Premium
SU‐E‐T‐87: Comparison Study of Dose Reconstruction From Cylindrical Diode Array Measurements, with TLD Measurements and Treatment Planning System Calculations in Anthropomorphic Head and Neck and Lung Phantoms
Author(s) -
Benhabib S,
Cardan R,
Faught A,
Huang M,
Brezovich I,
Followill D,
Popple R
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4888417
Subject(s) - imaging phantom , thermoluminescent dosimeter , nuclear medicine , radiation treatment planning , head and neck , medicine , dosimetry , radiation therapy , radiology , dosimeter , surgery
Purpose: To assess dose calculated by the 3DVH software (Sun Nuclear Systems, Melbourne, FL) against TLD measurements and treatment planning system calculations in anthropomorphic phantoms. Methods: The IROC Houston (RPC) head and neck (HN) and lung phantoms were scanned and plans were generated using Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems, Milpitas, CA) following IROC Houston procedures. For the H&N phantom, 6 MV VMAT and 9‐field dynamic MLC (DMLC) plans were created. For the lung phantom 6 MV VMAT and 15 MV 9‐field dynamic MLC (DMLC) plans were created. The plans were delivered to the phantoms and to an ArcCHECK (Sun Nuclear Systems, Melbourne, FL). The head and neck phantom contained 8 TLDs located at PTV1 (4), PTV2 (2), and OAR Cord (2). The lung phantom contained 4 TLDs, 2 in the PTV, 1 in the cord, and 1 in the heart. Daily outputs were recorded before each measurement for correction. 3DVH dose reconstruction software was used to project the calculated dose to patient anatomy. Results: For the HN phantom, the maximum difference between 3DVH and TLDs was ‐3.4% and between 3DVH and Eclipse was 1.2%. For the lung plan the maximum difference between 3DVH and TLDs was 4.3%, except for the spinal cord for which 3DVH overestimated the TLD dose by 12%. The maximum difference between 3DVH and Eclipse was 0.3%. 3DVH agreed well with Eclipse because the dose reconstruction algorithm uses the diode measurements to perturb the dose calculated by the treatment planning system; therefore, if there is a problem in the modeling or heterogeneity correction, it will be carried through to 3DVH. Conclusion: 3DVH agreed well with Eclipse and TLD measurements. Comparison of 3DVH with film measurements is ongoing. Work supported by PHS grant CA10953 and CA81647 (NCI, DHHS).