Cargando…

Do the representative beam data for TrueBeam(™) linear accelerators represent average data?

If the vendor's representative beam data (RBD) for TrueBeam linear accelerators are to be valid for use in clinical practice, the variations in the beam data used for beam modeling must be small. Although a few studies have reported the variation of the beam data of the TrueBeam machines, the n...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tanaka, Yoshihiro, Mizuno, Hirokazu, Akino, Yuichi, Isono, Masaru, Masai, Norimasa, Yamamoto, Toshijiro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6370991/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30636358
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12518
_version_ 1783394470963707904
author Tanaka, Yoshihiro
Mizuno, Hirokazu
Akino, Yuichi
Isono, Masaru
Masai, Norimasa
Yamamoto, Toshijiro
author_facet Tanaka, Yoshihiro
Mizuno, Hirokazu
Akino, Yuichi
Isono, Masaru
Masai, Norimasa
Yamamoto, Toshijiro
author_sort Tanaka, Yoshihiro
collection PubMed
description If the vendor's representative beam data (RBD) for TrueBeam linear accelerators are to be valid for use in clinical practice, the variations in the beam data used for beam modeling must be small. Although a few studies have reported the variation of the beam data of the TrueBeam machines, the numbers of machines analyzed in those studies were small. In this study, we investigated the variation in the beam data for 21 TrueBeam machines collected from 17 institutions with their agreement. In the exponential regions, the percent depth dose (PDD) values showed very small variation, <1% for all the photon energies analyzed. Similarly, the off‐center ratio (OCR) values also showed small variation for all energies. In the field regions, the standard deviations of the values of dose difference (DD) between the data for each machine and the study average were <1% for field sizes ≥100 × 100 mm(2). The maximum distance‐to‐agreement from the average data was <0.5 mm in the penumbra regions. The output factor (OPF) values also showed very small variation (<1%) for all energies and field sizes. Both the PDD and OCR of the average study data showed good agreement with the vendor's RBD for field sizes ≥100 × 100 mm(2). The OPF of the average study data also showed good agreement with the vendor's RBD for all field sizes. However, although all the institutions used ionization chambers with similar cavity volumes, the 30 × 30 mm(2) field size showed large DD variations (≥2%) in OCR in the field regions. We conclude that the intermachine variability of TrueBeam linear accelerators was very small except for small field dosimetry, supporting the validity of the use of the RBD for clinical applications. The use of the vendor's RBD might greatly facilitate the quick installation of a new linear accelerator.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6370991
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63709912019-02-21 Do the representative beam data for TrueBeam(™) linear accelerators represent average data? Tanaka, Yoshihiro Mizuno, Hirokazu Akino, Yuichi Isono, Masaru Masai, Norimasa Yamamoto, Toshijiro J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics If the vendor's representative beam data (RBD) for TrueBeam linear accelerators are to be valid for use in clinical practice, the variations in the beam data used for beam modeling must be small. Although a few studies have reported the variation of the beam data of the TrueBeam machines, the numbers of machines analyzed in those studies were small. In this study, we investigated the variation in the beam data for 21 TrueBeam machines collected from 17 institutions with their agreement. In the exponential regions, the percent depth dose (PDD) values showed very small variation, <1% for all the photon energies analyzed. Similarly, the off‐center ratio (OCR) values also showed small variation for all energies. In the field regions, the standard deviations of the values of dose difference (DD) between the data for each machine and the study average were <1% for field sizes ≥100 × 100 mm(2). The maximum distance‐to‐agreement from the average data was <0.5 mm in the penumbra regions. The output factor (OPF) values also showed very small variation (<1%) for all energies and field sizes. Both the PDD and OCR of the average study data showed good agreement with the vendor's RBD for field sizes ≥100 × 100 mm(2). The OPF of the average study data also showed good agreement with the vendor's RBD for all field sizes. However, although all the institutions used ionization chambers with similar cavity volumes, the 30 × 30 mm(2) field size showed large DD variations (≥2%) in OCR in the field regions. We conclude that the intermachine variability of TrueBeam linear accelerators was very small except for small field dosimetry, supporting the validity of the use of the RBD for clinical applications. The use of the vendor's RBD might greatly facilitate the quick installation of a new linear accelerator. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6370991/ /pubmed/30636358 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12518 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Tanaka, Yoshihiro
Mizuno, Hirokazu
Akino, Yuichi
Isono, Masaru
Masai, Norimasa
Yamamoto, Toshijiro
Do the representative beam data for TrueBeam(™) linear accelerators represent average data?
title Do the representative beam data for TrueBeam(™) linear accelerators represent average data?
title_full Do the representative beam data for TrueBeam(™) linear accelerators represent average data?
title_fullStr Do the representative beam data for TrueBeam(™) linear accelerators represent average data?
title_full_unstemmed Do the representative beam data for TrueBeam(™) linear accelerators represent average data?
title_short Do the representative beam data for TrueBeam(™) linear accelerators represent average data?
title_sort do the representative beam data for truebeam(™) linear accelerators represent average data?
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6370991/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30636358
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12518
work_keys_str_mv AT tanakayoshihiro dotherepresentativebeamdatafortruebeamlinearacceleratorsrepresentaveragedata
AT mizunohirokazu dotherepresentativebeamdatafortruebeamlinearacceleratorsrepresentaveragedata
AT akinoyuichi dotherepresentativebeamdatafortruebeamlinearacceleratorsrepresentaveragedata
AT isonomasaru dotherepresentativebeamdatafortruebeamlinearacceleratorsrepresentaveragedata
AT masainorimasa dotherepresentativebeamdatafortruebeamlinearacceleratorsrepresentaveragedata
AT yamamototoshijiro dotherepresentativebeamdatafortruebeamlinearacceleratorsrepresentaveragedata