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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shi, Chengyu, Papanikolaou, Nikos, Yan, Yulong, Weng, Xuejun, Jiang, gyu
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