Development of a quasi‐humanoid phantom to perform dosimetric and radiobiological measurements for out‐of‐field doses from external beam radiation therapy. Issue 4 (1st February 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kruszyna‐Mochalska, Marta; Skrobala, Agnieszka; Romanski, Piotr; Ryczkowski, Adam; Suchorska, Wiktoria; Kulcenty, Katarzyna; Piotrowski, Igor; Borowicz, Dorota; Matuszak, Natalia; Malicki, Julian
• Is Part Of: Journal of applied clinical medical physics. Volume 23:Issue 4(2022)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2022-02-01
• Subjects: humanoid phantoms -- out‐of‐field doses -- radiobiological response -- risk modeling; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; Health Physics; Clinical Medicine; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13514
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1526-9914

Abstract

Abstract: Our understanding of low dose, out‐of‐field radiation and their radiobiological effects are limited, in part due to the rapid technological advances in external beam radiotherapy, especially for non‐coplanar and dynamic techniques. Reliable comparisons of out‐of‐field doses produced by advanced radiotherapy techniques are difficult due to the limitations of commercially available phantoms. There is a clear need for a functional phantom to accurately measure the dosimetric and radiobiological characteristics of out‐of‐field doses, which would in turn allow clinicians and medical physicists to optimize treatment parameters. We designed, manufactured, and tested the performance of a quasi‐humanoid (Q‐H) adult phantom. To test the physics parameters, we used computed tomography (CT) scans of assembled Q‐H phantom. Static open field and dynamic techniques were measured both in‐ and out‐of‐field with ionization chambers and radiochromic films for two configurations (full solid and with water‐filled containers). In the areas simulating soft tissues, lung, and bones, median Hounsfield units and densities were, respectively: 129.8, ‐738.7, 920.8 HU and 1.110, 0.215, 1.669 g/cm 3 . Comparison of the measured to treatment planning systems (TPS) in‐field dose values for the sample volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) (6 MV flattening filter‐free (FFF)) plan, 96.4% of analyzed points passed the gamma evaluation criteria (L2%/2 mm, threshold (TH) 10%) and less than 1.50% for point dose verification. In the two phantom configurations: full poly(methyl) methacrylate (PMMA) and with water container, the off‐axis median doses for open field, relative to the central axis of the beam (CAX) were similar, respectively: 0.900% versus 0.907% (15 cm distance to CAX); 0.096% versus 0.120% (35 cm); 0.018% versus 0.018% (52 cm); 0.009% versus 0.008% (74 cm). For VMAT 6 MV FFF, doses relative the CAX were, respectively: 0.667% (15 cm), 0.062% (35 cm), 0.019% (52 cm), 0.016% (74 cm). The Q‐H phantom meets the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) and American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) recommended phantom criteria, providing medical physicists with a reliable, comprehensive system to perform dose calculation and measurements and to assess the impact on radiobiological response and on the risk of secondary tumor induction.