Cargando…

Comparing dose in the build‐up region between compensator‐ and MLC‐based IMRT

The build‐up dose in the megavoltage photon beams can be a limiting factor in intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatments. Excessive surface dose can cause patient discomfort and treatment interruptions, while underdosing may lead to tumor repopulation and local failure. Dose in the buil...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Javedan, Khosrow, Zhang, Geoffrey G., Hoffe, Sarah, Feygelman, Vladimir, Forster, Kenneth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5718229/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22955641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v13i5.3748
_version_ 1783284295756939264
author Javedan, Khosrow
Zhang, Geoffrey G.
Hoffe, Sarah
Feygelman, Vladimir
Forster, Kenneth
author_facet Javedan, Khosrow
Zhang, Geoffrey G.
Hoffe, Sarah
Feygelman, Vladimir
Forster, Kenneth
author_sort Javedan, Khosrow
collection PubMed
description The build‐up dose in the megavoltage photon beams can be a limiting factor in intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatments. Excessive surface dose can cause patient discomfort and treatment interruptions, while underdosing may lead to tumor repopulation and local failure. Dose in the build‐up region was investigated for IMRT delivery with solid brass compensator technique (compensator‐based IMRT) and compared with that of multileaf collimator (MLC)‐based IMRT. A Varian Trilogy linear accelerator equipped with an MLC was used for beam delivery. A special solid brass step‐wise compensator was designed and built for testing purposes. Two step‐and‐shoot MLC fields were programmed to produce a similar modulated step‐wise dose profile. The MLC and compensator dose profiles were measured and adjusted to match at the isocenter depth of 10 cm. Build‐up dose in the 1–5 mm depth range was measured with an ultrathin window, fixed volume parallel plate ionization chamber. Monte Carlo simulations were used to model the brass compensator and step‐and‐shoot MLC fields. The measured and simulated profiles for the two IMRT techniques were matched at the isocenter depth of 10 cm. Different component contributions to the shallow dose, including the MLC scatter, were quantified. Mean spectral energies for the open and filtered beams were calculated. The compensator and MLC profiles at 10 cm depth were matched better than [Formula: see text]. The build‐up dose was up to 7% lower for compensator IMRT compared to MLC IMRT due to beam hardening in the brass. Low‐energy electrons contribute 22% and 15% dose at 1 mm depth for compensator and MLC modalities, respectively. Compensator‐based IMRT delivers less dose in the build‐up region than MLC‐based IMRT does, even though a compensator is closer to the skin than the MLC. PACS number: 87.55.dk, 87.56.ng
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5718229
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57182292018-04-02 Comparing dose in the build‐up region between compensator‐ and MLC‐based IMRT Javedan, Khosrow Zhang, Geoffrey G. Hoffe, Sarah Feygelman, Vladimir Forster, Kenneth J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics The build‐up dose in the megavoltage photon beams can be a limiting factor in intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatments. Excessive surface dose can cause patient discomfort and treatment interruptions, while underdosing may lead to tumor repopulation and local failure. Dose in the build‐up region was investigated for IMRT delivery with solid brass compensator technique (compensator‐based IMRT) and compared with that of multileaf collimator (MLC)‐based IMRT. A Varian Trilogy linear accelerator equipped with an MLC was used for beam delivery. A special solid brass step‐wise compensator was designed and built for testing purposes. Two step‐and‐shoot MLC fields were programmed to produce a similar modulated step‐wise dose profile. The MLC and compensator dose profiles were measured and adjusted to match at the isocenter depth of 10 cm. Build‐up dose in the 1–5 mm depth range was measured with an ultrathin window, fixed volume parallel plate ionization chamber. Monte Carlo simulations were used to model the brass compensator and step‐and‐shoot MLC fields. The measured and simulated profiles for the two IMRT techniques were matched at the isocenter depth of 10 cm. Different component contributions to the shallow dose, including the MLC scatter, were quantified. Mean spectral energies for the open and filtered beams were calculated. The compensator and MLC profiles at 10 cm depth were matched better than [Formula: see text]. The build‐up dose was up to 7% lower for compensator IMRT compared to MLC IMRT due to beam hardening in the brass. Low‐energy electrons contribute 22% and 15% dose at 1 mm depth for compensator and MLC modalities, respectively. Compensator‐based IMRT delivers less dose in the build‐up region than MLC‐based IMRT does, even though a compensator is closer to the skin than the MLC. PACS number: 87.55.dk, 87.56.ng John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2012-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5718229/ /pubmed/22955641 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v13i5.3748 Text en © 2012 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Javedan, Khosrow
Zhang, Geoffrey G.
Hoffe, Sarah
Feygelman, Vladimir
Forster, Kenneth
Comparing dose in the build‐up region between compensator‐ and MLC‐based IMRT
title Comparing dose in the build‐up region between compensator‐ and MLC‐based IMRT
title_full Comparing dose in the build‐up region between compensator‐ and MLC‐based IMRT
title_fullStr Comparing dose in the build‐up region between compensator‐ and MLC‐based IMRT
title_full_unstemmed Comparing dose in the build‐up region between compensator‐ and MLC‐based IMRT
title_short Comparing dose in the build‐up region between compensator‐ and MLC‐based IMRT
title_sort comparing dose in the build‐up region between compensator‐ and mlc‐based imrt
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5718229/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22955641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v13i5.3748
work_keys_str_mv AT javedankhosrow comparingdoseinthebuildupregionbetweencompensatorandmlcbasedimrt
AT zhanggeoffreyg comparingdoseinthebuildupregionbetweencompensatorandmlcbasedimrt
AT hoffesarah comparingdoseinthebuildupregionbetweencompensatorandmlcbasedimrt
AT feygelmanvladimir comparingdoseinthebuildupregionbetweencompensatorandmlcbasedimrt
AT forsterkenneth comparingdoseinthebuildupregionbetweencompensatorandmlcbasedimrt