考虑TLD对CBCT方案在外束放疗剂量监测中的反应。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Andrew J. White, Cliff G. Hammer, Matthew W. Brenner, Larry A. DeWerd, Kurt E. Stump, Wesley S. Culberson
{"title":"考虑TLD对CBCT方案在外束放疗剂量监测中的反应。","authors":"Andrew J. White,&nbsp;Cliff G. Hammer,&nbsp;Matthew W. Brenner,&nbsp;Larry A. DeWerd,&nbsp;Kurt E. Stump,&nbsp;Wesley S. Culberson","doi":"10.1002/acm2.70103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>LiF thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are commonly used in radiation therapy to verify the delivered dose. Examples include dose verification for complicated treatment setups or cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). TLDs may be present for both the pre-treatment imaging kilovoltage (kV) beam and the megavoltage (MV) treatment beams. For low energy x-ray beams, where the photoelectric effect dominates, TLDs respond differently than tissue or water. An overresponse of up to 40% has been previously reported for lower-energy (kV) x-rays when calibrated to higher-energy (MV) beams. In this work, the response of TLDs to various cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) protocols with calibrations in clinical therapy beams (MV) is quantified.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Three Varian OBI (Head, Thorax, and Pelvis) and three Elekta XVI (Fast Head and Neck, Fast Chest, and Fast Pelvis) CBCT protocols were investigated. For each protocol, TLDs were positioned on a tissue equivalent phantom at various distances extending out from the center of the imaging field. The response was determined by calibrating TLDs to a 6 MV photon beam.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The maximum in-field TLD response ranged from 0.82 to 4.80 and 0.06 to 2.69 cGy for Varian OBI and Elekta XVI protocols, respectively. The out-of-field CBCT response dropped exponentially from the field edge. Calculated uncertainties were generally less than 3% (<i>k</i> = 1), with exceptions along the edge of the CBCT field (6%) and at the most distal TLD positions (34%).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Using the measured TLD responses to CBCT protocols with an MV calibration, the therapeutic dose can be isolated. The therapeutic dose can then be compared to predictions from the treatment planning system (TPS), allowing for more accurate dose verification for complex treatment setups and patients with CIEDs. The CBCT response can change the reported therapeutic dose by up to 2.5%.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":"26 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acm2.70103","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accounting for TLD response to CBCT protocols in external beam radiotherapy dose monitoring\",\"authors\":\"Andrew J. White,&nbsp;Cliff G. Hammer,&nbsp;Matthew W. Brenner,&nbsp;Larry A. DeWerd,&nbsp;Kurt E. Stump,&nbsp;Wesley S. Culberson\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acm2.70103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>LiF thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are commonly used in radiation therapy to verify the delivered dose. Examples include dose verification for complicated treatment setups or cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). TLDs may be present for both the pre-treatment imaging kilovoltage (kV) beam and the megavoltage (MV) treatment beams. For low energy x-ray beams, where the photoelectric effect dominates, TLDs respond differently than tissue or water. An overresponse of up to 40% has been previously reported for lower-energy (kV) x-rays when calibrated to higher-energy (MV) beams. In this work, the response of TLDs to various cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) protocols with calibrations in clinical therapy beams (MV) is quantified.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Three Varian OBI (Head, Thorax, and Pelvis) and three Elekta XVI (Fast Head and Neck, Fast Chest, and Fast Pelvis) CBCT protocols were investigated. For each protocol, TLDs were positioned on a tissue equivalent phantom at various distances extending out from the center of the imaging field. The response was determined by calibrating TLDs to a 6 MV photon beam.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The maximum in-field TLD response ranged from 0.82 to 4.80 and 0.06 to 2.69 cGy for Varian OBI and Elekta XVI protocols, respectively. The out-of-field CBCT response dropped exponentially from the field edge. Calculated uncertainties were generally less than 3% (<i>k</i> = 1), with exceptions along the edge of the CBCT field (6%) and at the most distal TLD positions (34%).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Using the measured TLD responses to CBCT protocols with an MV calibration, the therapeutic dose can be isolated. The therapeutic dose can then be compared to predictions from the treatment planning system (TPS), allowing for more accurate dose verification for complex treatment setups and patients with CIEDs. The CBCT response can change the reported therapeutic dose by up to 2.5%.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics\",\"volume\":\"26 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acm2.70103\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.70103\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.70103","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:LiF热释光剂量计(TLDs)是放射治疗中常用的剂量测定仪器。例子包括复杂治疗装置或心血管植入式电子装置(cied)的剂量验证。预处理成像的千伏(kV)波束和兆伏(MV)波束都可能出现tld。对于光电效应占主导地位的低能量x射线束,tld的反应与组织或水不同。先前有报道称,当校准到高能(MV)光束时,低能(kV) x射线的过度响应高达40%。在这项工作中,tld对临床治疗束(MV)校准的各种锥束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)方案的响应进行了量化。方法:研究了三种Varian OBI(头部、胸部和骨盆)和三种Elekta XVI(快速头颈、快速胸部和快速骨盆)CBCT方案。对于每个协议,tld被定位在从成像场中心伸出的不同距离的组织等效体上。通过将tld校准到6 MV光子束来确定响应。结果:Varian OBI和Elekta XVI的最大田间TLD响应范围分别为0.82 ~ 4.80和0.06 ~ 2.69 cGy。场外CBCT响应从场边缘开始呈指数下降。计算的不确定性通常小于3% (k = 1),除了CBCT场边缘(6%)和最远端TLD位置(34%)。结论:利用测量的TLD对CBCT方案的反应和MV校准,可以分离治疗剂量。然后可以将治疗剂量与来自治疗计划系统(TPS)的预测进行比较,从而允许对复杂的治疗设置和cied患者进行更准确的剂量验证。CBCT反应可使报告的治疗剂量改变2.5%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Accounting for TLD response to CBCT protocols in external beam radiotherapy dose monitoring

