A Chalkley1, G Heyes. 1. Radiotherapy Physics and Cancer Centre, Hall-Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a new commercial PTW-60019 microDiamond (PTW, Freiburg, Germany) synthetic single-crystal diamond detector for relative dosimetry measurements on a clinical CyberKnife™ VSI (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA) system. METHODS: Relative output factors (ROFs) were measured for collimator diameters from 5 to 60 mm, and compared with diode [PTW-60017, PTW-60018 and IBA Dosimetry (Schwarzenbruck, Germany) SFD] and ionization chamber (PTW-31014 PinPoint and PTW-31010 Semiflex) measurements. Beam profiles were measured at a range of depths, and collimator sizes, with the detector stem oriented both parallel and perpendicular to the central axis (CAX). Percentage depth-dose (PDD) curves were obtained for the 60-mm collimator and compared with natural Diamond Detector (PTW-60003) and ionization chamber curves to evaluate energy dependence. RESULTS: Penumbral broadening was noted on profile measurements made with the microDiamond oriented with the stem parallel to the CAX, in comparison with diodes. Oriented perpendicular to the CAX, the profile penumbra was sharper, but stem effects could not be ruled out. The PDD measurements were within 0.5% of ionization chamber measurements, indicating insignificant dose-rate dependence. The ROF for the microDiamond fell between diode and ionization chamber results. Published Monte Carlo-derived CyberKnife-specific factors were applied to the PTW-60017, PTW-60018 and PTW-31014 ROFs, and the microDiamond factors agreed within 2.0% of the mean of these. CONCLUSION: Over a range of small field relative dosimetry measurements, the microDiamond detector shows excellent spatial resolution, dose-rate independence and water equivalence. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The microDiamond is a suitable tool for commissioning stereotactic systems.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a new commercial PTW-60019 microDiamond (PTW, Freiburg, Germany) synthetic single-crystal diamond detector for relative dosimetry measurements on a clinical CyberKnife™ VSI (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA) system. METHODS: Relative output factors (ROFs) were measured for collimator diameters from 5 to 60 mm, and compared with diode [PTW-60017, PTW-60018 and IBA Dosimetry (Schwarzenbruck, Germany) SFD] and ionization chamber (PTW-31014 PinPoint and PTW-31010 Semiflex) measurements. Beam profiles were measured at a range of depths, and collimator sizes, with the detector stem oriented both parallel and perpendicular to the central axis (CAX). Percentage depth-dose (PDD) curves were obtained for the 60-mm collimator and compared with natural Diamond Detector (PTW-60003) and ionization chamber curves to evaluate energy dependence. RESULTS: Penumbral broadening was noted on profile measurements made with the microDiamond oriented with the stem parallel to the CAX, in comparison with diodes. Oriented perpendicular to the CAX, the profile penumbra was sharper, but stem effects could not be ruled out. The PDD measurements were within 0.5% of ionization chamber measurements, indicating insignificant dose-rate dependence. The ROF for the microDiamond fell between diode and ionization chamber results. Published Monte Carlo-derived CyberKnife-specific factors were applied to the PTW-60017, PTW-60018 and PTW-31014 ROFs, and the microDiamond factors agreed within 2.0% of the mean of these. CONCLUSION: Over a range of small field relative dosimetry measurements, the microDiamond detector shows excellent spatial resolution, dose-rate independence and water equivalence. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The microDiamond is a suitable tool for commissioning stereotactic systems.
Authors: E Pantelis; A Moutsatsos; K Zourari; W Kilby; C Antypas; P Papagiannis; P Karaiskos; E Georgiou; L Sakelliou Journal: Med Phys Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: R Alfonso; P Andreo; R Capote; M Saiful Huq; W Kilby; P Kjäll; T R Mackie; H Palmans; K Rosser; J Seuntjens; W Ullrich; S Vatnitsky Journal: Med Phys Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Margherita Zani; Marta Bucciolini; Marta Casati; Cinzia Talamonti; Marco Marinelli; Giuseppe Prestopino; Alessia Tonnetti; Gianluca Verona-Rinati Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: F Marsolat; D Tromson; N Tranchant; M Pomorski; M Le Roy; M Donois; F Moignau; A Ostrowsky; L De Carlan; C Bassinet; C Huet; S Derreumaux; M Chea; K Cristina; G Boisserie; P Bergonzo Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2013-10-11 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: E Pantelis; A Moutsatsos; K Zourari; L Petrokokkinos; L Sakelliou; W Kilby; C Antypas; P Papagiannis; P Karaiskos; E Georgiou; I Seimenis Journal: Med Phys Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: G G Echner; W Kilby; M Lee; E Earnst; S Sayeh; A Schlaefer; B Rhein; J R Dooley; C Lang; O Blanck; E Lessard; C R Maurer; W Schlegel Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2009-08-18 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: I Ciancaglioni; Marco Marinelli; E Milani; G Prestopino; C Verona; G Verona-Rinati; R Consorti; A Petrucci; F De Notaristefani Journal: Med Phys Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Hui Khee Looe; Daniela Poppinga; Rafael Kranzer; Isabel Büsing; Tuba Tekin; Ann-Britt Ulrichs; Björn Delfs; Dennis Vogt; Jan Würfel; Björn Poppe Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Owen J Brace; Sultan F Alhujaili; Jason R Paino; Duncan J Butler; Dean Wilkinson; Brad M Oborn; Anatoly B Rosenfeld; Michael L F Lerch; Marco Petasecca; Jeremy A Davis Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 2.102