In vivo surface dosimetry with a scintillating fiber dosimeter in preclinical image-guided radiotherapy.

Med Phys

Grand Accélérateur National d'Ions Lourds (GANIL), CEA/DRF, CNRS/IN2P3, Boulevard Henri Becquerel, 14076, Caen, France.

Published: January 2020

AI Article Synopsis

  • New preclinical image-guided irradiators and treatment planning systems have advanced radiobiology, but their quality control is lagging compared to clinical radiotherapy, especially for in vivo dosimetry.
  • The study used a scintillating fiber dosimeter called DosiRat to compare planned versus actual doses in small animal irradiations, focusing on various irradiation conditions and specific dose measurements.
  • Results showed that while discrepancies in planned versus measured doses were generally within a 5% accuracy range for phantom tests, variations for animal irradiations were larger, indicating challenges in implementing effective in vivo dosimetry with current technology.

Article Abstract

Purpose: New preclinical image-guided irradiators and treatment planning systems represent a huge progress in radiobiology. Nevertheless, quality control of preclinical treatments is not as advanced as in clinical radiotherapy and in vivo dosimetry is less developed. In this study, we evaluate the use of a scintillating fiber dosimeter called DosiRat to verify the agreement between the doses planned with SmART-Plan and the measured doses during small animal irradiations.

Methods: In vivo dosimetry was first evaluated with DosiRat through dose measurements performed at the surface of a 3 × 9 × 3 cm phantom. Measured and planned doses were compared for different irradiation conditions (prescription point, anterior, and posterior beams, 5 mm and 10 mm irradiation fields). In a second phase, measured and planned doses were compared for rat brain irradiations performed with anterior beams, with DosiRat positioned at the beam entrance. Comparisons were performed for different tube currents (1.3 and 13 mA), collimations (5, 10 and 25 mm diameter), and planned doses (0.1, 0.5, 2, and 10 Gy).

Results: In the case of the phantom irradiations, planned and measured doses showed discrepancies smaller than the 5% accuracy of the TPS, except in cases in which the dosimeter was not centered in the irradiation field. The differences were larger for animal irradiations (from -3.3% to 8.8%) because of variations of the beam energy spectrum and the nonequivalence between materials at medium and low energy.

Conclusions: This study highlighted the complexity to implement one-dimension in vivo dosimetry in orthovoltage millimetric beams. Nevertheless, DosiRat is well adapted to in vivo dosimetry because of its small volume and its direct reading and allowed in vivo control of planned doses for anterior beams down to 5 mm diameter.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mp.13903DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

vivo dosimetry
16
planned doses
16
scintillating fiber
8
fiber dosimeter
8
preclinical image-guided
8
measured doses
8
measured planned
8
doses compared
8
beams 5 mm
8
anterior beams
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!