SU‐E‐T‐652: Quantification of Dosimetric Uncertainty of I‐125 COMS Eye Plaque

Purpose: To compare dosimetrically three plan calculation systems (Plato, Varian Brachytherapy, and in‐house‐made Excel) available for I‐125 COMS eye plaque treatment with measurement. Methods: All systems assume homogeneous media and calculations are based on a three‐dimensional Cartesian coordinat...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medical physics (Lancaster) 2015-06, Vol.42 (6Part22), p.3486-3486
Hauptverfasser: Ferreira, C, Ahmad, S, Firestone, B, Johnson, D, Matthiesen, C, De La Fuente Herman, T
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 3486
container_issue 6Part22
container_start_page 3486
container_title Medical physics (Lancaster)
container_volume 42
creator Ferreira, C
Ahmad, S
Firestone, B
Johnson, D
Matthiesen, C
De La Fuente Herman, T
description Purpose: To compare dosimetrically three plan calculation systems (Plato, Varian Brachytherapy, and in‐house‐made Excel) available for I‐125 COMS eye plaque treatment with measurement. Methods: All systems assume homogeneous media and calculations are based on a three‐dimensional Cartesian coordinates, Plato and Brachytherapy Planning are based on AAPM TG‐43 and the in‐house Excel program only on inverse square corrections. Doses at specific depths were measured with EBT3 Gafchromic film from a fully loaded and a partially loaded 16 mm plaque (13 and 8 seeds respectively, I‐125, model 6711 GE, Oncura). Measurements took place in a water tank, utilizing solid water blocks and a 3D‐printed plaque holder. Taking advantage that gafchromic film has low energy dependence, a dose step wedge was delivered with 6 MV photon beam from a Varian 2100 EX linac for calibration. The gray‐scale to dose in cGy was obtained with an Epson Expression 10000 XL scanner in the green channel. Treatment plans were generated for doses of 2200 cGy to a depth of 7 mm, and measurements were taken on a sagittal plane. Results: The calculated dose at the prescription point was 2242, 2344, and 2211 cGy with Excel, Brachyvision and Plato respectively for a fully loaded plaque, for the partially loaded plaque the doses were 2266, 2477, and 2193 cGy respectively. At 5 mm depth the doses for Brachyvision and Plato were comparable (3399 and 3267 cGy respectively), however, the measured dose in film was 3180 cGy which was lower by as much as 6.4% in the fully loaded plaque and 7.6% in the partially loaded plaque. Conclusion: Careful methodology and calibration are essential when measuring doses at specific depth due to the sensitivity and rapid dose fall off of I‐125.
doi_str_mv 10.1118/1.4925015
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>wiley_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_22538161</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>MP5015</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1005-8a51c1eac7870111bccd2346a5b04dc843a7d77e8058f7cccbb6599eeac778753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kLFOwzAQhi0EEqUw8AaWmBhSzo6dOGyoFKjUqkVtZsu5OsKoTSB2VWXjEXhGnoSUdmX4dcN93-n0E3LNYMAYU3dsIDIugckT0uMijSPBITslPYBMRFyAPCcX3r8DQBJL6JF8kf98fY-6LLskkt_T162pgisdmuDqitYlfay929jQOKR5hbYJxlWh3W_GncS4pMPZdEFHraXztfnc2ktyVpq1t1fH2Sf502g5fIkms-fx8GESIQOQkTKSIbMGU5VC936BuOKxSIwsQKxQidikqzS1CqQqU0QsikRmmd0bnSLjPrk53K19cNqjCxbfsK4qi0FzLmPFEtZRtwcKm9r7xpb6o3Eb07Sagd63ppk-ttax0YHdubVt_wf1dP7H_wJVFG0r</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>SU‐E‐T‐652: Quantification of Dosimetric Uncertainty of I‐125 COMS Eye Plaque</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ferreira, C ; Ahmad, S ; Firestone, B ; Johnson, D ; Matthiesen, C ; De La Fuente Herman, T</creator><creatorcontrib>Ferreira, C ; Ahmad, S ; Firestone, B ; Johnson, D ; Matthiesen, C ; De La Fuente Herman, T</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose: To compare dosimetrically three plan calculation systems (Plato, Varian Brachytherapy, and in‐house‐made Excel) available for I‐125 COMS eye plaque treatment with measurement. Methods: All systems assume homogeneous media and calculations are based on a three‐dimensional Cartesian coordinates, Plato and Brachytherapy Planning are based on AAPM TG‐43 and the in‐house Excel program only on inverse square corrections. Doses at specific depths were measured with EBT3 Gafchromic film from a fully loaded and a partially loaded 16 mm plaque (13 and 8 seeds respectively, I‐125, model 6711 GE, Oncura). Measurements took place in a water tank, utilizing solid water blocks and a 3D‐printed plaque holder. Taking advantage that gafchromic film has low energy dependence, a dose step wedge was delivered with 6 MV photon beam from a Varian 2100 EX linac for calibration. The gray‐scale to dose in cGy was obtained with an Epson Expression 10000 XL scanner in the green channel. Treatment plans were generated for doses of 2200 cGy to a depth of 7 mm, and measurements were taken on a sagittal plane. Results: The calculated dose at the prescription point was 2242, 2344, and 2211 cGy with Excel, Brachyvision and Plato respectively for a fully loaded plaque, for the partially loaded plaque the doses were 2266, 2477, and 2193 cGy respectively. At 5 mm depth the doses for Brachyvision and Plato were comparable (3399 and 3267 cGy respectively), however, the measured dose in film was 3180 cGy which was lower by as much as 6.4% in the fully loaded plaque and 7.6% in the partially loaded plaque. Conclusion: Careful methodology and calibration are essential when measuring doses at specific depth due to the sensitivity and rapid dose fall off of I‐125.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0094-2405</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2473-4209</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1118/1.4925015</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Association of Physicists in Medicine</publisher><subject>BRACHYTHERAPY ; Calibration ; CARTESIAN COORDINATES ; DEPTH DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS ; Dosimetry ; Error analysis ; FILM DOSIMETRY ; Germanium ; Image scanners ; IODINE 125 ; LINEAR ACCELERATORS ; PHOTON BEAMS ; Photons ; RADIATION DOSES ; RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY ; RADIATION SOURCE IMPLANTS ; RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE</subject><ispartof>Medical physics (Lancaster), 2015-06, Vol.42 (6Part22), p.3486-3486</ispartof><rights>2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1118%2F1.4925015$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,1417,27924,27925,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/22538161$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ferreira, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahmad, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Firestone, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matthiesen, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De La Fuente Herman, T</creatorcontrib><title>SU‐E‐T‐652: Quantification of Dosimetric Uncertainty of I‐125 COMS Eye Plaque</title><title>Medical physics (Lancaster)</title><description>Purpose: To compare dosimetrically three plan calculation systems (Plato, Varian Brachytherapy, and in‐house‐made Excel) available for I‐125 COMS eye plaque treatment with measurement. Methods: All systems assume homogeneous media and calculations are based on a three‐dimensional Cartesian coordinates, Plato and Brachytherapy Planning are based on AAPM TG‐43 and the in‐house Excel program only on inverse square corrections. Doses at specific depths were measured with EBT3 Gafchromic film from a fully loaded and a partially loaded 16 mm plaque (13 and 8 seeds respectively, I‐125, model 6711 GE, Oncura). Measurements took place in a water tank, utilizing solid water blocks and a 3D‐printed plaque holder. Taking advantage that gafchromic film has low energy dependence, a dose step wedge was delivered with 6 MV photon beam from a Varian 2100 EX linac for calibration. The gray‐scale to dose in cGy was obtained with an Epson Expression 10000 XL scanner in the green channel. Treatment plans were generated for doses of 2200 cGy to a depth of 7 mm, and measurements were taken on a sagittal plane. Results: The calculated dose at the prescription point was 2242, 2344, and 2211 cGy with Excel, Brachyvision and Plato respectively for a fully loaded plaque, for the partially loaded plaque the doses were 2266, 2477, and 2193 cGy respectively. At 5 mm depth the doses for Brachyvision and Plato were comparable (3399 and 3267 cGy respectively), however, the measured dose in film was 3180 cGy which was lower by as much as 6.4% in the fully loaded plaque and 7.6% in the partially loaded plaque. Conclusion: Careful methodology and calibration are essential when measuring doses at specific depth due to the sensitivity and rapid dose fall off of I‐125.</description><subject>BRACHYTHERAPY</subject><subject>Calibration</subject><subject>CARTESIAN COORDINATES</subject><subject>DEPTH DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS</subject><subject>Dosimetry</subject><subject>Error analysis</subject><subject>FILM DOSIMETRY</subject><subject>Germanium</subject><subject>Image scanners</subject><subject>IODINE 125</subject><subject>LINEAR ACCELERATORS</subject><subject>PHOTON BEAMS</subject><subject>Photons</subject><subject>RADIATION DOSES</subject><subject>RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY</subject><subject>RADIATION SOURCE IMPLANTS</subject><subject>RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE</subject><issn>0094-2405</issn><issn>2473-4209</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kLFOwzAQhi0EEqUw8AaWmBhSzo6dOGyoFKjUqkVtZsu5OsKoTSB2VWXjEXhGnoSUdmX4dcN93-n0E3LNYMAYU3dsIDIugckT0uMijSPBITslPYBMRFyAPCcX3r8DQBJL6JF8kf98fY-6LLskkt_T162pgisdmuDqitYlfay929jQOKR5hbYJxlWh3W_GncS4pMPZdEFHraXztfnc2ktyVpq1t1fH2Sf502g5fIkms-fx8GESIQOQkTKSIbMGU5VC936BuOKxSIwsQKxQidikqzS1CqQqU0QsikRmmd0bnSLjPrk53K19cNqjCxbfsK4qi0FzLmPFEtZRtwcKm9r7xpb6o3Eb07Sagd63ppk-ttax0YHdubVt_wf1dP7H_wJVFG0r</recordid><startdate>201506</startdate><enddate>201506</enddate><creator>Ferreira, C</creator><creator>Ahmad, S</creator><creator>Firestone, B</creator><creator>Johnson, D</creator><creator>Matthiesen, C</creator><creator>De La Fuente Herman, T</creator><general>American Association of Physicists in Medicine</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201506</creationdate><title>SU‐E‐T‐652: