Dose computation for therapeutic electron beams

The accuracy of electron dose calculations performed by two commercially available treatment planning computers, Varian Cadplan and Helax TMS, has been assessed. Measured values of absorbed dose delivered by a Varian 2100C linear accelerator, under a wide variety of irradiation conditions, were compared with doses calculated by the treatment planning computers. Much of the motivation for this work was provided by a requirement to verify the accuracy of calculated electron dose distributions in situations encountered clinically at Glasgow's Beatson Oncology Centre. Calculated dose distributions are required in a significant minority of electron treatments, usually in cases involving treatment to the head and neck. Here, therapeutic electron beams are subject to factors which may cause non-uniformity in the distribution of dose, and which may complicate the calculation of dose. The beam shape is often irregular, the beam may enter the patient at an oblique angle or at an extended source to skin distance (SSD), tissue inhomogeneities can alter the dose distribution, and tissue equivalent material (such as wax) may be added to reduce dose to critical organs. Technological advances have allowed the current generation of treatment planning computers to implement dose calculation algorithms with the ability to model electron beams in these complex situations. These calculations have, however, yet to be verified by measurement. This work has assessed the accuracy of calculations in a number of specific instances. Chapter two contains a comparison of measured and calculated planar electron isodose distributions. Three situations were considered: oblique incidence, incidence on an irregular surface (such as that which would be arise from the use of wax to reduce dose to spinal cord), and incidence on a phantom containing a small air cavity. Calculations were compared with measurements made by thermoluminescent dosimetry (TLD) in a WTe electron solid water phantom. Chapter three assesses the planning computers' ability to model electron beam penumbra at extended SSD. Calculations were compared with diode measurements in a water phantom. Further measurements assessed doses in the junction region produced by abutting an extended SSD electron field with opposed photon fields. Chapter four describes an investigation of the size and shape of the region enclosed by the 90% isodose line when produced by limiting the electron beam with square and elliptical apertures. The 90% isodose line was chosen because clinical treatments are often prescribed such that a given volume receives at least 90% dose. Calculated and measured dose distributions were compared in a plane normal to the beam central axis. Measurements were made by film dosimetry. While chapters two to four examine relative doses, chapter five assesses the accuracy of absolute dose (or output) calculations performed by the planning computers. Output variation with SSD and field size was examined. Two further situations already assessed for the distribution of relative dose were also considered: an obliquely incident field, and a field incident on an irregular surface. The accuracy of calculations was assessed against criteria stipulated by the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurement (ICRU). The Varian Cadplan and Helax TMS treatment planning systems produce acceptable accuracy in the calculation of relative dose from therapeutic electron beams in most commonly encountered situations. When interpreting clinical dose distributions, however, knowledge of the limitations of the calculation algorithm employed by each system is required in order to identify the minority of situations where results are not accurate. The calculation of absolute dose is too inaccurate to implement in a clinical environment. (Abstract shortened by ProQuest.)

Evaluation of six TPS algorithms in computing entrance and exit doses

Entrance and exit doses are commonly measured in in vivo dosimetry for comparison with expected values, usually generated by the treatment planning system (TPS), to verify accuracy of treatment delivery. This report aims to evaluate the accuracy of six TPS algorithms in computing entrance and exit doses for a 6MV beam. The algorithms tested were: pencil beam convolution (Eclipse PBC), analytical anisotropic algorithm (Eclipse AAA), AcurosXB (Eclipse AXB), FFT convolution (XiO Convolution), multigrid superposition (XiO Superposition), and Monte Carlo photon (Monaco MC). Measurements with ionization chamber (IC) and diode detector in water phantoms were used as a reference. Comparisons were done in terms of central axis point dose, 1D relative profiles, and 2D absolute gamma analysis. Entrance doses computed by all TPS algorithms agreed to within 2% of the measured values. Exit doses computed by XiO Convolution, XiO Superposition, Eclipse AXB, and Monaco MC agreed with the IC measured doses to within 2%-3%. Meanwhile, Eclipse PBC and Eclipse AAA computed exit doses were higher than the IC measured doses by up to 5.3% and 4.8%, respectively. Both algorithms assume that full backscatter exists even at the exit level, leading to an overestimation of exit doses. Despite good agreements at the central axis for Eclipse AXB and Monaco MC, 1D relative comparisons showed profiles mismatched at depths beyond 11.5 cm. Overall, the 2D absolute gamma (3%/3 mm) pass rates were better for Monaco MC, while Eclipse AXB failed mostly at the outer 20% of the field area. The findings of this study serve as a useful baseline for the implementation of entrance and exit in vivo dosimetry in clinical departments utilizing any of these six common TPS algorithms for reference comparison

Quantitative comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity modulated radiotherapy plan quality in sino-nasal cancer

The aim of this study was to compare various dosimetric parameters of dynamic mlc intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for sino-nasal cancers, which are rare and complex tumors to treat with radiotherapy. IMRT using five fields, coplanar in the sagittal plane and VMAT employing two coplanar arc plans were created for five patients. The plans were assessed by comparing Conformity Index and Sigma Index (dose homogeneity) in the Planning Target Volume (PTV) and through comparison of dose-volume characteristics to the following organs at risk (OARs): Spinal cord, brainstem, eye, ipsilateral and contralateral optic nerve and the volume of brain receiving 10% of the prescribed dose (V10%). The total monitor units required to deliver the plan were also compared. Conformity Index was found to be superior in VMAT plans for three patients and in IMRT plans for two patients. Dose homogeneity within the PTV was better with VMAT plans for all five cases. The mean difference in Sigma Index was 0.68%. There was no significant difference in dose between IMRT and VMAT plans for any of the OARs assessed in these patients. The monitor units were significantly reduced in the VMAT plan in comparison to the IMRT plan for four out of five patients, with mean reduction of 66%. It was found in this study that for the treatment of sino-nasal cancer, VMAT produced minimal, and statistically insignificant improvement in dose homogeneity within the PTV when compared with IMRT. VMAT plans were delivered using significantly fewer monitor units. We conclude in this study that VMAT does not offer significant improvement of treatment for sino-nasal cancer over the existing IMRT techniques, but the findings may change with a larger sample of patients in this rare condition

Paraprotein sample exchange in Australia and New Zealand - 2018

Quantification of co-migrating paraproteins in the beta-region presents an ongoing challenge for laboratories performing serum protein electrophoresis. The between-laboratory variation may impact patient care if the patient uses different pathology services during plasma cell dyscrasia monitoring. To identify the practical difficulties and determine the extent of agreement in the reporting of beta-migrating paraproteins in Australia and New Zealand (NZ), sample exchanges were conducted in five Australian states and in NZ in early 2018. This study has highlighted the variation in quantification and reporting of beta-migrating paraproteins which could potentially affect patient monitoring and management