Cargando…

Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm

In the present work, we investigated the accuracy of the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm (PBRA) in calculating central‐axis percent depth dose in water for rectangular fields. The PBRA energy correction factor C(E) was determined so that PBRA‐calculated percent depth dose best matched th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Price, Michael J., Hogstrom, Kenneth R., Antolak, John A., White, R. Allen, Bloch, Charles D., Boyd, Robert A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5722410/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17592466
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v8i2.2443
_version_ 1783285007528230912
author Price, Michael J.
Hogstrom, Kenneth R.
Antolak, John A.
White, R. Allen
Bloch, Charles D.
Boyd, Robert A
author_facet Price, Michael J.
Hogstrom, Kenneth R.
Antolak, John A.
White, R. Allen
Bloch, Charles D.
Boyd, Robert A
author_sort Price, Michael J.
collection PubMed
description In the present work, we investigated the accuracy of the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm (PBRA) in calculating central‐axis percent depth dose in water for rectangular fields. The PBRA energy correction factor C(E) was determined so that PBRA‐calculated percent depth dose best matched the percent depth dose measured in water. The hypothesis tested was that a method can be implemented into the PBRA that will enable the algorithm to calculate central‐axis percent depth dose in water at a 100‐cm source‐to‐surface distance (SSD) with an accuracy of 2% or 1‐mm distance to agreement for rectangular field sizes [Formula: see text] cm. Preliminary investigations showed that C(E), determined using a single percent depth dose for a large field (that is, having side‐scatter equilibrium), was insufficient for the PBRA to accurately calculate percent depth dose for all square fields [Formula: see text] cm. Therefore, two alternative methods for determining C(E) were investigated. In Method 1, C(E), modeled as a polynomial in energy, was determined by fitting the PBRA calculations to individual rectangular‐field percent depth doses. In Method 2, C(E) for square fields, described by a polynomial in both energy and side of square W [that is, [Formula: see text]], was determined by fitting the PBRA calculations to measured percent depth dose for a small number of square fields. Using the function C(E, W), C(E) for other square fields was determined, and C(E) for rectangular field sizes was determined using the geometric mean of C(E) for the two measured square fields of the dimension of the rectangle (square root method). Using both methods, PBRA calculations were evaluated by comparison with measured square‐field and derived rectangular‐field percent depth doses at 100‐cm SSD for the Siemens Primus radiotherapy accelerator equipped with a [Formula: see text] ‐cm applicator at 10 MeV and 15 MeV. To improve the fit of C(E) and C(E, W) to the electron component of percent depth dose, it was necessary to modify the PBRA's photon depth dose model to include dose buildup. Results showed that, using both methods, the PBRA was able to predict percent depth dose within criteria for all square and rectangular fields. Results showed that second‐ or third‐order polynomials in energy (Methods 1 and 2) and in field size (Method 2) were typically required. Although the time for dose calculation using Method 1 is approximately twice that using Method 2, we recommend that Method 1 be used for clinical implementation of the PBRA because it is more accurate (most measured depth doses predicted within approximately 1%) and simpler to implement. PACS number: 87.53.Fs
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5722410
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57224102018-04-02 Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm Price, Michael J. Hogstrom, Kenneth R. Antolak, John A. White, R. Allen Bloch, Charles D. Boyd, Robert A J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics In the present work, we investigated the accuracy of the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm (PBRA) in calculating central‐axis percent depth dose in water for rectangular fields. The PBRA energy correction factor C(E) was determined so that PBRA‐calculated percent depth dose best matched the percent depth dose measured in water. The hypothesis tested was that a method can be implemented into the PBRA that will enable the algorithm to calculate central‐axis percent depth dose in water at a 100‐cm source‐to‐surface distance (SSD) with an accuracy of 2% or 1‐mm distance to agreement for rectangular field sizes [Formula: see text] cm. Preliminary investigations showed that C(E), determined using a single percent depth dose for a large field (that is, having side‐scatter equilibrium), was insufficient for the PBRA to accurately calculate percent depth dose for all square fields [Formula: see text] cm. Therefore, two alternative methods for determining C(E) were investigated. In Method 1, C(E), modeled as a polynomial in energy, was determined by fitting the PBRA calculations to individual rectangular‐field percent depth doses. In Method 2, C(E) for square fields, described by a polynomial in both energy and side of square W [that is, [Formula: see text]], was determined by fitting the PBRA calculations to measured percent depth dose for a small number of square fields. Using the function C(E, W), C(E) for other square fields was determined, and C(E) for rectangular field sizes was determined using the geometric mean of C(E) for the two measured square fields of the dimension of the rectangle (square root method). Using both methods, PBRA calculations were evaluated by comparison with measured square‐field and derived rectangular‐field percent depth doses at 100‐cm SSD for the Siemens Primus radiotherapy accelerator equipped with a [Formula: see text] ‐cm applicator at 10 MeV and 15 MeV. To improve the fit of C(E) and C(E, W) to the electron component of percent depth dose, it was necessary to modify the PBRA's photon depth dose model to include dose buildup. Results showed that, using both methods, the PBRA was able to predict percent depth dose within criteria for all square and rectangular fields. Results showed that second‐ or third‐order polynomials in energy (Methods 1 and 2) and in field size (Method 2) were typically required. Although the time for dose calculation using Method 1 is approximately twice that using Method 2, we recommend that Method 1 be used for clinical implementation of the PBRA because it is more accurate (most measured depth doses predicted within approximately 1%) and simpler to implement. PACS number: 87.53.Fs John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2007-04-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5722410/ /pubmed/17592466 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v8i2.2443 Text en © 2007 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
Price, Michael J.
Hogstrom, Kenneth R.
Antolak, John A.
White, R. Allen
Bloch, Charles D.
Boyd, Robert A
Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm
title Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm
title_full Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm
title_fullStr Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm
title_full_unstemmed Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm
title_short Calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm
title_sort calculating percent depth dose with the electron pencil‐beam redefinition algorithm
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5722410/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17592466
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v8i2.2443
work_keys_str_mv AT pricemichaelj calculatingpercentdepthdosewiththeelectronpencilbeamredefinitionalgorithm
AT hogstromkennethr calculatingpercentdepthdosewiththeelectronpencilbeamredefinitionalgorithm
AT antolakjohna calculatingpercentdepthdosewiththeelectronpencilbeamredefinitionalgorithm
AT whiterallen calculatingpercentdepthdosewiththeelectronpencilbeamredefinitionalgorithm
AT blochcharlesd calculatingpercentdepthdosewiththeelectronpencilbeamredefinitionalgorithm
AT boydroberta calculatingpercentdepthdosewiththeelectronpencilbeamredefinitionalgorithm