A comparison between direct TMR measurements and TMRs calculated from PDDs using BJR Supplement 25 data for flattened and unflattened photon beams

This study assessed the validity of the conversion from percentage depth dose (PDD) to tissue maximum ratio (TMR) using BJR Supplement 25 data for flattened and flattening filter free (FFF) beams. PDD and TMR scans for a variety of field sizes were measured in water using a Sun Nuclear Corporation 3D SCANNER™ on a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator in 6 MV, 10 MV and 6 MV FFF beams. The BJR Supplement 25 data was used to convert the measured PDDs to TMRs and these were compared with the directly measured TMR data. The TMR plots calculated from PDD were within 1 % for the 10 MV and 6 MV flattened beams, for field sizes 3 cm × 3 cm to 40 cm × 40 cm inclusive, at depths measured beyond the depth of maximum dose. The disagreement between the measured and calculated TMR plots for the 6 MV FFF beam increased with depth and field size to a maximum of 1.7 % for a 40 cm × 40 cm field. The results found in this study indicate that the BJR Supplement 25 data should not be used for field sizes larger than 20 cm × 20 cm at depths greater than 15 cm for the 6 MV FFF beam. It is advised that PDD to TMR conversion for FFF beams should be done with phantom scatter ratios appropriate to FFF beams, or the TMR should be directly measured if required.

[1]  Tommy Knöös,et al.  Combining tissue-phantom ratios to provide a beam-quality specifier for flattening filter free photon beams. , 2014, Medical physics.

[2]  R. van der Laarse,et al.  NCS Report 12: Determination and use of scatter correction factors of megavoltage photon beams , 1998 .

[3]  B. Yi,et al.  An analytical formalism to calculate phantom scatter factors for flattening filter free (FFF) mode photon beams , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[4]  J. Purdy Relationship between tissue-phantom ratio and percentage depth dose. , 1977, Medical Physics (Lancaster).

[5]  Tommy Knöös,et al.  Dosimetric characteristics of 6 and 10MV unflattened photon beams. , 2009, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[6]  P. Andreo,et al.  Absorbed Dose Determination in External Beam Radiotherapy: An International Code of Practice for Dosimetry based on Standards of Absorbed Dose to Water , 2001 .

[7]  T. Zhu,et al.  Accelerator beam data commissioning equipment and procedures: report of the TG-106 of the Therapy Physics Committee of the AAPM. , 2008, Medical physics.

[8]  D. Mercier,et al.  The delta envelope: a technique for dose distribution comparison. , 2009, Medical physics.

[9]  Timothy C Zhu,et al.  Accelerator beam data commissioning equipment and procedures: Report of the TG-106 of the Therapy Physics Committee of the AAPM. , 2008, Medical physics.

[10]  Cristina Garibaldi,et al.  MONITOR UNIT CALCULATION FOR HIGH ENERGY PHOTON BEAMS - PRACTICAL EXAMPLES , 1997 .

[11]  Radhe Mohan,et al.  Monte Carlo study of photon fields from a flattening filter-free clinical accelerator. , 2006, Medical physics.

[12]  Murray Boles,et al.  Central axis depth dose data for use in radiotherapy. A survey of depth doses and related data measured in water or equivalent media. , 1972, British journal of radiology. Supplement.

[13]  M. Rosenbloom Central Axis Depth Dose Data for Use in Radiotherapy, in: British Journal of Radiology. British Institute of Radiology, New York (1983) , 1985 .

[14]  J. Antolak The Physics of Radiation Therapy , 2015 .

[15]  Robert F. Dacey,et al.  A comparison of phantom scatter from flattened and flattening filter free high-energy photon beams. , 2015, Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.

[16]  M. Guerrero,et al.  SU‐E‐T‐38: Are the Calculation Methods for Determining Tissue‐Maximum Ratios from Percent Depth Dose Valid for Flattening Filter‐Free Photon Beams? , 2012 .