• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.8 no.5
• /
• pp.249-254
• /
• 2014

Medical linear accelerator is used for radiotherapy since it was developed in 1952, the utilization rate is further increased. It is used high energy radiotherapy using the energy of the photon of 6 MeV or more is universal at present, but the creation of the neutron by photonuclear reaction cause a problem that is radiation exposure of patients and operators. Therefore, in this study, to analyze the spectrum of the photon beam of 6 to 24 MV that occurred in the medical linear accelerator using the Monte Carlo code MCNPX, the number of photons of 7.41 MeV or more, which is a neutron production threshold energy of tungsten and average energy. The result of 24 MV in the beginning and the 8 MV was 0.59% of the total number of detected photons and it was founded that the number of photons are increased which are possible to cause the photonuclear reaction.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.10 no.8
• /
• pp.591-596
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this study is to determine the equivalent energy of a 6MV X-ray beam in the experiment. The half-value layer (HVL) of lead for the 6 MV X-ray beam was measured using an ionization chamber. The linear attenuation coefficients were calculated with HVL. And, the mass attenuation coefficient was obtained by dividing the linear attenuation coefficient by the density of lead. The equivalent energy of mass attenuation coefficient was determined using the photon energy versus mass attenuation coefficient data of lead given by National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). In conclusion, the equivalent energy of the 6 MV X-ray beam was determined to be 1.61 MeV. This equivalent energy was determined to be about 30% lower than reported by Reft. The reason is presumed to be due to the presence of an air cavity between the lead attenuators.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.41 no.2
• /
• pp.141-148
• /
• 2018

This study examined the properties of photons and the dose distribution in a human body via a simulation where the total body irradiation(TBI) is performed on a pediatric anthropomorphic phantom and a child size water phantom. Based on this, we tried to find the optimal photon beam energy and material for beam spoiler. In this study, MCNPX (Ver. 2.5.0), a simulation program based on the Monte Carlo method, was used for the photon beam analysis and TBI simulation. Several different beam spoiler materials (plexiglass, copper, lead, aluminium) were used, and three different electron beam energies were used in the simulated accelerator to produce photon beams (6, 10, and 15 MeV). Moreover, both a water phantom for calculating the depth-dependent dosage and a pediatric anthropomorphic phantom for calculating the organ dosage were used. The homogeneity of photon beam was examined in different depths for the water phantom, which shows the 20%-40% difference for each material. Next, the org an doses on pediatric anthropomorphic phantom were examined, and the results showed that the average dose for each part of the body was skin 17.7 Gy, sexual gland 15.2 Gy, digestion 13.8 Gy, liver 11.8 Gy, kidney 9.2 Gy, lungs 6.2 Gy, and brain 4.6 Gy. Moreover, as for the organ doses according to materials, the highest dose was observed in lead while the lowest was observed in plexiglass. Plexiglass in current use is considered the most suitable material, and a 6 or 10 MV photon energy plan tailored to the patient condition is considered more suitable than a higher energy plan.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.11 no.4
• /
• pp.197-203
• /
• 2017

This study purpose is propose the basic data for selecting the optimal target material by analyzing the photon characteristics of various materials which was located in the head of medical linear accelerator. In this study, energy spectrum of 6, 15 MV photon beams were compared and analyzed for 13 target materials using MCNPX of Monte Carlo method. The mean energy for the 6 MV energy spectrum was 1.69 ~ 1.84 MeV and that for the 15 MV was 3.38 ~ 3.56 MeV, according to the target material. The flux for the 6 MV energy spectrum was $1.64{\times}10^{-5}{\sim}1.80{\times}10^{-5}{\sharp}/cm^2/e$ and that for the 15 MV was $1.76{\times}10^{-4}{\sim}1.85{\times}10^{-4}{\sharp}/cm^2/e$. The analysis shows that the average energy and flux increase with higher atomic number of the target material. Based on this study, it is possible to present the basic data about the physical characteristics of the photon, and it will be possible to select the target later considering economic, efficiency and physical aspect.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.333-336
• /
• 1991

