Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the measurement of scaling factors in the RW3 plastic phantom during high energy electron beam dosimetry

  • Scientific Paper
  • Published:
Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ionometric electron dosimetry inside water-equivalent plastic phantoms demands special considerations including determination of depth scaling and fluence scaling factors (cpl and hpl) to shift from in-phantom measurements to those relevant to water. This study evaluates these scaling factors for RW3 slab phantom and also introduces a new coefficient, k(RW3), for direct conversion from RW3 measurements to water without involving scaling factors. The RW3 solid phantom developed by the PTW Company was used and the corresponding scaling factors including cpl, hpl, and k(RW3) were measured for conventional electron energies of 4, 6, 9, 12, and 16 MeV. Separate measurements were performed in water and the RW3 slab phantom using the Advanced Markus chamber. The validity of the reported scaling factors was confirmed by comparing the direct and indirect percentage depth dose (PDD) measurements in water and in the RW3 phantom. The cpl values for the RW3 phantom were respectively equal to 0.915, 0.927, 0.934, 0.937, and 0.937 for 4, 6, 9, 12, and 16 MeV electron energies. The hpl and k(RW3) values were dependent on the depth of investigation and electron energy. Application of the cpl−hpl factors and k(RW3) coefficients to measured data inside the RW3 can reliably reproduce the measured PDD curves in water. The mean difference between the PDDs measured directly and indirectly in water and in the RW3 phantom was less than 1.2% in both approaches for PDD conversion (cpl−hpl coupling and the use of k(RW3)). The measured scaling factors and k(RW3) coefficients are sufficiently relevant to mimic water-based dosimetry results through indirect measurements inside the RW3 slab phantom. Nevertheless, employing k(RW3) is more straightforward than the cpl−hpl approach because it does not involve scaling and it is also less time-consuming.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article.

References

  1. Baskar R, Lee KA, Yeo R, Yeoh KW (2012) Cancer and radiation therapy: current advances and future directions. Int J Med Sci 9:193–199

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Valentini V, Boldrini L, Mariani S, Massaccesi M (2020) Role of radiation oncology in modern multidisciplinary cancer treatment. Mol Oncol 14:1431–1441

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Hogstrom KR, Almond PR (2006) Review of electron beam therapy physics. Phys Med Biol 51:R455–R489

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. de Boer SF, Kumek Y, Jaggernauth W, Podgorsak MB (2007) The effect of beam energy on the quality of IMRT plans for prostate conformal radiotherapy. Technol Cancer Res Treat 6:139–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lodge M, Pijls-Johannesma M, Stirk L, Munro AJ, De Ruysscher D, Jefferson T (2007) A systematic literature review of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of hadron therapy in cancer. Radiother Oncol 83:110–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Das IJ, Kase KR, Copeland JF, Fitzgerald TJ (1991) Electron beam modifications for the treatment of superficial malignancies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 21:1627–1634

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Baghani HR, Robatjazi M, Mahdavi SR, Nafissi N, Akbari ME (2019) Breast intraoperative electron radiotherapy: image-based setup verification and in-vivo dosimetry. Phys Med 60:37–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Baghani HR, Robatjazi M, Mahdavi SR (2020) Comparing the performance of some dedicated radioprotection disks in breast intraoperative electron radiotherapy: a Monte Carlo study. Radiat Environ Biophys 59:265–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Diamantopoulos S, Platoni K, Dilvoi M, Nazos I, Geropantas K, Maravelis G, Tolia M, Beli I, Efstathopoulos E, Pantelakos P, Panayiotakis G, Kouloulias V (2011) Clinical implementation of total skin electron beam (TSEB) therapy: a review of the relevant literature. Phys Med 27:62–68

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Piotrowski T, Milecki P, Skórska M, Fundowicz D (2013) Total skin electron irradiation techniques: a review. Postepy Dermatol Alergol 30:50–5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Rong Y, Zuo L, Shang L, Bazan JG (2015) Radiotherapy treatment for nonmelanoma skin cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 15:765–776

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Valve A, Kulmala A, Followill D, Tenhunen M (2019) Modifcation of the 4 MeV electron beam from a linear accelerator for irradiation of small superfcial skin tumors. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 10:25–28

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Polanek R, Hafz NAM, Lécz Z, Papp D, Kamperidis C, Brunner S, Szabó ER, Tőkés T, Hideghéty K (2021) 1 kHz laser accelerated electron beam feasible for radiotherapy uses: a PIC–Monte Carlo based study. Nucl Instrum Meth Phys Res A 987:164841

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Baghani HR, Aghamiri SM, Mahdavi SR, Akbari ME, Mirzaei HR (2015) Comparing the dosimetric characteristics of the electron beam from dedicated intraoperative and conventional radiotherapy accelerators. J Appl Clin Med Phys 16:62–72

