| |
Records |
Links |
|
Author  |
Granero, D.; Vijande, J.; Ballester, F.; Rivard, M.J. |
|
| |
Title |
Dosimetry revisited for the HDR Ir-192 brachytherapy source model mHDR-v2 |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2011 |
Publication |
Medical Physics |
Abbreviated Journal |
Med. Phys. |
|
| |
Volume |
38 |
Issue |
1 |
Pages |
487-494 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Ir-192; brachytherapy; dosimetry; TG-43; PSS model; MCNP5; PENELOPE2008; GEANT4 |
|
| |
Abstract |
Purpose: Recently, the manufacturer of the HDR Ir-192 mHDR-v2 brachytherapy source reported small design changes (referred to herein as mHDR-v2r) that are within the manufacturing tolerances but may alter the existing dosimetric data for this source. This study aimed to (1) check whether these changes affect the existing dosimetric data published for this source; (2) obtain new dosimetric data in close proximity to the source, including the contributions from 192Ir electrons and considering the absence of electronic equilibrium; and (3) obtain scatter dose components for collapsed cone treatment planning system implementation. Methods: Three different Monte Carlo (MC) radiation transport codes were used: MCNP5, PENELOPE2008, and GEANT4. The source was centrally positioned in a 40 cm radius water phantom. Absorbed dose and collision kerma were obtained using 0.1 mm (0.5 mm) thick voxels to provide high-resolution dosimetry near (far from) the source. Dose-rate distributions obtained with the three MC codes were compared. Results: Simulations of mHDR-v2 and mHDR-v2r designs performed with three radiation transport codes showed agreement typically within 0.2% for r >= 0.25 cm. Dosimetric contributions from source electrons were significant for r<0.25 cm. The dose-rate constant and radial dose function were similar to those from previous MC studies of the mHDR-v2 design. The 2D anisotropy function also coincided with that of the mHDR-v2 design for r >= 0.25 cm. Detailed results of dose distributions and scatter components are presented for the modified source design. Conclusions: Comparison of these results to prior MC studies showed agreement typically within 0.5% for r >= 0.25 cm. If dosimetric data for r<0.25 cm are not needed, dosimetric results from the prior MC studies will be adequate. c 2011 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. |
|
| |
Address |
[Granero, Domingo] Hosp Gen Univ, Dept Radiat Phys, ERESA, E-46014 Valencia, Spain, Email: dgranero@eresa.com |
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Amer Assoc Physicists Medicine Amer Inst Physics |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
0094-2405 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
ISI:000285769800050 |
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Is ISI |
yes |
International Collaboration |
yes |
|
| |
Call Number |
IFIC @ pastor @ |
Serial |
557 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Granero, D.; Perez-Calatayud, J.; Vijande, J.; Ballester, F.; Rivard, M.J. |
|
| |
Title |
Limitations of the TG-43 formalism for skin high-dose-rate brachytherapy dose calculations |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2014 |
Publication |
Medical Physics |
Abbreviated Journal |
Med. Phys. |
|
| |
Volume |
41 |
Issue |
2 |
Pages |
021703 - 8pp |
|
| |
Keywords |
HDR; brachytherapy; skin; Monte Carlo; Geant4; Co-60; Ir-192; Yb-169 |
|
| |
Abstract |
Purpose: In skin high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy, sources are located outside, in contact with, or implanted at some depth below the skin surface. Most treatment planning systems use the TG-43 formalism, which is based on single-source dose superposition within an infinite water medium without accounting for the true geometry in which conditions for scattered radiation are altered by the presence of air. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the dosimetric limitations of the TG-43 formalism in HDR skin brachytherapy and the potential clinical impact. Methods: Dose rate distributions of typical configurations used in skin brachytherapy were obtained: a 5 cm x 5 cm superficial mould; a source inside a catheter located at the skin surface with and without backscatter bolus; and a typical interstitial implant consisting of an HDR source in a catheter located at a depth of 0.5 cm. Commercially available HDR Co-60 and Ir-192 sources and a hypothetical Yb-169 source were considered. The Geant4Monte Carlo radiation transport code was used to estimate dose rate distributions for the configurations considered. These results were then compared to those obtained with the TG-43 dose calculation formalism. In particular, the influence of adding bolus material over the implant was studied. Results: For a 5 cm x 5 cm Ir-192 superficial mould and 0.5 cm prescription depth, dose differences in comparison to the TG-43 method were about -3%. When the source was positioned at the skin surface, dose differences were smaller than -1% for Co-60 and Ir-192, yet -3% for Yb-169. For the interstitial implant, dose differences at the skin surface were -7% for Co-60, -0.6% for Ir-192, and -2.5% for Yb-169. Conclusions: This study indicates the following: (i) for the superficial mould, no bolus is needed; (ii) when the source is in contact with the skin surface, no bolus is needed for either Co-60 and Ir-192. For lower energy radionuclides like Yb-169, bolus may be needed; and (iii) for the interstitial case, at least a 0.1 cm bolus is advised for Co-60 to avoid underdosing superficial target layers. For Ir-192 and Yb-169, no bolus is needed. For those cases where no bolus is needed, its use might be detrimental as the lack of radiation scatter may be beneficial to the patient, although the 2% tolerance for dose calculation accuracy recommended in the AAPM TG-56 report is not fulfilled. |