High energy Photon beam has a sharp beam margin due to a less side scatter and the other things. But there still remains a penumbra where the dose changes rapidly in the region near the edge of a radiation beam, although it is short in width. It is suggested that the width of the penumbra depends on the source size, distance from source to diaphragm, source to skin distance, and depth in tissue. However, it is also supposed that the other factors influence the penumbra width. In this paper, we investigate changes of the physical penumbra widths according to various field sizes and depths, by using the three dimensional dosimetry system. As a result, we found that as field size and depth increase, the physical penumbra width also increases.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.9-14
• /
• 2013

Purpose: High-energy radiotherapy with 10 MV or higher develops photoneutron through photonuclear reaction. Photoneutron has higher radiation weighting factor than X-ray, thus low dose can greatly affect the human body. An accurate dosimetric calculation and consultation are needed. This study compared and analyzed the dose change of photoneutron in terms of space according to the size of photon beam energy and treatment methods. Materials and Methods: To measure the dose change of photoneutron by the size of photon beam energy, patients with the same therapy area were recruited and conventional plans with 10 MV and 15 MV were each made. To measure the difference between the two treatment methods, 10 MV conventional plan and 10 MV IMRT plan was made. A detector was placed at the point which was 100 cm away from the photon beam isocenter, which was placed in the center of $^3He$ proportional counter, and the photoneutron dose was measured. $^3He$ proportional counter was placed 50 cm longitudinally superior to and inferior to the couch with the central point as the standard to measure the dose change by position changes. A commercial program was used for dose change analysis. Results: The average integral dose by energy size was $220.27{\mu}Sv$ and $526.61{\mu}Sv$ in 10 MV and 15 MV conventional RT, respectively. The average dose increased 2.39 times in 15 MV conventional RT. The average photoneutron integral dose in conventional RT and IMRT with the same energy was $220.27{\mu}Sv$ and $308.27{\mu}Sv$ each; the dose in IMRT increased 1.40 times. The average photoneutron integral dose by measurement location resulted significantly higher in point 2 than 3 in conventional RT, 7.1% higher in 10 MV, and 3.0% higher in 15 MV. Conclusion: When high energy radiotherapy, it should consider energy selection, treatment method and patient position to reduce unnecessary dose by photoneutron. Also, the dose data of photoneutron needs to be systematized to find methods to apply computerization programs. This is considered to decrease secondary cancer probabilities and side effects due to radiation therapy and to minimize unnecessary dose for the patients.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.111-116
• /
• 2016

This study is to evaluate the dosimetric impact of dosimetric leaf gap (DLG) and transmission factor (TF) at different measurement depths and field sizes for high definition multileaf collimator (HD MLC). Consequently, its clinical implication on dose calculation of treatment planning system was also investigated for pancreas stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). The TF and DLG were measured at various depths (5, 8, 10, 12, and 15 cm) and field sizes ($6{\times}6$, $8{\times}8$, and $10{\times}10cm^2$) for various energies (6 MV, 6 MV FFF, 10 MV, 10 MV flattening filter free [FFF], and 15 MV). Fifteen pancreatic SBRT cases were enrolled in the study. For each case, the dose distribution was recomputed using a reconfigured beam model of which TF and DLG was the closest to the patient geometry, and then compared to the original plan using the results of dose-volume histograms (DVH). For 10 MV FFF photon beam, its maximum difference between 2 cm and 15 cm was within 0.9% and it is increased by 0.05% from $6{\times}6cm^2$ to $10{\times}10cm^2$ for depth of 15 cm. For 10 MV FFF photon beam, the difference in DLG between the depth of 5 cm and 15 cm is within 0.005 cm for all field sizes and its maximum difference between field size of $6{\times}6cm^2$ and $10{\times}10cm^2$ is 0.0025 cm at depth of 8 cm. TF and DLG values were dependent on the depth and field size. However, the dosimetric difference between the original and recomputed doses were found to be within an acceptable range (<0.5%). In conclusion, current beam modeling using single TF and DLG values is enough for accurate dose calculation.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.237-244
• /
• 1996

