110-cm SSD, the %DD calculated from that at 100-cm SSD using an inverse square factor does not agree with measured values for all fields. The maximum difference observed for the 20-MeV, 6 x 6-cm field was 5.5% or 10 mm. Output data at the 110-cm SSD show that the square-root method is suitable for determination of the air-gap correction factors of rectangular fields. In summary, the recommendations of TG25 work reasonably well for central axis electron beam dosimetry for this version of a radiotherapy linear accelerator, except in limited cases where applicator-scattered electrons apparently cause minor but clinically significant discrepancies.
The accuracy of dose calculations from a pencil-beam algorithm developed specifically for arc electron beam therapy was evaluated at 10 and 15 MeV. Mid-arc depth-doses were measured for 0 degrees and 90 degrees arcs using 12 and 15 cm radius cylindrical water phantoms. Calculated depth-doses for the 90 degrees arced beams in the build-up region were as much as 3% less than measured values; the maximum dose was similar in magnitude but at a greater depth; and the therapeutic depth, R80, was 2-4 mm deeper. Calculated values of output (dose per monitor unit) at the depth of the maximum calculated dose were compared with measured values; for arcs ranging from 0-90 degrees, 12 and 15 cm radius water phantoms, and collimator widths of 4, 5 and 6 cm, results showed differences as great as 7%. Isodose countours for a 90 degrees arc were also measured in a 15 cm radius PMMA phantom. At the depth of maximum dose the algorithm predicted doses in the penumbral regions, both with and without collimation, which agreed within a few per cent of measured values. The largest discrepancies were 5%, which occurred in the penumbral portion of the depth-dose fall-off region. Differences between measurement and calculation are not believed to be clinically significant and are believed to be primarily due to the fact that the algorithm models neither large-angle scattering nor the effects of range straggling on the pencil-beam dose distribution.
In a beam accessory configuration for a linear accelerator using a prototype multileaf collimator, newly designed wedges were mounted beyond the blocking tray. The isodose curves, depth of maximum dose, surface dose, and wedge transmission factors were measured for the wedges designed for this unique configuration. The same set of wedges was used for both 6- and 18-MV x rays. The shape of the wedged isodose curves was essentially unchanged from those produced by the conventional wedges located above the blocking tray. The isodose curves exhibited the desired wedge angles over the range of field sizes from 5 x 5 to 15 x 40 cm. In the 10 x 10-cm field, the average difference between the observed wedge angle and the desired wedge angle was 3.8 degrees. The surface doses ranged from 18% to 35% for the wedged 10 x 10-cm fields as compared with about 15% for the same open field. Dosimetrically the wedges were acceptable for clinical use.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.