Cargando…

Off‐axis dose distribution with stand‐in and stand‐off configurations for superficial radiotherapy treatments

Current practice when delivering dose for superficial skin radiotherapy is to adjust the monitor units so that the prescribed dose is delivered to the central axis of the superficial unit applicator. Variations of source‐to‐surface distance due to patient’s anatomy protruding into the applicator or...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davey, Keith, Moore, Margaret, Cleary, Sinéad, Kleefeld, Christoph, Foley, Mark J.
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/PMC6806473/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31605464
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12730
_version_ 1783461634979659776
author Davey, Keith
Moore, Margaret
Cleary, Sinéad
Kleefeld, Christoph
Foley, Mark J.
author_facet Davey, Keith
Moore, Margaret
Cleary, Sinéad
Kleefeld, Christoph
Foley, Mark J.
author_sort Davey, Keith
collection PubMed
description Current practice when delivering dose for superficial skin radiotherapy is to adjust the monitor units so that the prescribed dose is delivered to the central axis of the superficial unit applicator. Variations of source‐to‐surface distance due to patient’s anatomy protruding into the applicator or extending away from the applicator require adjustments to the monitor units using the inverse square law. Off‐axis dose distribution varies significantly from the central axis dose and is not currently being quantified. The dose falloff at the periphery of the field is not symmetrical in the anode–cathode axis due to the heel effect. This study was conducted to quantify the variation of dose across the surface being treated and model a simple geometric shape to estimate a patient’s surface with stand‐in and stand‐off. Isodose plots and color‐coded dose distribution maps were produced from scans of GAFChromic EBT‐3 film irradiated by a Gulmay D3300 orthovoltage x‐ray therapy system. It was clear that larger applicators show a greater dose falloff toward the periphery than smaller applicators. Larger applicators were found to have a lower percentage of points above 90% of central axis dose (SA90). Current clinical practice does not take this field variation into account. Stand‐in can result in significant dose falloff off‐axis depending on the depth and width of the protrusion, while stand‐off can result in a flatter field due to the high‐dose region near the central axis being further from the source than the peripheral regions. The central axis also received a 7% increased or decreased dose for stand‐in or stand‐off, respectively.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6806473
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68064732019-10-28 Off‐axis dose distribution with stand‐in and stand‐off configurations for superficial radiotherapy treatments Davey, Keith Moore, Margaret Cleary, Sinéad Kleefeld, Christoph Foley, Mark J. J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics Current practice when delivering dose for superficial skin radiotherapy is to adjust the monitor units so that the prescribed dose is delivered to the central axis of the superficial unit applicator. Variations of source‐to‐surface distance due to patient’s anatomy protruding into the applicator or extending away from the applicator require adjustments to the monitor units using the inverse square law. Off‐axis dose distribution varies significantly from the central axis dose and is not currently being quantified. The dose falloff at the periphery of the field is not symmetrical in the anode–cathode axis due to the heel effect. This study was conducted to quantify the variation of dose across the surface being treated and model a simple geometric shape to estimate a patient’s surface with stand‐in and stand‐off. Isodose plots and color‐coded dose distribution maps were produced from scans of GAFChromic EBT‐3 film irradiated by a Gulmay D3300 orthovoltage x‐ray therapy system. It was clear that larger applicators show a greater dose falloff toward the periphery than smaller applicators. Larger applicators were found to have a lower percentage of points above 90% of central axis dose (SA90). Current clinical practice does not take this field variation into account. Stand‐in can result in significant dose falloff off‐axis depending on the depth and width of the protrusion, while stand‐off can result in a flatter field due to the high‐dose region near the central axis being further from the source than the peripheral regions. The central axis also received a 7% increased or decreased dose for stand‐in or stand‐off, respectively. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6806473/ /pubmed/31605464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12730 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
Davey, Keith
Moore, Margaret
Cleary, Sinéad
Kleefeld, Christoph
Foley, Mark J.
Off‐axis dose distribution with stand‐in and stand‐off configurations for superficial radiotherapy treatments
title Off‐axis dose distribution with stand‐in and stand‐off configurations for superficial radiotherapy treatments
title_full Off‐axis dose distribution with stand‐in and stand‐off configurations for superficial radiotherapy treatments
title_fullStr Off‐axis dose distribution with stand‐in and stand‐off configurations for superficial radiotherapy treatments
title_full_unstemmed Off‐axis dose distribution with stand‐in and stand‐off configurations for superficial radiotherapy treatments
title_short Off‐axis dose distribution with stand‐in and stand‐off configurations for superficial radiotherapy treatments
title_sort off‐axis dose distribution with stand‐in and stand‐off configurations for superficial radiotherapy treatments
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6806473/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31605464
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12730
work_keys_str_mv AT daveykeith offaxisdosedistributionwithstandinandstandoffconfigurationsforsuperficialradiotherapytreatments
AT mooremargaret offaxisdosedistributionwithstandinandstandoffconfigurationsforsuperficialradiotherapytreatments
AT clearysinead offaxisdosedistributionwithstandinandstandoffconfigurationsforsuperficialradiotherapytreatments
AT kleefeldchristoph offaxisdosedistributionwithstandinandstandoffconfigurationsforsuperficialradiotherapytreatments
AT foleymarkj offaxisdosedistributionwithstandinandstandoffconfigurationsforsuperficialradiotherapytreatments