Purpose : The accurate dosimetry of independent collimator equipped for 6MV and 15MV X-ray beam was investigated to search for the optimal correction factor. Materials and Methods : The field size factors, beam quality and dose distribution were measured by using 6MV, 15MV X-ray Field size factors were measured from $3{\times}3cm^2$ to $35{\times}35cm^2$ by using 0.6cc ion chamber (NE 2571) at Dmax. Beam qualities were measured at different field sizes, off-axis distances and depths. Isodose distributions at different off-axis distance using $10\times10cm^2$ field were also investigated and compared with symmetric field. Result: 1) Relative field size factors was different along lateral distance with maximum changes in $3.1\%$ for 6MV and $5\%$ for 15MV. But the field size factors of asymmetric fields were identical to the modified central-axis values in symmetric field, which corrected by off-axis ratio at Dmax. 2) The HVL and PDD was decreased by increasing off-axis distance. PDD was also decreased by increasing depth For field size more than $5{\times}cm^2$ and depth less than 15cm, PDD of asymmetric field differs from that of symmetric one ($0.5\~2\%$ for 6MV and $0.4\~1.4\%$ for 15MV). 3) The measured isodose curves demonstrate divergence effects and reduced doses adjacent to the edge close to the flattening filter center was also observed. Conclusion . When asymmetric collimator is used, calculation of MU must be corrected with off-axis and PDD with a caution of underdose in central axis.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.29 no.3
• /
• pp.92-100
• /
• 2018

The manufacturer of a linear accelerator (LINAC) has reported that the target melting phenomenon could be caused by a non-recommended output setting and the excessive use of monitor unit (MU) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Due to these reasons, we observed an unexpected beam interruption during the treatment of a patient in our institution. The target status was inspected and a replacement of the target was determined. After the target replacement, the beam profile was adjusted to the machine commissioning beam data, and the absolute doses-to-water for 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams were calibrated according to American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group (TG)-51 protocol. To verify the beam data after target replacement, the beam flatness, symmetry, output factor, and percent depth dose (PDD) were measured and compared with the commissioning data. The difference between the referenced and measured data for flatness and symmetry exhibited a coincidence within 0.3% for both 6 MV and 10 MV, and the difference of the PDD at 10 cm depth ($PDD_{10}$) was also within 0.3% for both photon energies. Also, patient-specific quality assurances (QAs) were performed with gamma analysis using a 2-D diode and ion chamber array detector for eight patients. The average gamma passing rates for all patients for the relative dose distribution was $99.1%{\pm}1.0%$, and those for absolute dose distribution was $97.2%{\pm}2.7%$, which means the gamma analysis results were all clinically acceptable. In this study, we recommend that the beam characteristics, such as beam profile, depth dose, and output factors, should be examined. Further, patient-specific QAs should be performed to verify the changes in the overall beam delivery system when a target replacement is inevitable; although it is more important to check the beam output in a daily routine.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.20 no.4
• /
• pp.269-276
• /
• 2009

Radiation treatment techniques using photon beam such as three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) as well as intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment (IMRT) demand accurate dose calculation in order to increase target coverage and spare healthy tissue. Both jaw collimator and multi-leaf collimators (MLCs) for photon beams have been used to achieve such goals. In the Pinnacle3 treatment planning system (TPS), which we are using in our clinics, a set of model parameters like jaw collimator transmission factor (JTF) and MLC transmission factor (MLCTF) are determined from the measured data because it is using a model-based photon dose algorithm. However, model parameters obtained by this auto-modeling process can be different from those by direct measurement, which can have a dosimetric effect on the dose distribution. In this paper we estimated JTF and MLCTF obtained by the auto-modeling process in the Pinnacle3 TPS. At first, we obtained JTF and MLCTF by direct measurement, which were the ratio of the output at the reference depth under the closed jaw collimator (MLCs for MLCTF) to that at the same depth with the field size $10{\times}10\;cm^2$ in the water phantom. And then JTF and MLCTF were also obtained by auto-modeling process. And we evaluated the dose difference through phantom and patient study in the 3D-CRT plan. For direct measurement, JTF was 0.001966 for 6 MV and 0.002971 for 10 MV, and MLCTF was 0.01657 for 6 MV and 0.01925 for 10 MV. On the other hand, for auto-modeling process, JTF was 0.001983 for 6 MV and 0.010431 for 10 MV, and MLCTF was 0.00188 for 6 MV and 0.00453 for 10 MV. JTF and MLCTF by direct measurement were very different from those by auto-modeling process and even more reasonable considering each beam quality of 6 MV and 10 MV. These different parameters affect the dose in the low-dose region. Since the wrong estimation of JTF and MLCTF can lead some dosimetric error, comparison of direct measurement and auto-modeling of JTF and MLCTF would be helpful during the beam commissioning.