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Almond PR, Biggs PJ, Coursey BM, Hanson WF, Huq MS, Nath R, Rogers DW (1999) AAPM’s TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams. Med Phys 26:1847–1870

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Andreo P, Burns DT, Hohlfeld K, Huq MS, Kanai T, Laitano F, Smyth V, Vynckier S (2006) Absorbed dose determination in external beam radiotherapy: an international code of practice for dosimetry based on standards of absorbed dose to water. IAEA TRS, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  17. Baghani HR, Robatjazi M (2020) Scaling factors measurement for intraoperative electron beam calibration inside PMMA plastic phantom. Measurement 165:108096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hong JW, Lee HK, Cho JH (2015) Comparison of the photon charge between water and solid phantom depending on depth. Int J Radiat Res 13:229–234

    Google Scholar 

  19. Khan FM, Doppke KP, Hogstrom KR, Kutcher GJ, Nath R, Prasad SC, Purdy JA, Rozenfeld M, Werner BL (1991) Clinical electron-beam dosimetry: report of AAPM radiation therapy committee task group no. 25. Med Phys 18:73–109

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mihailescu D, Borcia C (2006) Water equivalency of some plastic materials used in electron dosimetry: a Monte Carlo investigation. Rom Rep Phys 58:415

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Mayles P, Nahum A, Rosenwald JC (2007) Handbook of radiotherapy physics: theory and practice. CRC Press, Florida

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Araki F (2007) Monte Carlo study of correction factors for the use of plastic phantoms in clinical electron dosimetry. Med Phys 34:4368–4377

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Seito H, Ichikawa T, Hanaya H, Sato Y, Kaneko H, Haruyama Y, Watanabe H, Kojima T (2009) Application of clear polymethylmethacrylate dosimeter Radix W to a few MeV electron in radiation processing. Radiat Phys Chem 78:961–965

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Gargett MA, Briggs AR, Booth JT (2020) Water equivalence of a solid phantom material for radiation dosimetry applications. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 14:43–47

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Siegbahn EA, Nilsson B, Fernández-Varea JM, Andreo P (2003) Calculations of electron fluence correction factors using the Monte Carlo code PENELOPE. Phys Med Biol 48:1263–1275

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Araki F, Hanyu Y, Fukuoka M, Matsumoto K, Okumura M, Oguchi H (2009) Monte Carlo calculations of correction factors for plastic phantoms in clinical photon and electron beam dosimetry. Med Phys 36:2992–3001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fuse H, Hanada K, Fujisaki T, Yasue K, Tomita F, Abe S (2022) Determination of scaling factors for a new plastic phantom at 6–15 MeV electron beams. Rad Phys Chem 193:109994

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. PTW (2019) Radiation medicine QA. https://www.ptwdosimetry.com/en/products/rw3-slab-phantom/?type=3451&downloadfile=1816&cHash=eee7c204867204d923df30cd74c22616. Accessed 20 June 2022

  29. Cameron M, Cornelius I, Cutajar D, Davis J, Rosenfeld A, Lerch M, Guatelli S (2017) Comparison of phantom materials for use in quality assurance of microbeam radiation therapy. J Synchrotron Radiat 24:866–876

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Oshima T, Aoyama Y, Shimozato T, Sawaki M, Imai T, Ito Y, Obata Y, Tabushi K (2009) An experimental attenuation plate to improve the dose distribution in intraoperative electron beam radiotherapy for breast cancer. Phys Med Biol 54:3491–3500

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Das IJ, Cheng CW, Watts RJ, Ahnesjö A, Gibbons J, Li XA, Lowenstein J, Mitra RK, Simon WE, Zhu TC et al (2008) Accelerator beam data commissioning equipment and procedures: report of the TG-106 of the therapy physics committee of the AAPM. Med Phys 35:4186–215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Podgorsak EB (2005) Radiation oncology physics: a handbook for teachers and students. IAEA, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  33. Cember H, Johnson TE (2008) Introduction to health physics. McGrawHill, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Physics Department, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran

    Hamid Reza Baghani

  2. Fisica Scanitaria, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy

    Stefano Andreoli

  3. Medical Physics and Radiological Sciences Department, Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences, Sabzevar, Iran

    Mostafa Robatjazi

Authors
  1. Hamid Reza Baghani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefano Andreoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mostafa Robatjazi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by [HRB], [SA] and [MR]. The first draft of the manuscript was written by [HRB] and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefano Andreoli.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Hamid Reza Baghani, Stefano Andreoli, and Mostafa Robatjazi have no conflict of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

None declared.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baghani, H.R., Andreoli, S. & Robatjazi, M. On the measurement of scaling factors in the RW3 plastic phantom during high energy electron beam dosimetry. Phys Eng Sci Med 46, 185–195 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-022-01209-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-022-01209-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation