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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |