• The Korean Journal of Food & Health Convergence
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.15-22
• /
• 2018

A radiation dosimeter is important to assess quality assurance (QA) of radiation therapy devices and to estimate the radiation dose in vivo dosimetry. Recently, optically stimulated luminescence detector (OSLD) is widely used in clinical filed. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate dose, energy, and angular dependence of OSLD and EBT3 film. The absorbed dose in clinical linear accelerator (Linac) beam is calibrated for dose per monitor unit (MU). Dose, energy, and angular dependence of OSLD and EBT3 film are estimated after the calibration procedure. The absorbed dose is measured at 50, 100, 150, and 200 cGy in an 6 MV X-ray beam for dose dependence. A dose of 150 cGy is delivered to OSLD and EBT3 film with 6 and 10 MV photon energies for energy dependence. For measurements of angular dependence, angular positions of gantry are $0^{\circ}{\pm}80^{\circ}$ with 6 MV at 150 cGy. The results of dose dependence is linear for OSLD and EBT3 film. For the results of energy dependence, errors were 0.39% and 0.03% for OSLD and EBT3 film, respectively. The results of dose for angular is decreased from $0^{\circ}$ to ${\pm}80^{\circ}$ for both OSLD and EBT3 film. When angle of $0^{\circ}$ is normalized to 1, and the dose is decreased to 60 and 66% at $80^{\circ}$ for OSLD and EBT3 film, respectively. Dose and energy dependence of OSLD and EBT3 film are measured within the recommendation of manufacturer. Angular dependence is increased from $0^{\circ}$ to ${\pm}80^{\circ}$ for OSLD and EBT3 film. The characteristics of OSLD and EBT3 film are similar and expected to useful for clinical field.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.71-79
• /
• 1998

Purpose : The objective of this study is to introduce our installation of a non-commercial 3D Planning system, Plunc and confirm it's clinical applicability in various treatment situations. Materials and Methods : We obtained source codes of Plunc, offered by University of North Carolina and installed them on a Pentium Pro 200MHz (128MB RAM, Millenium VGA) with Linux operating system. To examine accuracy of dose distributions calculated by Plunc, we input beam data of 6MV Photon of our linear accelerator(Siemens MXE 6740) including tissue-maximum ratio, scatter-maximum ratio, attenuation coefficients and shapes of wedge filters. After then, we compared values of dose distributions(Percent depth dose; PDD, dose profiles with and without wedge filters, oblique incident beam, and dose distributions under air-gap) calculated by Plunc with measured values. Results : Plunc operated in almost real time except spending about 10 seconds in full volume dose distribution and dose-volume histogram(DVH) on the PC described above. As compared with measurements for irradiations of 90-cm 550 and 10-cm depth isocenter, the PDD curves calculated by Plunc did not exceed $1\%$ of inaccuracies except buildup region. For dose profiles with and without wedge filter, the calculated ones are accurate within $2\%$ except low-dose region outside irradiations where Plunc showed $5\%$ of dose reduction. For the oblique incident beam, it showed a good agreement except low dose region below $30\%$ of isocenter dose. In the case of dose distribution under air-gap, there was $5\%$ errors of the central-axis dose. Conclusion : By comparing photon dose calculations using the Plunc with measurements, we confirmed that Plunc showed acceptable accuracies about $2-5\%$ in typical treatment situations which was comparable to commercial planning systems using correction-based a1gorithms. Plunc does not have a function for electron beam planning up to the present. However, it is possible to implement electron dose calculation modules or more accurate photon dose calculation into the Plunc system. Plunc is shown to be useful to clear many limitations of 2D planning systems in clinics where a commercial 3D planning system is not available.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.51-58
• /
• 2011

The aim of the study is to analyze the dose delivery error depending on the depth variation according to target positions and arc trajectories by comparing the simulated treatment planning with the actual dose delivery in conformal arc therapy. We simulated the conformal arc treatment planning with the three target positions (center, 2.5 cm, and 5 cm in the phantom). For the experiments, IMRT body phantom (I’mRT Phantom, Wellhofer Dosimetry, Germany) was used for treatment planning with CT (Computed Tomography, Light speed 16, GE, USA). The simulated treatment plans were established by three different target positions using treatment planning system (Eclipse, ver. 6.5, VMS, Palo Alto, USA). The radiochromic film (Gafchromic EBT2, ISP, Wayne, USA) and dose analysis software (OmniPro-IMRT, ver. 1.4, Wellhofer Dosimetry, Germany) were used for the measurement of the planned arc delivery using 6 MV photon beam from linear accelerator (CL21EX, VMS, Palo Alto, USA). Gamma index (DD: 3%, DTA: 2 mm) histogram and dose profile were evaluated for a quantitative analysis. The dose distributions surrounded by targets were also compared with each plans and measurements by conformity index (CI), and homogeneity index (HI). The area covered by 100% isodose line was compared to the whole target area. The results for the 5 cm-shifted target plan show that 23.8%, 35.6%, and 37% for multiple conformal arc therapy (MCAT), single conformal arc therapy (SCAT), and multiple static beam therapy, respectively. In the 2.5 cm-shifted target plan, it was shown that 61%, 21.5%, and 14.2%, while in case of center-located target, 70.5%, 14.1%, and 36.3% for MCAT, SCAT, and multiple static beam therapy, respectively. The values were resulted by most superior in the MCAT, except the case of the 5 cm-shifted target. In the analysis of gamma index histogram, it was resulted of 37.1, 27.3, 29.2 in the SCAT, while 9.2, 8.4, 10.3 in the MCAT, for the target positions of center, shifted 2.5 cm and 5 cm, respectively. The fail proportions of the SCAT were 2.8 to 4 times as compared to those of the MCAT. In conclusion, dose delivery error could be occurred depending on the target positions and arc trajectories. Hence, if the target were located in the biased position, the accurate dose delivery could be performed through the optimization of depth according to arc trajectory.