English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Purpose:   Beam range control is the essence of radiotherapy with heavy charged particles. In conventional broad‐beam delivery, fine range adjustment is achieved by insertion of range shifting and compensating materials. In dosimetry, solid phantoms are often used for convenience. These materials should ideally be equivalent to water. In this study, the authors evaluated dosimetric water equivalence of four common plastics, high‐density polyethylene (HDPE), polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and polyoxymethylene (POM).Methods:   Using the Bethe formula for energy loss, the Gottschalk formula for multiple scattering, and the Sihver formula for nuclear interactions, the authors calculated the effective densities of the plastics for these interactions. The authors experimentally measured variation of the Bragg peak of carbon‐ion beams by insertion of HDPE, PMMA, and POM, which were compared with analytical model calculations.Results:   The theoretical calculation resulted in slightly reduced multiple scattering and severely increased nuclear interactions for HDPE, compared to water and the other plastics. The increase in attenuation of carbon ions for 20‐cm range shift was experimentally measured to be 8.9% for HDPE, 2.5% for PMMA, and 0.0% for POM while PET was theoretically estimated to be in between PMMA and POM. The agreement between the measurements and the calculations was about 1% or better.Conclusions:   For carbon‐ion beams, POM was dosimetrically indistinguishable from water and the best of the plastics examined in this study. The poorest was HDPE, which would reduce the Bragg peak by 0.45% per cm range shift, although with marginal superiority for reduced multiple scattering. Between the two clear plastics, PET would be superior to PMMA in dosimetric water equivalence.

Evaluation of plastic materials for range shifting, range compensation, and solid‐phantom dosimetry in carbon‐ion radiotherapy