'International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology'
Doi
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the results of patient specific absolute dosimetry using slab phantom, acrylic body phantom and goat head phantom. Methods: Fifteen intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans already planned on treatment planning system (TPS) for head-and-neck cancer patients were exported on all three kinds of phantoms viz. slab phantom, acrylic body phantom and goat head phantom, and dose was calculated using anisotropic analytic algorithm (AAA). All the gantry angles were set to zero in case of slab phantom while set to as it is in actual plan in case of other two phantoms. All the plans were delivered by linear accelerator (LA) and dose for each plan was measured by 0.13 cc ion chamber. The percentage (%) variations between planned and measured doses were calculated and analyzed. Results: The mean % variations between planned and measured doses of all IMRT quality assurance (QA) plans were as 0.65 (Standard deviation (SD): 0.38) with confidence limit (CL) 1.39, 1.16 (SD: 0.61) with CL 2.36 and 2.40 (SD: 0.86) with CL 4.09 for slab phantom, acrylic head phantom and goat head phantom respectively. Conclusion: Higher dose variations found in case of real tissue phantom compare to results in case of slab and acrylic body phantoms. The algorithm AAA does not calculate doses in heterogeneous medium as accurate as it calculates in homogeneous medium. Therefore the patient specific absolute dosimetry should be done using heterogeneous phantom mimicking density wise as well as design wise to the actual human body. </p
