| Literature DB >> 31574356 |
Alexandre Ocadiz1, Jayde Livingstone2, Mattia Donzelli3, Stefan Bartzsch4, Christian Nemoz5, Samy Kefs6, Paolo Pellicioli7, Jean-Yves Giraud8, Jacques Balosso8, Michael Krisch5, Elke Bräuer-Krisch5, Raphaël Serduc9, Jean-François Adam8.
Abstract
Microbeam radiation therapy (MRT) uses synchrotron arrays of X-ray microbeams to take advantage of the spatial fractionation effect for normal tissue sparing. In this study, radiochromic film dosimetry was performed for a treatment where MRT is introduced as a dose boost in a hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) scheme. The isocenter dose was measured using an ionization chamber and two dimensional dose distributions were determined using radiochromic films. To compare the measured dose distribution to the MRT treatment plan, peak and valley were displayed in separate dosemaps. The measured and computed isocenter doses were compared and a two-dimensional 2%/2 mm normalized γ-index analysis with a 90% passing rate criterion was computed. For SRT, a difference of 2.6% was observed in the dose at the isocenter from the treatment plan and film measurement, with a passing rate of 96% for the γ-index analysis. For MRT, peak and valley doses differences of 25.6% and 8.2% were observed, respectively but passing rates of 96% and 90% respectively were obtained from the normalized γ-index maps. The differences in isocenter doses measured in MRT should be further investigated. We present the methodology of patient specific quality assurance (QA) for studying MRT dose distributions and discuss ideas to improve absolute dosimetry. This patient specific QA will be used for large animal trials quality assurance where MRT will be administered as a dose boost in conventional SRT. The observed remaining discrepancies should be studied against approximations in the TPS phantom materials, beams characteristics or film read-out procedures.Entities:
Keywords: Film dosimetry; Microbeam radiation therapy; Quality assurance
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31574356 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.09.071
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Phys Med ISSN: 1120-1797 Impact factor: 2.685