Literature DB >> 29178457

Relative dosimetry with an MR-linac: Response of ion chambers, diamond, and diode detectors for off-axis, depth dose, and output factor measurements.

Daniel J O'Brien1, James Dolan2, Stefan Pencea2, Nicholas Schupp2, Gabriel O Sawakuchi1,3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to acquire beam data for an MR-linac, with and without a 1.5 T magnetic field, by using a variety of commercially available detectors to assess their relative response in the magnetic field. The impact of the magnetic field on the measured dose distribution was also assessed.
METHODS: An MR-safe 3D scanning water phantom was used to measure output factors, depth dose curves, and off-axis profiles for various depths and for field sizes between 2 × 2 cm2 and 22 × 22 cm2 for an Elekta MR-linac beam with the orthogonal 1.5 T magnetic field on or off. An on-board MV portal imaging system was used to ensure that the reproducibility of the detector position, both with and without the magnetic field, was within 0.1 mm. The detectors used included ionization chambers with large, medium, and small sensitive volumes; a diamond detector; a shielded diode; and an unshielded diode.
RESULTS: The offset of the effective point of measurement of the ionization chambers was found to be reduced by at least half for each chamber in the direction parallel with the beam. A lateral shift of similar magnitude was also introduced to the chambers' effective point of measurement toward the average direction of the Lorentz force. A similar lateral shift (but in the opposite direction) was also observed for the diamond and diode detectors. The measured lateral shift in the dose distribution was independent of depth and field size for each detector for fields between 2 × 2 cm2 and 10 × 10 cm2 . The shielded diode significantly misrepresented the dose distribution in the lateral direction perpendicular to the magnetic field, making it seem more symmetric. The percentage depth dose was generally found to be lower with the magnetic field than without, but this difference was reduced as field size increased. The depth of maximum dose showed little dependence on field size in the presence of the magnetic field, with values from 1.2 cm to 1.3 cm between the 2 × 2 cm2 and 22 × 22 cm2 fields. Output factors measured in the magnetic field at the center of the beam profile produced a larger spread of values between detectors for fields smaller than 10 × 10 cm2 (with a spread of 2% at 3 × 3 cm2 ). The spread of values was more consistent when the output factors were measured at the point of peak intensity of the lateral dose distribution instead (except for the shielded diode which differed by up to 2% depending on field size).
CONCLUSIONS: The magnetic field of the MR-linac alters the effective point of measurement of ionization chambers, shifting it both downstream and laterally. Shielded diodes produce incorrect and misleading dose profiles. The output factor measured at the point of peak intensity in the lateral dose distribution is more robust than the conventional output factor (measured at central axis). Diodes are not recommended for output factor measurements in the magnetic field.
© 2017 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MRIgRT; diamond; diodes; dosimetry; ion chambers; magnetic field

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29178457      PMCID: PMC5807173          DOI: 10.1002/mp.12699

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


  26 in total

1.  Integrating a MRI scanner with a 6 MV radiotherapy accelerator: dose deposition in a transverse magnetic field.

Authors:  B W Raaymakers; A J E Raaijmakers; A N T J Kotte; D Jette; J J W Lagendijk
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2004-09-07       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Experimental verification of magnetic field dose effects for the MRI-accelerator.

Authors:  A J E Raaijmakers; B W Raaymakers; J J W Lagendijk
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-06-20       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Magnetic-field-induced dose effects in MR-guided radiotherapy systems: dependence on the magnetic field strength.

Authors:  A J E Raaijmakers; B W Raaymakers; J J W Lagendijk
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-01-18       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Integrating a 1.5 T MRI scanner with a 6 MV accelerator: proof of concept.

Authors:  B W Raaymakers; J J W Lagendijk; J Overweg; J G M Kok; A J E Raaijmakers; E M Kerkhof; R W van der Put; I Meijsing; S P M Crijns; F Benedosso; M van Vulpen; C H W de Graaff; J Allen; K J Brown
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Dosimetry for the MRI accelerator: the impact of a magnetic field on the response of a Farmer NE2571 ionization chamber.

Authors:  I Meijsing; B W Raaymakers; A J E Raaijmakers; J G M Kok; L Hogeweg; B Liu; J J W Lagendijk
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-04-23       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  First MR images obtained during megavoltage photon irradiation from a prototype integrated linac-MR system.

Authors:  B G Fallone; B Murray; S Rathee; T Stanescu; S Steciw; S Vidakovic; E Blosser; D Tymofichuk
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Monte Carlo simulation of the dose response of a novel 2D silicon diode array for use in hybrid MRI-LINAC systems.

Authors:  Maegan Gargett; Brad Oborn; Peter Metcalfe; Anatoly Rosenfeld
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Magnetic field influences on the lateral dose response functions of photon-beam detectors: MC study of wall-less water-filled detectors with various densities.

Authors:  Hui Khee Looe; Björn Delfs; Daniela Poppinga; Dietrich Harder; Björn Poppe
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2017-04-11       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Technical Note: Magnetic field effects on Gafchromic-film response in MR-IGRT.

Authors:  Francisco J Reynoso; Austen Curcuru; Olga Green; Sasa Mutic; Indra J Das; Lakshmi Santanam
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Dose response of selected solid state detectors in applied homogeneous transverse and longitudinal magnetic fields.

Authors:  M Reynolds; B G Fallone; S Rathee
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  6 in total

1.  Optical imaging method to quantify spatial dose variation due to the electron return effect in an MR-linac.

Authors:  Jacqueline M Andreozzi; Petr Brůža; Jochen Cammin; Brian W Pogue; David J Gladstone; Olga Green
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-12-25       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Technical Note: Consistency of PTW30013 and FC65-G ion chamber magnetic field correction factors.

Authors:  S J Woodings; B van Asselen; T L van Soest; L A de Prez; J J W Lagendijk; B W Raaymakers; J W H Wolthaus
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Longitudinal assessment of quality assurance measurements in a 1.5T MR-linac: Part I-Linear accelerator.

Authors:  Ergys Subashi; Seng Boh Lim; Xesus Gonzalez; Neelam Tyagi
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-09-10       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Commissioning measurements on an Elekta Unity MR-Linac.

Authors:  Marcus Powers; John Baines; Robert Crane; Chantelle Fisher; Stephen Gibson; Linda Marsh; Bronwyn Oar; Ariadne Shoobridge; Emily Simpson-Page; Marchant Van der Walt; Glenn de Vine
Journal:  Phys Eng Sci Med       Date:  2022-03-02

Review 5.  Medical physics challenges in clinical MR-guided radiotherapy.

Authors:  Christopher Kurz; Giulia Buizza; Guillaume Landry; Florian Kamp; Moritz Rabe; Chiara Paganelli; Guido Baroni; Michael Reiner; Paul J Keall; Cornelis A T van den Berg; Marco Riboldi
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 3.481

6.  Characterization of an inorganic scintillator for small-field dosimetry in MR-guided radiotherapy.

Authors:  Davide Cusumano; Lorenzo Placidi; Emiliano D'Agostino; Luca Boldrini; Sebastiano Menna; Vincenzo Valentini; Marco De Spirito; Luigi Azario
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-08-25       Impact factor: 2.102

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.