Cargando…
Analysis of the sources of uncertainty for EDR2 film‐based IMRT quality assurance
In our institution, patient‐specific quality assurance (QA) for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is usually performed by measuring the dose to a point using an ion chamber and by measuring the dose to a plane using film. In order to perform absolute dose comparison measurements using fil...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5722441/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17533329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v7i2.2230 |
_version_ | 1783285015345364992 |
---|---|
author | Shi, Chengyu Papanikolaou, Nikos Yan, Yulong Weng, Xuejun Jiang, gyu |
author_facet | Shi, Chengyu Papanikolaou, Nikos Yan, Yulong Weng, Xuejun Jiang, gyu |
author_sort | Shi, Chengyu |
collection | PubMed |
description | In our institution, patient‐specific quality assurance (QA) for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is usually performed by measuring the dose to a point using an ion chamber and by measuring the dose to a plane using film. In order to perform absolute dose comparison measurements using film, an accurate calibration curve should be used. In this paper, we investigate the film response curve uncertainty factors, including film batch differences, film processor temperature effect, film digitization, and treatment unit. In addition, we reviewed 50 patient‐specific IMRT QA procedures performed in our institution in order to quantify the sources of error in film‐based dosimetry. Our study showed that the EDR2 film dosimetry can be done with less than 3% uncertainty. The EDR2 film response was not affected by the choice of treatment unit provided the nominal energy was the same. This investigation of the different sources of uncertainties in the film calibration procedure can provide a better understanding of the film‐based dosimetry and can improve quality control for IMRT QA. PACS numbers: 87.86.Cd, 87.53.Xd, 87.57.Nk |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5722441 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2006 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57224412018-04-02 Analysis of the sources of uncertainty for EDR2 film‐based IMRT quality assurance Shi, Chengyu Papanikolaou, Nikos Yan, Yulong Weng, Xuejun Jiang, gyu J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics In our institution, patient‐specific quality assurance (QA) for intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is usually performed by measuring the dose to a point using an ion chamber and by measuring the dose to a plane using film. In order to perform absolute dose comparison measurements using film, an accurate calibration curve should be used. In this paper, we investigate the film response curve uncertainty factors, including film batch differences, film processor temperature effect, film digitization, and treatment unit. In addition, we reviewed 50 patient‐specific IMRT QA procedures performed in our institution in order to quantify the sources of error in film‐based dosimetry. Our study showed that the EDR2 film dosimetry can be done with less than 3% uncertainty. The EDR2 film response was not affected by the choice of treatment unit provided the nominal energy was the same. This investigation of the different sources of uncertainties in the film calibration procedure can provide a better understanding of the film‐based dosimetry and can improve quality control for IMRT QA. PACS numbers: 87.86.Cd, 87.53.Xd, 87.57.Nk John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2006-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5722441/ /pubmed/17533329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v7i2.2230 Text en © 2006 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 Shi, Chengyu Papanikolaou, Nikos Yan, Yulong Weng, Xuejun Jiang, gyu Analysis of the sources of uncertainty for EDR2 film‐based IMRT quality assurance |
title | Analysis of the sources of uncertainty for EDR2 film‐based IMRT quality assurance |
title_full | Analysis of the sources of uncertainty for EDR2 film‐based IMRT quality assurance |
title_fullStr | Analysis of the sources of uncertainty for EDR2 film‐based IMRT quality assurance |
title_full_unstemmed | Analysis of the sources of uncertainty for EDR2 film‐based IMRT quality assurance |
title_short | Analysis of the sources of uncertainty for EDR2 film‐based IMRT quality assurance |
title_sort | analysis of the sources of uncertainty for edr2 film‐based imrt quality assurance |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5722441/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17533329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v7i2.2230 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shichengyu analysisofthesourcesofuncertaintyforedr2filmbasedimrtqualityassurance AT papanikolaounikos analysisofthesourcesofuncertaintyforedr2filmbasedimrtqualityassurance AT yanyulong analysisofthesourcesofuncertaintyforedr2filmbasedimrtqualityassurance AT wengxuejun analysisofthesourcesofuncertaintyforedr2filmbasedimrtqualityassurance AT jianggyu analysisofthesourcesofuncertaintyforedr2filmbasedimrtqualityassurance |