Time filter

Source Type

Keehan S.,RMIT University | Taylor M.L.,RMIT University | Smith R.L.,RMIT University | Smith R.L.,Alfred Hospital | And 4 more authors.
Radiation Protection Dosimetry | Year: 2016

Production of radioisotopes in medical linear accelerators (linacs) is of concern when the beam energy exceeds the threshold for the photonuclear interaction. Staff and patients may receive a radiation dose as a result of the induced radioactivity in the linac. Gamma-ray spectroscopy was used to identify the isotopes produced following the delivery of 18MV photon beams from a Varian 21EX and an Elekta Synergy. The prominent radioisotopes produced include 187W, 63Zn, 56Mn, 24Na and 28Al in both linac models. The dose rate was measured at the beam exit window (12.6 mSv in the first 10 min) following 18 MV total body irradiation (TBI) beams. For a throughput of 24 TBI patients per year, staff members are estimated to receive an annual dose of up to 750 mSv at the patient location. This can be further reduced to 65 mSv by closing the jaws before re-entering the treatment bunker. © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.


Dunn L.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Lehmann J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Lehmann J.,University of Sydney | Lehmann J.,RMIT University | And 10 more authors.
Physica Medica | Year: 2015

This work presents the Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service's (ACDS) findings of an investigation of systematic discrepancies between treatment planning system (TPS) calculated and measured audit doses. Specifically, a comparison between the Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm (AAA) and other common dose-calculation algorithms in regions downstream (≥2. cm) from low-density material in anthropomorphic and slab phantom geometries is presented. Two measurement setups involving rectilinear slab-phantoms (ACDS Level II audit) and anthropomorphic geometries (ACDS Level III audit) were used in conjunction with ion chamber (planar 2D array and Farmer-type) measurements. Measured doses were compared to calculated doses for a variety of cases, with and without the presence of inhomogeneities and beam-modifiers in 71 audits. Results demonstrate a systematic AAA underdose with an average discrepancy of 2.9 ± 1.2% when the AAA algorithm is implemented in regions distal from lung-tissue interfaces, when lateral beams are used with anthropomorphic phantoms. This systemic discrepancy was found for all Level III audits of facilities using the AAA algorithm. This discrepancy is not seen when identical measurements are compared for other common dose-calculation algorithms (average discrepancy -0.4 ± 1.7%), including the Acuros XB algorithm also available with the Eclipse TPS. For slab phantom geometries (Level II audits), with similar measurement points downstream from inhomogeneities this discrepancy is also not seen. © 2015.


Lehmann J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Lehmann J.,University of Sydney | Lehmann J.,RMIT University | Dunn L.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | And 10 more authors.
Medical Physics | Year: 2014

Purpose: The purpose of this investigation was to assess the angular dependence of a commercial optically stimulated luminescence dosimeter (OSLD) dosimetry system in MV x-ray beams at depths beyonddmax and to find ways to mitigate this dependence for measurements in phantoms. Methods: Two special holders were designed which allow a dosimeter to be rotated around the center of its sensitive volume. The dosimeter's sensitive volume is a disk, 5 mm in diameter and 0.2 mm thick. The first holder rotates the disk in the traditional way. It positions the disk perpendicular to the beam (gantry pointing to the floor) in the initial position (0°). When the holder is rotated the angle of the disk towards the beam increases until the disk is parallel with the beam ("edge on," 90°). This is referred to as Setup 1. The second holder offers a new, alternative measurement position. It positions the disk parallel to the beam for all angles while rotating around its center (Setup 2). Measurements with five to ten dosimeters per point were carried out for 6 MV at 3 and 10 cm depth. Monte Carlo simulations using GEANT4 were performed to simulate the response of the active detector material for several angles. Detector and housing were simulated in detail based on microCT data and communications with the manufacturer. Various material compositions and an all-water geometry were considered. Results: For the traditional Setup 1 the response of the OSLD dropped on average by 1.4% ± 0.7% (measurement) and 2.1% ± 0.3% (Monte Carlo simulation) for the 90° orientation compared to 0°. Monte Carlo simulations also showed a strong dependence of the effect on the composition of the sensitive layer. Assuming the layer to completely consist of the active material (Al2O3) results in a 7% drop in response for 90°compared to 0°. Assuming the layer to be completely water, results in a flat response within the simulation uncertainty of about 1%. For the new Setup 2, measurements and Monte Carlo simulations found the angular dependence of the dosimeter to be below 1% and within the measurement uncertainty. Conclusions: The dosimeter system exhibits a small angular dependence of approximately 2% which needs to be considered for measurements involving other than normal incident beams angles. This applies in particular to clinicalin vivo measurements where the orientation of the dosimeter is dictated by clinical circumstances and cannot be optimized as otherwise suggested here. When measuring in a phantom, the proposed new setup should be considered. It changes the orientation of the dosimeter so that a coplanar beam arrangement always hits the disk shaped detector material from the thin side and thereby reduces the angular dependence of the response to within the measurement uncertainty of about 1%. This improvement makes the dosimeter more attractive for clinical measurements with multiple coplanar beams in phantoms, as the overall measurement uncertainty is reduced. Similarly, phantom based postal audits can transition from the traditional TLD to the more accurate and convenient OSLD. © 2014 Author(s).


