Hostname: page-component-6b989bf9dc-mbg9n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-14T08:30:53.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Practical lookup tables for ensuring target coverage in a clinical setup for skin cancer electron therapy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2017

Yongsook C. Lee  and
Yongbok Kim
Yongsook C. Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
Yongbok Kim*
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
*
Correspondence to: Yongbok Kim, Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Arizona, 1501N Campbell Avenue, P.O. Box 245081, Tucson, AZ 85724-5081, USA. Tel: +1 520 694 7427. Fax: +1 520 694 0228. E-mail: yongbokkim@email.arizona.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aim

To create practical lookup tables containing percent depth dose (PDD) and profile parameters of electron beams and to demonstrate clinical application of the lookup tables to skin cancer treatment to ensure target coverage in a clinical setup.

Materials and methods

For 6 and 9 MeV electron energies, PDDs and profiles at clinically relevant depths [i.e., R95 (distal depth of 95% maximum dose), R90, R85 and R80] were measured in water at 100 cm source-to-surface distance for an 10×10 cm2 open field and circular cutouts with diameters of 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 cm. Then PDD parameters along with profile parameters such as width of isodose lines and penumbra at the clinically relevant depths were determined. Output factors for the cutouts were measured at dmax in water and solid water.

Results

With PDD and profile parameters, dosimetry lookup tables were generated. Based upon the lookup tables, target coverage at prescribed depths was retrospectively reviewed for three skin cancer cases. The lookup tables suggested larger cutouts for adequate target coverage.

Findings

Dosimetry lookup tables for electron beam therapy should include profile parameters at clinically relevant depths and be provided to clinicians to ensure target coverage in a clinical setup.

Keywords

clinical setupelectron beam therapypractical lookup tablesskin cancertarget coverage
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , June 2018 , pp. 205 - 211
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Das, I, Cheng, C W, Healey, G A. Optimum field size and choice of isodose lines in electron beam treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 31: 157–163.Google Scholar
2. Gerbi, B J, Antolak, J A, Deibel, F C et al. Recommendations for clinical electron beam dosimetry: supplement to the recommendations of Task Group 25. Med Phys 2009; 36: 3239–3279.Google Scholar
3. Ding, G X, Duggan, D M, Coffey, C W, Shokrani, P, Cygler, J E. First macro Monte Carlo based commercial dose calculation module for electron beam treatment planning – new issues for clinical consideration. Phys Med Biol 2006; 51: 2781–2799.Google Scholar
4. Popple, R A, Weinber, R, Antolak, J A et al. Comprehensive evaluation of a commercial macro Monte Carlo electron dose calculation implementation using a standard verification data set. Med Phys 2006; 33: 1540–1551.Google Scholar
5. Xu, Z, Walsh, S E, Telivala, T P, Meek, A G, Yang, G. Evaluation of the eclipse electron Monte Carlo dose calculation for small fields. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2009; 10: 2834.Google Scholar
6. Khan, F M, Doppke, K P, Hogstrom, K R et al. Clinical electron-beam dosimetry: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 25. Med Phys 1991; 18: 73–109.Google Scholar
7. Demir, B, Okutan, M, Cakir, A, Gokel, E, Bilge, H. The effect of oblique electron beams to the surface dose under the bolus. Med Dosim 2009; 34: 311–316.Google Scholar
8. Gunhan, B, Kemikler, G, Koca, A. Determination of surface dose and the effect of bolus to surface dose in electron beams. Med Dosim 2003; 28: 193–198.Google Scholar
9. Arunkumar, T, Supe, S S, Ravikumar, M, Sathiyan, S, Ganesh, M. Electron beam characteristics at extended source-to-surface distances for irregular cut-outs. J Med Phys 2010; 35: 207–214.Google Scholar
10. Washington, C M, Leaver, D T. Principles and Practice of Radiation Therapy, 4th edition. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby, 2015; 515.Google Scholar
11. Podgorsak, E B. Review of Radiation Oncology Physics: A Handbook for Teachers and Students. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency, 2005; 287.Google Scholar
12. Zhang, S, Liengsawangwong, P, Lindsay, P et al. Clinical implementation of electron energy changes of Varian linear accelerators. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2009; 10: 2978.Google Scholar
13. Cygler, J, Li, X A, Ding, G X, Lawrence, E. Practical approach to electron beam dosimetry at extended SSD. Phys Med Biol 1997; 42: 1505–1514.Google Scholar
14. Khan, F M, Higgins, P D, Gerbi, B J, Deibel, F C, Sethi, A, Mihailidis, D N. Calculation of depth dose and dose per monitor unit for irregularly shaped electron fields. Phys Med Biol 1998; 43: 2741–2754.Google Scholar