Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:16:33.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Commissioning and evaluation of a radiochromic EBT3 film dosimetry system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2018

Muhammad Isa Khan Open the ORCID record for Muhammad Isa Khan [Opens in a new window] ,
Muhammad Bilal Tahir ,
Muhammad Rafique ,
Tahir Iqbal ,
Sabiha Zulfiqar ,
Aliza Zahoor ,
Jalil ur Rehman ,
Khalid Iqbal  and
James Chow
Muhammad Isa Khan*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Sciences, University of Gujrat, Gujrat, Punjab, Pakistan
Muhammad Bilal Tahir
Affiliation:
Faculty of Sciences, University of Gujrat, Gujrat, Punjab, Pakistan
Muhammad Rafique
Affiliation:
Faculty of Sciences, University of Gujrat, Gujrat, Punjab, Pakistan
Tahir Iqbal
Affiliation:
Faculty of Sciences, University of Gujrat, Gujrat, Punjab, Pakistan
Sabiha Zulfiqar
Affiliation:
Faculty of Sciences, University of Gujrat, Gujrat, Punjab, Pakistan
Aliza Zahoor
Affiliation:
Faculty of Sciences, University of Gujrat, Gujrat, Punjab, Pakistan
Jalil ur Rehman
Affiliation:
Balochistan University of Information Technology, Engineering and Management Sciences (BUITEMS), Quetta, Balochistan, Pakistan
Khalid Iqbal
Affiliation:
Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre (SKMH&RC), Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan
James Chow
Affiliation:
Princess Margaret Hospital Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
*
Author for correspondence: M. Isa Khan, Faculty of Sciences, University of Gujrat, Gujrat, Punjab 65100, Pakistan. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Purpose

This work reports our study to commission a radiochromic film dosimetry system using the timely EBT3 film. We carried out dosimetric evaluations on different characteristics of photon beams (e.g., flatness, symmetry and penumbra) in radiation dose delivery.

Materials and Methods

A Varian linear accelerator producing 6 and 15 MV photon beams with 120 multi-leaf collimator was used in this study. PTW ionisation chamber was used to measure the beam characteristics such as symmetry, flatness and penumbra and these measurements were used to commission the radiochormic EBT3 film dosimetry system. The results of irradiated films were analysed using the radiochromic film QA Pro software 2016.

Results

The measured film doses were analysed at two different colour channels (green and red) using two scanning geometries (i.e., upper or lower side of film facing the scanner light source) at two dose levels (10 and 40 Gy). The difference between the ionisation chamber and film results was found insignificant and within the acceptable range as per the World Health Organisation standard.

Conclusion

Results of the comparison between the ionisation chamber and film measurements show that our radiochormic EBT3 film dosimetry system is reliable and cost-effective in the output measurement of a linear accelerator. Our measurements confirm that our EBT3 film dosimetry agreed well with the ionisation chamber, and can be used as a re-validation tool for linear accelerator quality control.

Keywords

dosimetryintensity modulated radiotherapymulti-channelquality controlradiochromic film
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , March 2019 , pp. 55 - 62
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Cite this article: Isa Khan M, Bilal Tahir M, Rafique M, Iqbal T, Zulfiqar S, Zahoor A, ur Rehman J, Iqbal K, Chow J. (2019) Commissioning and evaluation of a radiochromic EBT3 film dosimetry system. Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice18: 55–62. doi: 10.1017/S1460396918000444

