Cargando…

Verification of the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm

An extensive set of measured data was developed for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm. Dose distributions from a linear accelerator were measured using an ion chamber in a water phantom and thermoluminescent dosimeters in a heterogeneous anthropomorphic pha...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gifford, Kent A., Followill, David S., Liu, H. Helen, Starkschall, George
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2002
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5724546/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11818002
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v3i1.2589
_version_ 1783285381407440896
author Gifford, Kent A.
Followill, David S.
Liu, H. Helen
Starkschall, George
author_facet Gifford, Kent A.
Followill, David S.
Liu, H. Helen
Starkschall, George
author_sort Gifford, Kent A.
collection PubMed
description An extensive set of measured data was developed for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm. Dose distributions from a linear accelerator were measured using an ion chamber in a water phantom and thermoluminescent dosimeters in a heterogeneous anthropomorphic phantom. Test cases included square fields, rectangular fields, fields having different source‐to‐surface distances, wedged fields, irregular fields, obliquely incident fields, asymmetrically collimated fields with wedges, multileaf collimator‐shaped fields, and two heterogeneous density cases. The data set was used to validate the photon dose‐calculation algorithm in a commercial radiation treatment planning system. The treatment planning system calculated photon doses to within the American College of Medical Physics (AAPM) Task Group 53 (TG‐53) criteria for 99% of points in the buildup region, 90% of points in the inner region, 88% of points in the outer region, and 93% of points in the penumbra. For the heterogeneous phantoms, calculations agreed with actual measurements to within [Formula: see text]. The monitor unit tests revealed that the 18‐MV open square fields, oblique incidence, oblique incidence with wedge, and mantle field test cases did not meet the TG‐53 criteria but were within [Formula: see text] of measurements. It was concluded that (i) the photon dose calculation algorithm used by the treatment planning system did not meet the TG‐53 criteria 100% of the time; (ii) some of the TG‐53 criteria may need to be modified, and (iii) the generally stated goal of accuracy in dose delivery of within 5% cannot be met in all situations using this beam model in the treatment planning system. PACS number(s): 87.53.–j, 87.66.–a
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5724546
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2002
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57245462018-04-02 Verification of the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm Gifford, Kent A. Followill, David S. Liu, H. Helen Starkschall, George J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics An extensive set of measured data was developed for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm. Dose distributions from a linear accelerator were measured using an ion chamber in a water phantom and thermoluminescent dosimeters in a heterogeneous anthropomorphic phantom. Test cases included square fields, rectangular fields, fields having different source‐to‐surface distances, wedged fields, irregular fields, obliquely incident fields, asymmetrically collimated fields with wedges, multileaf collimator‐shaped fields, and two heterogeneous density cases. The data set was used to validate the photon dose‐calculation algorithm in a commercial radiation treatment planning system. The treatment planning system calculated photon doses to within the American College of Medical Physics (AAPM) Task Group 53 (TG‐53) criteria for 99% of points in the buildup region, 90% of points in the inner region, 88% of points in the outer region, and 93% of points in the penumbra. For the heterogeneous phantoms, calculations agreed with actual measurements to within [Formula: see text]. The monitor unit tests revealed that the 18‐MV open square fields, oblique incidence, oblique incidence with wedge, and mantle field test cases did not meet the TG‐53 criteria but were within [Formula: see text] of measurements. It was concluded that (i) the photon dose calculation algorithm used by the treatment planning system did not meet the TG‐53 criteria 100% of the time; (ii) some of the TG‐53 criteria may need to be modified, and (iii) the generally stated goal of accuracy in dose delivery of within 5% cannot be met in all situations using this beam model in the treatment planning system. PACS number(s): 87.53.–j, 87.66.–a John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2002-01-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5724546/ /pubmed/11818002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v3i1.2589 Text en © 2002 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
Gifford, Kent A.
Followill, David S.
Liu, H. Helen
Starkschall, George
Verification of the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm
title Verification of the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm
title_full Verification of the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm
title_fullStr Verification of the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm
title_full_unstemmed Verification of the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm
title_short Verification of the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm
title_sort verification of the accuracy of a photon dose‐calculation algorithm
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5724546/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11818002
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v3i1.2589
work_keys_str_mv AT giffordkenta verificationoftheaccuracyofaphotondosecalculationalgorithm
AT followilldavids verificationoftheaccuracyofaphotondosecalculationalgorithm
AT liuhhelen verificationoftheaccuracyofaphotondosecalculationalgorithm
AT starkschallgeorge verificationoftheaccuracyofaphotondosecalculationalgorithm