|
| |
Address |
[Granero, Domingo] Hosp Gen Univ, ERESA, Dept Radiat Phys, Valencia 46014, Spain, Email: dgranero@eresa.com |
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Amer Assoc Physicists Medicine Amer Inst Physics |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
0094-2405 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
WOS:000331213300006 |
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Is ISI |
yes |
International Collaboration |
yes |
|
| |
Call Number |
IFIC @ pastor @ |
Serial |
1704 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Granero, D.; Candela-Juan, C.; Vijande, J.; Ballester, F.; Perez-Calatayud, J.; Jacob, D.; Mourtada, F. |
|
| |
Title |
Technical Note: Dosimetry of Leipzig and Valencia applicators without the plastic cap |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2016 |
Publication |
Medical Physics |
Abbreviated Journal |
Med. Phys. |
|
| |
Volume |
43 |
Issue |
5 |
Pages |
2087 - 4pp |
|
| |
Keywords |
Leipzig applicators; Valencia applicators; skin brachytherapy; Monte Carlo; dosimetry |
|
| |
Abstract |
Purpose: High dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy for treatment of small skin lesions using the Leipzig and Valencia applicators is a widely used technique. These applicators are equipped with an attachable plastic cap to be placed during fraction delivery to ensure electronic equilibrium and to prevent secondary electrons from reaching the skin surface. The purpose of this study is to report on the dosimetric impact of the cap being absent during HDR fraction delivery, which has not been explored previously in the literature. Methods: GEANT4 Monte Carlo simulations (version 10.0) have been performed for the Leipzig and Valencia applicators with and without the plastic cap. In order to validate the Monte Carlo simulations, experimental measurements using radiochromic films have been done. Results: Dose absorbed within 1 mm of the skin surface increases by a factor of 1500% for the Leipzig applicators and of 180% for the Valencia applicators. Deeper than 1 mm, the overdosage flattens up to a 10% increase. Conclusions: Differences of treating with or without the plastic cap are significant. Users must check always that the plastic cap is in place before any treatment in order to avoid overdosage of the skin. Prior to skin HDR fraction delivery, the timeout checklist should include verification of the cap placement. (C) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. |
|
| |
Address |
[Granero, D.] Hosp Gen Univ, Dept Radiat Phys, ERESA, Valencia 46014, Spain, Email: dgranero@eresa.com |
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Amer Assoc Physicists Medicine Amer Inst Physics |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
0094-2405 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
WOS:000378924200010 |
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Is ISI |
yes |
International Collaboration |
yes |
|
| |
Call Number |
IFIC @ pastor @ |
Serial |
2753 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Fletcher, E.M.; Ballester, F.; Beaulieu, L.; Morrison, H.; Poher, A.; Rivard, M.J.; Sloboda, R.S.; Vijande, J.; Thomson, R.M. |
|
| |
Title |
Generation and comparison of 3D dosimetric reference datasets for COMS eye plaque brachytherapy using model-based dose calculations |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2024 |
Publication |
Medical Physics |
Abbreviated Journal |
Med. Phys. |
|
| |
Volume |
51 |
Issue |
|
Pages |
694-706 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Monte Carlo; ocular brachytherapy; treatment planning |
|
| |
Abstract |
PurposeA joint Working Group of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the Australasian Brachytherapy Group (ABG) was created to aid in the transition from the AAPM TG-43 dose calculation formalism, the current standard, to model-based dose calculations. This work establishes the first test cases for low-energy photon-emitting brachytherapy using model-based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs).Acquisition and Validation MethodsFive test cases are developed: (1) a single model 6711 125I brachytherapy seed in water, 13 seeds (2) individually and (3) in combination in water, (4) the full Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) 16-mm eye plaque in water, and (5) the full plaque in a realistic eye phantom. Calculations are done with four Monte Carlo (MC) codes and a research version of a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). For all test cases, local agreement of MC codes was within & SIM;2.5% and global agreement was & SIM;2% (4% for test case 5). MC agreement was within expected uncertainties. Local agreement of TPS with MC was within 5% for test case 1 and & SIM;20% for test cases 4 and 5, and global agreement was within 0.4% for test case 1 and 10% for test cases 4 and 5.Data Format and Usage NotesDose distributions for each set of MC and TPS calculations are available online () along with input files and all other information necessary to repeat the calculations.Potential ApplicationsThese data can be used to support commissioning of MBDCAs for low-energy brachytherapy as recommended by TGs 186 and 221 and AAPM Report 372. This work additionally lays out a sample framework for the development of test cases that can be extended to other applications beyond eye plaque brachytherapy. |
