Mai Thi Thao, Le Ba Thach, Luong Tien Phat, Nguyen Van Thanh, Duong Thanh Tai, Peter Sandwall, Abdelmoneim Sulieman, Nissren Tamam, James C.L. Chow
{"title":"Elekta Synergy 6 MV和10 MV光子束模型在摩纳哥的剂量学验证","authors":"Mai Thi Thao, Le Ba Thach, Luong Tien Phat, Nguyen Van Thanh, Duong Thanh Tai, Peter Sandwall, Abdelmoneim Sulieman, Nissren Tamam, James C.L. Chow","doi":"10.1016/j.radphyschem.2025.112819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study assesses and compares the actual beam parameters with those calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS) on the Elekta Synergy linear accelerator at Phuc Thinh General Hospital, Vietnam. Photon beams of 6 MV and 10 MV were analyzed for varying field sizes and depths using a three-dimensional water tank phantom (48 × 48 × 48 cm<ce:sup loc=\"post\">3</ce:sup>) to measure the percentage depth dose (PDD) and profile for open fields (2 × 2 to 40 × 40 cm<ce:sup loc=\"post\">2</ce:sup>) and 60°-wedge fields (5 × 5 to 20 × 20 cm<ce:sup loc=\"post\">2</ce:sup>). Additionally, the same measurement configurations were accurately simulated in the Monaco TPS using a virtual water phantom of dimensions 60 × 40 × 60 cm<ce:sup loc=\"post\">3</ce:sup>. Data were analyzed using the Monaco Commissioning Utility and IBA's MyQA-Accept software. The Gamma index method was set at 3 %/3 mm, 2 %/2 mm, and 1 %/1 mm criteria to compare calculated and measured point doses. For the 6 MV photon, excellent agreement between the measured and calculated PDD and profiles was observed across all field sizes. The gamma passing rates were nearly 100 % when using the 3 %/3 mm and 2 %/2 mm criteria for both the Monte Carlo (MC) and Collapse Cone (CC) algorithms. A similar pattern was observed for the 10 MV photon beam, demonstrating strong agreement in both the PDD and dose profiles with the 3 %/3 mm and 2 %/2 mm criteria using the CC algorithm. However, when applying the more stringent 1 %/1 mm criterion, the small field 2 × 2 cm<ce:sup loc=\"post\">2</ce:sup> exhibited a significantly lower gamma pass rate and a higher output factor difference compared to the larger field sizes. Despite this, the output factor difference remained consistently below 1.3 % across all energies and field sizes. This study verifies the accuracy of the beam model and dose delivery while highlighting areas for improvement, such as optimizing the multi-leaf collimator (MLC). Continuous validation is recommended to maintain accuracy and treatment quality.","PeriodicalId":20861,"journal":{"name":"Radiation Physics and Chemistry","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dosimetric validation of Elekta Synergy 6 MV and 10 MV photon beam models in the Monaco\",\"authors\":\"Mai Thi Thao, Le Ba Thach, Luong Tien Phat, Nguyen Van Thanh, Duong Thanh Tai, Peter Sandwall, Abdelmoneim Sulieman, Nissren Tamam, James C.L. Chow\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.radphyschem.2025.112819\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study assesses and compares the actual beam parameters with those calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS) on the Elekta Synergy linear accelerator at Phuc Thinh General Hospital, Vietnam. Photon beams of 6 MV and 10 MV were analyzed for varying field sizes and depths using a three-dimensional water tank phantom (48 × 48 × 48 cm<ce:sup loc=\\\"post\\\">3</ce:sup>) to measure the percentage depth dose (PDD) and profile for open fields (2 × 2 to 40 × 40 cm<ce:sup loc=\\\"post\\\">2</ce:sup>) and 60°-wedge fields (5 × 5 to 20 × 20 cm<ce:sup loc=\\\"post\\\">2</ce:sup>). Additionally, the same measurement configurations were accurately simulated in the Monaco TPS using a virtual water phantom of dimensions 60 × 40 × 60 cm<ce:sup loc=\\\"post\\\">3</ce:sup>. Data were analyzed using the Monaco Commissioning Utility and IBA's MyQA-Accept software. The Gamma index method was set at 3 %/3 mm, 2 %/2 mm, and 1 %/1 mm criteria to compare calculated and measured point doses. For the 6 MV photon, excellent agreement between the measured and calculated PDD and profiles was observed across all field sizes. The gamma passing rates were nearly 100 % when using the 3 %/3 mm and 2 %/2 mm criteria for both the Monte Carlo (MC) and Collapse Cone (CC) algorithms. A similar pattern was observed for the 10 MV photon beam, demonstrating strong agreement in both the PDD and dose profiles with the 3 %/3 mm and 2 %/2 mm criteria using the CC algorithm. However, when applying the more stringent 1 %/1 mm criterion, the small field 2 × 2 cm<ce:sup loc=\\\"post\\\">2</ce:sup> exhibited a significantly lower gamma pass rate and a higher output factor difference compared to the larger field sizes. Despite this, the output factor difference remained consistently below 1.3 % across all energies and field sizes. This study verifies the accuracy of the beam model and dose delivery while highlighting areas for improvement, such as optimizing the multi-leaf collimator (MLC). Continuous validation is recommended to maintain accuracy and treatment quality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiation Physics and Chemistry\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiation Physics and Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2025.112819\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"物理与天体物理\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation Physics and Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2025.112819","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dosimetric validation of Elekta Synergy 6 MV and 10 MV photon beam models in the Monaco
This study assesses and compares the actual beam parameters with those calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS) on the Elekta Synergy linear accelerator at Phuc Thinh General Hospital, Vietnam. Photon beams of 6 MV and 10 MV were analyzed for varying field sizes and depths using a three-dimensional water tank phantom (48 × 48 × 48 cm3) to measure the percentage depth dose (PDD) and profile for open fields (2 × 2 to 40 × 40 cm2) and 60°-wedge fields (5 × 5 to 20 × 20 cm2). Additionally, the same measurement configurations were accurately simulated in the Monaco TPS using a virtual water phantom of dimensions 60 × 40 × 60 cm3. Data were analyzed using the Monaco Commissioning Utility and IBA's MyQA-Accept software. The Gamma index method was set at 3 %/3 mm, 2 %/2 mm, and 1 %/1 mm criteria to compare calculated and measured point doses. For the 6 MV photon, excellent agreement between the measured and calculated PDD and profiles was observed across all field sizes. The gamma passing rates were nearly 100 % when using the 3 %/3 mm and 2 %/2 mm criteria for both the Monte Carlo (MC) and Collapse Cone (CC) algorithms. A similar pattern was observed for the 10 MV photon beam, demonstrating strong agreement in both the PDD and dose profiles with the 3 %/3 mm and 2 %/2 mm criteria using the CC algorithm. However, when applying the more stringent 1 %/1 mm criterion, the small field 2 × 2 cm2 exhibited a significantly lower gamma pass rate and a higher output factor difference compared to the larger field sizes. Despite this, the output factor difference remained consistently below 1.3 % across all energies and field sizes. This study verifies the accuracy of the beam model and dose delivery while highlighting areas for improvement, such as optimizing the multi-leaf collimator (MLC). Continuous validation is recommended to maintain accuracy and treatment quality.
期刊介绍:
Radiation Physics and Chemistry is a multidisciplinary journal that provides a medium for publication of substantial and original papers, reviews, and short communications which focus on research and developments involving ionizing radiation in radiation physics, radiation chemistry and radiation processing.
The journal aims to publish papers with significance to an international audience, containing substantial novelty and scientific impact. The Editors reserve the rights to reject, with or without external review, papers that do not meet these criteria. This could include papers that are very similar to previous publications, only with changed target substrates, employed materials, analyzed sites and experimental methods, report results without presenting new insights and/or hypothesis testing, or do not focus on the radiation effects.