Quantification of Dosimetric Uncertainty of I‐125 COMS Eye Plaque</title><author>Ferreira, C ; Ahmad, S ; Firestone, B ; Johnson, D ; Matthiesen, C ; De La Fuente Herman, T</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1005-8a51c1eac7870111bccd2346a5b04dc843a7d77e8058f7cccbb6599eeac778753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>BRACHYTHERAPY</topic><topic>Calibration</topic><topic>CARTESIAN COORDINATES</topic><topic>DEPTH DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS</topic><topic>Dosimetry</topic><topic>Error analysis</topic><topic>FILM DOSIMETRY</topic><topic>Germanium</topic><topic>Image scanners</topic><topic>IODINE 125</topic><topic>LINEAR ACCELERATORS</topic><topic>PHOTON BEAMS</topic><topic>Photons</topic><topic>RADIATION DOSES</topic><topic>RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY</topic><topic>RADIATION SOURCE IMPLANTS</topic><topic>RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ferreira, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahmad, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Firestone, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matthiesen, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De La Fuente Herman, T</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>Medical physics (Lancaster)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ferreira, C</au><au>Ahmad, S</au><au>Firestone, B</au><au>Johnson, D</au><au>Matthiesen, C</au><au>De La Fuente Herman, T</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>SU‐E‐T‐652: Quantification of Dosimetric Uncertainty of I‐125 COMS Eye Plaque</atitle><jtitle>Medical physics (Lancaster)</jtitle><date>2015-06</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>6Part22</issue><spage>3486</spage><epage>3486</epage><pages>3486-3486</pages><issn>0094-2405</issn><eissn>2473-4209</eissn><abstract>Purpose: To compare dosimetrically three plan calculation systems (Plato, Varian Brachytherapy, and in‐house‐made Excel) available for I‐125 COMS eye plaque treatment with measurement. Methods: All systems assume homogeneous media and calculations are based on a three‐dimensional Cartesian coordinates, Plato and Brachytherapy Planning are based on AAPM TG‐43 and the in‐house Excel program only on inverse square corrections. Doses at specific depths were measured with EBT3 Gafchromic film from a fully loaded and a partially loaded 16 mm plaque (13 and 8 seeds respectively, I‐125, model 6711 GE, Oncura). Measurements took place in a water tank, utilizing solid water blocks and a 3D‐printed plaque holder. Taking advantage that gafchromic film has low energy dependence, a dose step wedge was delivered with 6 MV photon beam from a Varian 2100 EX linac for calibration. The gray‐scale to dose in cGy was obtained with an Epson Expression 10000 XL scanner in the green channel. Treatment plans were generated for doses of 2200 cGy to a depth of 7 mm, and measurements were taken on a sagittal plane. Results: The calculated dose at the prescription point was 2242, 2344, and 2211 cGy with Excel, Brachyvision and Plato respectively for a fully loaded plaque, for the partially loaded plaque the doses were 2266, 2477, and 2193 cGy respectively. At 5 mm depth the doses for Brachyvision and Plato were comparable (3399 and 3267 cGy respectively), however, the measured dose in film was 3180 cGy which was lower by as much as 6.4% in the fully loaded plaque and 7.6% in the partially loaded plaque. Conclusion: Careful methodology and calibration are essential when measuring doses at specific depth due to the sensitivity and rapid dose fall off of I‐125.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Association of Physicists in Medicine</pub><doi>10.1118/1.4925015</doi><tpages>1</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0094-2405
ispartof Medical physics (Lancaster), 2015-06, Vol.42 (6Part22), p.3486-3486
issn 0094-2405
2473-4209
language eng
recordid cdi_osti_scitechconnect_22538161
source Wiley Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects BRACHYTHERAPY
Calibration
CARTESIAN COORDINATES
DEPTH DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS
Dosimetry
Error analysis
FILM DOSIMETRY
Germanium
Image scanners
IODINE 125
LINEAR ACCELERATORS
PHOTON BEAMS
Photons
RADIATION DOSES
RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY
RADIATION SOURCE IMPLANTS
RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE
title SU‐E‐T‐652: Quantification of Dosimetric Uncertainty of I‐125 COMS Eye Plaque
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T05%3A43%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wiley_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=SU%E2%80%90E%E2%80%90T%E2%80%90652:%20Quantification%20of%20Dosimetric%20Uncertainty%20of%20I%E2%80%90125%20COMS%20Eye%20Plaque&rft.jtitle=Medical%20physics%20(Lancaster)&rft.au=Ferreira,%20C&rft.date=2015-06&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=6Part22&rft.spage=3486&rft.epage=3486&rft.pages=3486-3486&rft.issn=0094-2405&rft.eissn=2473-4209&rft_id=info:doi/10.1118/1.4925015&rft_dat=%3Cwiley_osti_%3EMP5015%3C/wiley_osti_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true