|
| |
Address |
[Fletcher, Elizabeth M.; Thomson, Rowan M.] Carleton Univ, Phys Dept, Carleton Lab Radiotherapy Phys, Ottawa, ON, Canada, Email: rthomson@physics.carleton.ca |
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Wiley |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
0094-2405 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
WOS:001058112300001 |
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Is ISI |
yes |
International Collaboration |
yes |
|
| |
Call Number |
IFIC @ pastor @ |
Serial |
5632 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Candela-Juan, C.; Vijande, J.; Garcia-Martinez, T.; Niatsetski, Y.; Nauta, G.; Schuurman, J.; Ouhib, Z.; Ballester, F.; Perez-Calatayud, J. |
|
| |
Title |
Comparison and uncertainty evaluation of different calibration protocols and ionization chambers for low-energy surface brachytherapy dosimetry |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2015 |
Publication |
Medical Physics |
Abbreviated Journal |
Med. Phys. |
|
| |
Volume |
42 |
Issue |
8 |
Pages |
4954-4964 |
|
| |
Keywords |
x-ray beams; electronic brachytherapy; surface applicators; dosimetry; uncertainty |
|
| |
Abstract |
Purpose: A surface electronic brachytherapy (EBT) device is in fact an x-ray source collimated with specific applicators. Low-energy (<100 kVp) x-ray beam dosimetry faces several challenges that need to be addressed. A number of calibration protocols have been published for x-ray beam dosimetry. The media in which measurements are performed are the fundamental difference between them. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface dose rate of a low-energy x-ray source with small field applicators using different calibration standards and different small-volume ionization chambers, comparing the values and uncertainties of each methodology. Methods: The surface dose rate of the EBT unit Esteya (Elekta Brachytherapy, The Netherlands), a 69.5 kVp x-ray source with applicators of 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 mm diameter, was evaluated using the AAPM TG-61 (based on air kerma) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) TRS-398 (based on absorbed dose to water) dosimetry protocols for low-energy photon beams. A plane parallel T34013 ionization chamber (PTW Freiburg, Germany) calibrated in terms of both absorbed dose to water and air kerma was used to compare the two dosimetry protocols. Another PTW chamber of the same model was used to evaluate the reproducibility between these chambers. Measurements were also performed with two different Exradin A20 (Standard Imaging, Inc., Middleton, WI) chambers calibrated in terms of air kerma. Results: Differences between surface dose rates measured in air and in water using the T34013 chamber range from 1.6% to 3.3%. No field size dependence has been observed. Differences are below 3.7% when measurements with the A20 and the T34013 chambers calibrated in air are compared. Estimated uncertainty (with coverage factor k = 1) for the T34013 chamber calibrated in water is 2.2%-2.4%, whereas it increases to 2.5% and 2.7% for the A20 and T34013 chambers calibrated in air, respectively. The output factors, measured with the PTW chambers, differ by less than 1.1% for any applicator size when compared to the output factors that were measured with the A20 chamber. Conclusions: Measurements using both dosimetric protocols are consistent, once the overall uncertainties are considered. There is also consistency between measurements performed with both chambers calibrated in air. Both the T34013 and A20 chambers have negligible stem effect. Any x-ray surface brachytherapy system, including Esteya, can be characterized using either one of these calibration protocols and ionization chambers. Having less correction factors, lower uncertainty, and based on measurements, performed in closer to clinical conditions, the TRS-398 protocol seems to be the preferred option. |
|
| |
Address |
[Candela-Juan, C.; Perez-Calatayud, J.] La Fe Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, Valencia 46026, Spain, Email: ccanjuan@gmail.com |
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Amer Assoc Physicists Medicine Amer Inst Physics |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
0094-2405 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
WOS:000358933000051 |
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Is ISI |
yes |
International Collaboration |
yes |
|
| |
Call Number |
IFIC @ pastor @ |
Serial |
2323 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
