Implementing a newly proposed Monte Carlo based small field dosimetry formalism for a comprehensive set of diode detectors

The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) held a comparison exercise in April 2016 where participants came to ARPANSA and measured the output factor of a nominal 5 mm cone attached to the ARPANSA Elekta Synergy (Elekta, Crawley, UK) linear accelerator. The goal of the exercise was to compare the consistency and methods used by independent medical physicists in measuring small‐field output factors. ARPANSA provided a three‐dimensional scanning tank for detector setup and positioning, but the participants were required to measure the output factor with their own detectors. No information regarding output factors previously measured was supplied to participants to make each result as independent as possible. Fifteen groups travelled to ARPANSA bringing a wide range of detectors and methods. A total of 30 measurements of the output factor were made. The standard deviation of the measurements (excluding one expected outlier from an uncorrected ionization chamber measurement) was 3.6%. The results provide an insight into the consistency of small‐field dosimetry being performed in Australia and New Zealand at the present time.

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey of 5 mm small‐field output factor measurements in Australia

Oliver¹,

Butler²,

Takau³

et al. 2018

“…The overresponse in the diode measurements of our study is expected to be greater, due to the increased presence of lower energy photons because of the lack of flattening filter. Cranmer‐Sargison et al (11) also reported correction factors of SFD detector by using Monte Carlo simulation. MC simulations (EGSnrc) were benchmarked for the Varian Clinac iX 6 MV accelerator to determine

k_{Q_{italicclin}, Q_{italicmsr}}^{f_{italicclin}, f_{italicmsr}}

correction factors for various diode detectors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although there was no machine‐specific correction factor for the SFD detector in this study, significant error may result if detector correction factors are not applied in small field dosimetry. This study averaged the SFD detector correction factors by Ralston et al (26) and Cranmer‐Sargison et al (11) resulting in 0.9395, 0.9655, 0.982, and 0.993 for 4 mm, 5 mm, 7.5 mm, and 10 mm cone, respectively. No correction factors were applied for cone size greater than and equal to 12.5 mm.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many recent studies have applied Monte Carlo simulations to examine the output factors of small field sizes used for radiosurgery such as CyberKnife, 6 , 7 Gamma Knife, 8 , 9 and Brainlab (10) . In addition, numerous studies have used Monte Carlo simulation to examine the accuracy of diode detectors measurements for small field dosimetry 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Output factor comparison of Monte Carlo and measurement for Varian TrueBeam 6 MV and 10 MV flattening filter‐free stereotactic radiosurgery system

Cheng

Ning

Arora

et al. 2016

The dose measurements of the small field sizes, such as conical collimators used in stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), are a significant challenge due to many factors including source occlusion, detector size limitation, and lack of lateral electronic equilibrium. One useful tool in dealing with the small field effect is Monte Carlo (MC) simulation. In this study, we report a comparison of Monte Carlo simulations and measurements of output factors for the Varian SRS system with conical collimators for energies of 6 MV flattening filter‐free (6 MV) and 10 MV flattening filter‐free (10 MV) on the TrueBeam accelerator. Monte Carlo simulations of Varian's SRS system for 6 MV and 10 MV photon energies with cones sizes of 17.5 mm, 15.0 mm, 12.5 mm, 10.0 mm, 7.5 mm, 5.0 mm, and 4.0 mm were performed using EGSnrc (release V4 2.4.0) codes. Varian's version‐2 phase‐space files for 6 MV and 10 MV of TrueBeam accelerator were utilized in the Monte Carlo simulations. Two small diode detectors Edge (Sun Nuclear) and Small Field Detector (SFD) (IBA Dosimetry) were applied to measure the output factors. Significant errors may result if detector correction factors are not applied to small field dosimetric measurements. Although it lacked the machine‐specific kQitalicclin,Qitalicmsrfitalicclin,fitalicmsr correction factors for diode detectors in this study, correction factors were applied utilizing published studies conducted under similar conditions. For cone diameters greater than or equal to 12.5 mm, the differences between output factors for the Edge detector, SFD detector, and MC simulations are within 3.0% for both energies. For cone diameters below 12.5 mm, output factors differences exhibit greater variations.PACS number(s): 87.55.k, 87.55.Qr

“…A Monte Carlo calculated actor

Ω_{Q_{c l i n e,} Q_{m s r}}^{f_{c l i n}, f_{m s r}}

was recommended to correct the field factor. Several studies have been published since then to generate correction factors for various detectors from different treatment platforms 40 , 41 . The diodes were shown to have an overresponse at small fields.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics of a novel treatment system for linear accelerator–based stereotactic radiosurgery

Song

Chin-Snyder

et al. 2015

The purpose of this study is to characterize the dosimetric properties and accuracy of a novel treatment platform (Edge radiosurgery system) for localizing and treating patients with frameless, image‐guided stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Initial measurements of various components of the system, such as a comprehensive assessment of the dosimetric properties of the flattening filter‐free (FFF) beams for both high definition (HD120) MLC and conical cone‐based treatment, positioning accuracy and beam attenuation of a six degree of freedom (6DoF) couch, treatment head leakage test, and integrated end‐to‐end accuracy tests, have been performed. The end‐to‐end test of the system was performed by CT imaging a phantom and registering hidden targets on the treatment couch to determine the localization accuracy of the optical surface monitoring system (OSMS), cone‐beam CT (CBCT), and MV imaging systems, as well as the radiation isocenter targeting accuracy. The deviations between the percent depth‐dose curves acquired on the new linac‐based system (Edge), and the previously published machine with FFF beams (TrueBeam) beyond Dmax were within 1.0% for both energies. The maximum deviation of output factors between the Edge and TrueBeam was 1.6%. The optimized dosimetric leaf gap values, which were fitted using Eclipse dose calculations and measurements based on representative spine radiosurgery plans, were 0.700 mm and 1.000 mm, respectively. For the conical cones, 6X FFF has sharper penumbra ranging from 1.2−1.8 mm (80%‐20%) and 1.9−3.8 mm (90%‐10%) relative to 10X FFF, which has 1.2−2.2 mm and 2.3−5.1 mm, respectively. The relative attenuation measurements of the couch for PA, PA (rails‐in), oblique, oblique (rails‐out), oblique (rails‐in) were: −2.0%, −2.5%, −15.6%, −2.5%, −5.0% for 6X FFF and −1.4%, −1.5%, −12.2%, −2.5%, −5.0% for 10X FFF, respectively, with a slight decrease in attenuation versus field size. The systematic deviation between the OSMS and CBCT was −0.4±0.2 mm, 0.1±0.3 mm, and 0.0±0.1 mm in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral directions. The mean values and standard deviations of the average deviation and maximum deviation of the daily Winston‐Lutz tests over three months are 0.20±0.03 mm and 0.66±0.18 mm, respectively. Initial testing of this novel system demonstrates the technology to be highly accurate and suitable for frameless, linac‐based SRS and SBRT treatment.PACS number: 87.56.J‐