References

1. Saminathan, S, Manickan, R, Chandraraj, V, Supe, SS. Dosimetric study of 2D ion chamber array matrix for the modern radiotherapy treatment verification. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2010; 11 (2): 116–127.Google Scholar
2. Li, JG, Yan, G, Liu, C. Comparison of two commercial detector arrays for IMRT quality assurance. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2009; 10 (2): 62–74.Google Scholar
3. Poppe, B, Blechschmidt, A, Djouguela, A et al. Two‐dimensional ionization chamber arrays for IMRT plan verification. Med Phys 2006; 33 (4): 1005–1015.Google Scholar
4. Palmer, AL, Nisbet, A, Bradley, D. Verification of high dose rate brachytherapy dose distributions with EBT3 gafchromic film quality control techniques. Phys Med Biol 2013; 58 (3): 497–511.Google Scholar
5. McDermott, LN, Wendling, M, Van Asselen, B et al. Clinical experience with EPID dosimetry for prostate IMRT pre‐treatment dose verification. Med Phys 2006; 33 (10): 3921–3930.Google Scholar
6. Peiffert, D, Simon, JM, Eschwege, F. Epinal radiotherapy accident: passed, present, future. Cancer Radiother 2007; 11 (6-7): 309–312.Google Scholar
7. World Health Organization. Quality assurance in radiotherapy: a guide prepared following a workshop held at Schloss Reisensburg, Federal Republic of Germany, 3–7 December 1984.Google Scholar
8. Kouloulias, VE, Poortmans, P, Antypas, C, Kappas, C, Sandilos, P. Field flatness and symmetry of photon beams: review of the current recommendations. Technol Health Care 2003; 11 (4): 283–288.Google Scholar
9. Khan, FM, Doppke, KP, Hogstrom, KR et al. Clinical electron‐beam dosimetry: report of AAPM radiation therapy committee task group No. 25. Med Phys 1991; 18 (1): 73–109.Google Scholar
10. Niroomand‐Rad, A, Blackwell, CR, Coursey, BM et al. Radiochromic film dosimetry: recommendations of AAPM radiation therapy committee task group 55. Med Phys 1998; 25 (11): 2093–2115.Google Scholar
11. Koji, M, Toshiyuki, K. Part A. Applied radiation and isotopes. Int J Radiat Appl Instrum 1991; 42 (3): 235–239.Google Scholar
12. Stevens, MA, Turner, JR, Hugtenburg, RP, Butler, PH. High-resolution dosimetry using radiochromic film and a document scanner. Phys Med Biol 1996; 41: 2357–2365.Google Scholar
13. Zhu, Y, Kirov, AS, Mishra, V, Meigooni, AS, Williamson, JF. Quantitative evaluation of radiochromic film response for two-dimensional dosimetry. Med Phys 1997; 24 (2): 223–231.Google Scholar
14. Ramani, R, Lightstone, AW, Mason, DL, O’Brien, PF. The use of radiochromic film in treatment verification of dynamic stereotactic radiosurgery. Med Phys 1994; 21 (3): 389–392.Google Scholar
15. Reinstein, LE, Gluckman, GR, Meek, AG. A rapid colour stabilization technique for radiochromic film dosimetry. Phys Med Biol 1998; 43 (10): 2703–2708.Google Scholar
16. Butson, MJ, Cheung, T, Yu, PK. Weak energy dependence of EBT gafchromic film dose response in the 50 kVp-10 MVp X-ray range. Appl Radiat Isot 2006; 64 (1): 60–62.Google Scholar
17. Huq, MS, Andreo, P, Song, H. Comparison of the IAEA TRS-398 and AAPM TG-51 absorbed dose to water protocols in the dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams. Phys Med Biol 2001; 46 (11): 2985.Google Scholar
18. Nalbant, N, Kesen, ND, Hatice, B. Pre-treatment dose verification of IMRT using gafchromic EBT3 film and 2d-array. J Nucl Med Radiat Ther 2014; 5 (3): 1–5.Google Scholar
19. Low, DA, Mutic, S, Dempsey, JF et al. Quantitative dosimetric verification of an IMRT planning and delivery system. Radiother Oncol 1998; 49 (3): 305–316.Google Scholar
20. Kouloulias, VE, Poortmans, P, Antypas, C, Kappas, C, Sandilos, P. Field flatness and symmetry of photon beams: review of the current recommendations. Technol Health Care 2003; 11 (4): 283–288.Google Scholar
21. Godson, HF, Ravikumar, M, Sathiyan, S et al. Analysis of small field percent depth dose and profiles: comparison of measurements with various detectors and effects of detector orientation with different jaw settings. J Med Phys 2016; 41 (1): 12–20.Google Scholar
22. Arunkumar, T, Supe, SS, Ravikumar, M, Sathiyan, S, Ganesh, M. Electron beam characteristics at extended source-to-surface distances for irregular cut-outs. J Med Phys 2010; 35 (4): 207–214.Google Scholar
23. Scott, AJ, Nahum, AE, Fenwick, JD. Using a Monte Carlo model to predict dosimetric properties of small radiotherapy photon fields. Med Phys 2008; 35 (10): 4671–4684.Google Scholar
24. Das, IJ, Mcgee, KP, Cheng, CW. Electron‐beam characteristics at extended treatment distances. Med Phys 1995; 22 (10): 1667–1674.Google Scholar
25. Low, DA, Parikh, P, Dempsey, JF, Wahab, S, Huq, S. Ionization chamber volume averaging effects in dynamic intensity modulated radiation therapy beams. Med Phys 2003; 30 (7): 1706–1711.Google Scholar
26. Bhangle, JR, Sathiya Narayanan, VK, Deshpande, SA. Dose linearity and uniformity of Siemens ONCOR impression plus linear accelerator designed for step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy. J Med Phys 2007; 32 (3): 103–107.Google Scholar
27. Kang, SK, Cheong, KH, Hwang, T et al. Dosimetric characteristics of linear accelerator photon beams with small monitor unit settings. Med Phys 2008; 35 (11): 5172–5178.Google Scholar
28. Mohr, P, Brieger, S, Stahl, J, Witucki, G. Linearity of the dose monitor system at low monitor units. Strahlenther Onkol 2007; 183 (6): 327–331.Google Scholar
29. Begg, J, George, A, Alnaghy, SJ et al. The Australian MRI-Linac Program: measuring profiles and PDD in a horizontal beam. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2017 Feb (Vol. 777, No. 1, p. 012035). IOP Publishing.Google Scholar
30. Goran K. Svensson [Chairman, TG-24], Norman A. Baily, Robert Loevinger, Robert J. Morton, Robert F. Moyer, James A. Purdy, Robert J. Shalek, Peter Wootton, Kenneth A. Wright [Members TG-24]. Physical aspects of quality assurance in radiation therapy. AAPM Report No. 13. New York: American Institute of Physics, 1994: 1–64.Google Scholar
31. Gert, JM, van Kleffens, HJ, Jochem Mijnheer, B. Quality control of medical linear accelerators. Curr Pract Minimum Requirem Rep 1996; 9: 1–71.Google Scholar
32. Zhang, S, Liengsawangwong, P, Lindsay, P et al. Clinical implementation of electron energy changes of Varian linear accelerators. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2009; 10 (4): 177–187.Google Scholar
33. Sahani, G, Sharma, SD, Dash Sharma, PK et al. Acceptance criteria for flattening filter-free photon beam from standard medical electron linear accelerator: AERB task group recommendations. J Med Phys 2014; 39 (4): 206–211.Google Scholar
34. Shende, R, Gupta, G, Patel, G, Kumar, S. Commissioning of TrueBeamTM medical linear accelerator: quantitative and qualitative dosimetric analysis and comparison of flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter free (FFF) beam. Int J Med Phys Clin Eng Radiat Oncol 2016; 5: 51–69.Google Scholar
35. Butson, MJ, Cheung, T, Peter, K. Weak energy dependence of EBT gafchromic film dose response in the 50 kVp–10 MVp X-ray range. Appl Radiat Isot 2006; 64 (1): 60–62.Google Scholar