Investigation of Surface Dose Accuracy of Two Dose Calculation Algorithms Using Thermoluminescent Dosimeters

Abstract

Accurate estimation of the surface dose in radiotherapy is very important in reducing skin reactions. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of two different treatment planning algorithms in calculating the surface dose in a specially designed phantom using thermoluminescent dosimetry (TLD). In this study, a special phantom was designed for surface dose measurement. The phantom surface consisted of an adhesive bolus for the adhesion of TLDs. 121 TLDs were placed 1 cm apart on the bolus surface. In TPS, irradiation plans were created at different fields and source-surface distances (SSD). Dose calculations were made with Anisotropic Algorithm algorithms (AAA) and Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) algorithms for all plans. The mean dose was measured for each point. For each of the 4x4, 6x6, 8x8, 10x10, and 12x12 cm2 domains, the TLDs within the domain were approximately 1 cm inward from the edge. To measure the effect of SSD on surface dose, the isocenter point was located at depths of 0 cm, 2.5 cm and 5.0 cm, respectively. The surface dose at each depth was measured with TLDs. The doses calculated by the AAA and PBC algorithms were compared with the doses measured by TLDs. The AAA algorithm overestimates the surface dose by 4% compared to the TLD measurement for the 4x4 field. The surface dose calculation of the PBC algorithm was found to be high when compared to TLD measurements for all SSDs and fields. There was a significant difference between the PBC algorithm dose calculation and TLD measurements in all fields and SSDs (p<0.001). It was observed that the AAA algorithm performed better in calculating the surface dose than the PBC algorithm. AAA and PBC algorithm users are advised to be more careful about surface dose calculation.

Keywords

• Surface Dose
• Thermoluminescent Dosimetry
• Algorithm

References

1. Aydemir, G. A., Akay, D., Tataroğlu, A., & Ocak, S. B. (2023). Electrical and optical properties of p-Si based structures with lead oxide interfaces. Materials Science and Engineering: B, 294, 116552. doi:10.1016/j.mseb.2023.116552
2. Cao, Y., Yang, X., Yang, Z., Qiu, X., Lv, Z., Lei, M., Liu, G., Zhang, Z., & Hu, Y. (2017). Superficial dose evaluation of four dose calculation algorithms. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 137, 23-28. doi:10.1016/j.radphyschem.2016.02.032
3. Chakarova, R., Gustafsson, M., Back, A., Drugge, N., Palm, Å., Lindberg, A., & Berglund, M. (2012). Superficial dose distribution in breast for tangential radiation treatment, Monte Carlo evaluation of Eclipse algorithms in case of phantom and patient geometries. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 102(1), 102-107. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2011.06.021
4. Córdoba, E. E., Lacunza, E., & Güerci, A. M. (2021). Clinical factors affecting the determination of radiotherapy-induced skin toxicity in breast cancer. Radiation Oncology Journal, 39(4), 315-323. doi:10.3857/roj.2020.00395
5. Danckaert, W., Ost, P., & De Wagter, C. (2023). Accuracy and reliability of a commercial treatment planning system in nontarget regions in modern prostate radiotherapy. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 24(8). doi:10.1002/acm2.14003
6. Guardiola, C., Bachiller‐Perea, D., Kole, E. M. M., Fleta, C., Quirion, D., De Marzi, L., & Gómez, F. (2022). First experimental measurements of 2D microdosimetry maps in proton therapy. Medical Physics, 50(1), 570-581. doi:10.1002/mp.15945
7. Lejosne, S., Allison, H. J., Blum, L. W., Drozdov, A. Y., Hartinger, M. D., Hudson, M. K., Jaynes, A. N., Ozeke, L., Roussos, E., & Zhao, H. (2022). Differentiating Between the Leading Processes for Electron Radiation Belt Acceleration. Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 9. doi:10.3389/fspas.2022.896245
8. Mahur, M., Singh, M., Semwal, M., & Gurjar, O. (2022). Evaluation of surface dose calculations using monaco treatment planning system in an indigenously developed head and neck phantom. Medical Journal of Dr. D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth. doi:10.4103/mjdrdypu.mjdrdypu_827_21

9. Matsumoto, T., Toya, R., Shimohigashi, Y., Watakabe, T., Matsuyama, T., Saito, T., Fukugawa, Y., Kai, Y., & Oya, N. (2021). Plan Quality Comparisons Between 3D-CRT, IMRT, and VMAT Based on 4D-CT for Gastric MALT Lymphoma. Anticancer Research, 41(8), 3941-3947. doi:10.21873/anticanres.15190
10. Mowery, M. L., & Singh, V. (2023). X-ray Production Technical Evaluation. StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL).
11. Ng, K.-H., Ung, N. M., & Hill, R. (2022). Problems and Solutions in Medical Physics: Radiotherapy Physics. CRC Press.
12. Oinam, A. S., & Singh, L. (2010). Verification of IMRT dose calculations using AAA and PBC algorithms in dose buildup regions. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 11(4), 105-121. doi:10.1120/jacmp.v11i4.3351
13. Panettieri, V., Barsoum, P., Westermark, M., Brualla, L., & Lax, I. (2009). AAA and PBC calculation accuracy in the surface build-up region in tangential beam treatments. Phantom and breast case study with the Monte Carlo code PENELOPE. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 93(1), 94-101. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2009.05.010
14. Ramseier, J. Y., Ferreira, M. N., & Leventhal, J. S. (2020). Dermatologic toxicities associated with radiation therapy in women with breast cancer. International Journal of Women's Dermatology, 6(5), 349-356. doi:10.1016/j.ijwd.2020.07.015
15. Ravikumar, M., & Ravichandran, R. (2000). Dose measurements in the build-up region for the photon beams from Clinac-1800 dual energy medical linear accelerator. Strahlentherapie und Onkologie, 176(5), 223-228. doi:10.1007/s000660050004
16. Simoni, N., Micera, R., Paiella, S., Guariglia, S., Zivelonghi, E., Malleo, G., Rossi, G., Addari, L., Giuliani, T., Pollini, T., Cavedon, C., Salvia, R., Milella, M., Bassi, C., & Mazzarotto, R. (2021). Hypofractionated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy With Simultaneous Integrated Boost and Simultaneous Integrated Protection in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Clinical Oncology, 33(1), e31-e38. doi:10.1016/j.clon.2020.06.019
17. Tsapaki, V., & Bayford, R. (2015). Medical Physics: Forming and testing solutions to clinical problems. Physica Medica, 31(7), 738-740. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2015.05.017
18. Wang, K., & Tepper, J. E. (2021). Radiation therapy‐associated toxicity: Etiology, management, and prevention. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 71(5), 437-454. doi:10.3322/caac.21689
19. Wong, S., Back, M., Tan, P. W., Lee, K. M., Baggarley, S., & Lu, J. J. (2012). Can radiation therapy treatment planning system accurately predict surface doses in postmastectomy radiation therapy patients? Medical Dosimetry, 37(2), 163-169. doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2011.06.006