Accounting for TLD response to CBCT protocols in external beam radiotherapy dose monitoring

Purpose

LiF thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are commonly used in radiation therapy to verify the delivered dose. Examples include dose verification for complicated treatment setups or cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). TLDs may be present for both the pre-treatment imaging kilovoltage (kV) beam and the megavoltage (MV) treatment beams. For low energy x-ray beams, where the photoelectric effect dominates, TLDs respond differently than tissue or water. An overresponse of up to 40% has been previously reported for lower-energy (kV) x-rays when calibrated to higher-energy (MV) beams. In this work, the response of TLDs to various cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) protocols with calibrations in clinical therapy beams (MV) is quantified.

Methods

Three Varian OBI (Head, Thorax, and Pelvis) and three Elekta XVI (Fast Head and Neck, Fast Chest, and Fast Pelvis) CBCT protocols were investigated. For each protocol, TLDs were positioned on a tissue equivalent phantom at various distances extending out from the center of the imaging field. The response was determined by calibrating TLDs to a 6 MV photon beam.

Results

The maximum in-field TLD response ranged from 0.82 to 4.80 and 0.06 to 2.69 cGy for Varian OBI and Elekta XVI protocols, respectively. The out-of-field CBCT response dropped exponentially from the field edge. Calculated uncertainties were generally less than 3% (k = 1), with exceptions along the edge of the CBCT field (6%) and at the most distal TLD positions (34%).

Conclusions

Using the measured TLD responses to CBCT protocols with an MV calibration, the therapeutic dose can be isolated. The therapeutic dose can then be compared to predictions from the treatment planning system (TPS), allowing for more accurate dose verification for complex treatment setups and patients with CIEDs. The CBCT response can change the reported therapeutic dose by up to 2.5%.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
19.00%
发文量
331
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission. JACMP will publish: -Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500. -Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed. -Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references. -Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents. -Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews. -Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics. -Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信