Literature DB >> 24007171

Quality assurance of proton beams using a multilayer ionization chamber system.

Sandeep Dhanesar1, Narayan Sahoo, Matthew Kerr, M Brad Taylor, Paige Summers, X Ronald Zhu, Falk Poenisch, Michael Gillin.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The measurement of percentage depth-dose (PDD) distributions for the quality assurance of clinical proton beams is most commonly performed with a computerized water tank dosimetry system with ionization chamber, commonly referred to as water tank. Although the accuracy and reproducibility of this method is well established, it can be time-consuming if a large number of measurements are required. In this work the authors evaluate the linearity, reproducibility, sensitivity to field size, accuracy, and time-savings of another system: the Zebra, a multilayer ionization chamber system.
METHODS: The Zebra, consisting of 180 parallel-plate ionization chambers with 2 mm resolution, was used to measure depth-dose distributions. The measurements were performed for scattered and scanned proton pencil beams of multiple energies delivered by the Hitachi PROBEAT synchrotron-based delivery system. For scattered beams, the Zebra-measured depth-dose distributions were compared with those measured with the water tank. The principal descriptors extracted for comparisons were: range, the depth of the distal 90% dose; spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) length, the region between the proximal 95% and distal 90% dose; and distal-dose fall off (DDF), the region between the distal 80% and 20% dose. For scanned beams, the Zebra-measured ranges were compared with those acquired using a Bragg peak chamber during commissioning.
RESULTS: The Zebra demonstrated better than 1% reproducibility and monitor unit linearity. The response of the Zebra was found to be sensitive to radiation field sizes greater than 12.5 × 12.5 cm; hence, the measurements used to determine accuracy were performed using a field size of 10 × 10 cm. For the scattered proton beams, PDD distributions showed 1.5% agreement within the SOBP, and 3.8% outside. Range values agreed within -0.1 ± 0.4 mm, with a maximum deviation of 1.2 mm. SOBP length values agreed within 0 ± 2 mm, with a maximum deviation of 6 mm. DDF values agreed within 0.3 ± 0.1 mm, with a maximum deviation of 0.6 mm. For the scanned proton pencil beams, Zebra and Bragg peak chamber range values demonstrated agreement of 0.0 ± 0.3 mm with a maximum deviation of 1.3 mm. The setup and measurement time for all Zebra measurements was 3 and 20 times less, respectively, compared to the water tank measurements.
CONCLUSIONS: Our investigation shows that the Zebra can be useful not only for fast but also for accurate measurements of the depth-dose distributions of both scattered and scanned proton beams. The analysis of a large set of measurements shows that the commonly assessed beam quality parameters obtained with the Zebra are within the acceptable variations specified by the manufacturer for our delivery system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24007171     DOI: 10.1118/1.4817481

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  11 in total

1.  Fast range measurement of spot scanning proton beams using a volumetric liquid scintillator detector.

Authors:  CheukKai Hui; Daniel Robertson; Fahed Alsanea; Sam Beddar
Journal:  Biomed Phys Eng Express       Date:  2015-07-30

2.  Semi-automated IGRT QA using a cone-shaped scintillator screen detector for proton pencil beam scanning treatments.

Authors:  Weixing Cai; Hakan Oesten; Benjamin Clasie; Brian Winey; Kyung-Wook Jee
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-04-05       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Proton range verification in homogeneous materials through acoustic measurements.

Authors:  Wei Nie; Kevin C Jones; Scott Petro; Alireza Kassaee; Chandra M Sehgal; Stephen Avery
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Calculations and measurements of the scintillator-to-water stopping power ratio of liquid scintillators for use in proton radiotherapy.

Authors:  W Scott Ingram; Daniel Robertson; Sam Beddar
Journal:  Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 1.455

5.  3D reconstruction of scintillation light emission from proton pencil beams using limited viewing angles-a simulation study.

Authors:  CheukKai Hui; Daniel Robertson; Sam Beddar
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Characterization of a MLIC Detector for QA in Scanned Proton and Carbon Ion Beams.

Authors:  Alessandro Vai; Alfredo Mirandola; Giuseppe Magro; Davide Maestri; Edoardo Mastella; Andrea Mairani; Silvia Molinelli; Stefania Russo; Michele Togno; Sara La Civita; Mario Ciocca
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2019-11-26

7.  Determination of the Range and Spread-Out Bragg Peak Width of Proton Beams Using a Large-Volume Liquid Scintillator.

Authors:  Thomas Henry; Daniel Robertson; François Therriault-Proulx; Sam Beddar
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2017-09-26

8.  Use of a novel two-dimensional ionization chamber array for pencil beam scanning proton therapy beam quality assurance.

Authors:  Liyong Lin; Minglei Kang; Timothy D Solberg; Thierry Mertens; Christian Baeumer; Christopher G Ainsley; James E McDonough
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-05-08       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Evaluation of detectors for acquisition of pristine depth-dose curves in pencil beam scanning.

Authors:  Christian Bäumer; Benjamin Koska; Jamil Lambert; Beate Timmermann; Thierry Mertens; Patrick Takoukam Talla
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-11-08       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Daily QA in proton therapy using a single commercially available detector.

Authors:  Jamil Lambert; Christian Bäumer; Benjamin Koska; Xiaoning Ding
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.