PubMed | Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, Tamworth Hospital, RMIT University and Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB) | Year: 2015

This work presents the Australian Clinical Dosimetry Services (ACDS) findings of an investigation of systematic discrepancies between treatment planning system (TPS) calculated and measured audit doses. Specifically, a comparison between the Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm (AAA) and other common dose-calculation algorithms in regions downstream (2cm) from low-density material in anthropomorphic and slab phantom geometries is presented. Two measurement setups involving rectilinear slab-phantoms (ACDS Level II audit) and anthropomorphic geometries (ACDS Level III audit) were used in conjunction with ion chamber (planar 2D array and Farmer-type) measurements. Measured doses were compared to calculated doses for a variety of cases, with and without the presence of inhomogeneities and beam-modifiers in 71 audits. Results demonstrate a systematic AAA underdose with an average discrepancy of 2.9 1.2% when the AAA algorithm is implemented in regions distal from lung-tissue interfaces, when lateral beams are used with anthropomorphic phantoms. This systemic discrepancy was found for all Level III audits of facilities using the AAA algorithm. This discrepancy is not seen when identical measurements are compared for other common dose-calculation algorithms (average discrepancy -0.4 1.7%), including the Acuros XB algorithm also available with the Eclipse TPS. For slab phantom geometries (Level II audits), with similar measurement points downstream from inhomogeneities this discrepancy is also not seen.


Alves A.D.C.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Lye J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Kenny J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Dunn L.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | And 7 more authors.
Australasian Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine | Year: 2015

The Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service (ACDS) has demonstrated the capacity to perform a basic dosimetry audit on all radiotherapy clinics across Australia. During the ACDS’s three and a half year trial the majority of the audits were performed using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLD) mailed to facilities for exposure to a reference dose, and then returned to the ACDS for analysis. This technical note investigates the stability of the readout process under the large workload of the national dosimetry audit. The OSLD readout uncertainty contributes to the uncertainty of several terms of the dose calculation equation and is a major source of uncertainty in the audit. The standard deviation of four OSLD readouts was initially established at 0.6 %. Measurements over 13 audit batches—each batch containing 200−400 OSLDs—showed variability (0.5−0.9 %) in the readout standard deviation. These shifts have not yet necessitated a change to the audit scoring levels. However, a standard deviation in OSLD readouts greater than 0.9 % will change the audit scoring levels. We identified mechanical wear on the OSLD readout adapter as a cause of variability in readout uncertainty, however, we cannot rule out other causes. Additionally we observed large fluctuations in the distribution of element correction factors (ECF) for OSLD batches. We conclude that the variability in the width of the ECF distribution from one batch to another is not caused by variability in readout uncertainty, but rather by variations in the OSLD stock. © 2014, The Author(s).


Lye J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Kenny J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Lehmann J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Lehmann J.,RMIT University | And 8 more authors.
Medical Physics | Year: 2014

Purpose: The Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service (ACDS) has implemented a new method of a nonreference condition Level II type dosimetric audit of radiotherapy services to increase measurement accuracy and patient safety within Australia. The aim of this work is to describe the methodology, tolerances, and outcomes from the new audit.Methods: The ACDS Level II audit measures the dose delivered in 2D planes using an ionization chamber based array positioned at multiple depths. Measurements are made in rectilinear homogeneous and inhomogeneous phantoms composed of slabs of solid water and lung. Computer generated computed tomography data sets of the rectilinear phantoms are supplied to the facility prior to audit for planning of a range of cases including reference fields, asymmetric fields, and wedged fields. The audit assesses 3D planning with 6 MV photons with a static (zero degree) gantry. Scoring is performed using local dose differences between the planned and measured dose within 80% of the field width. The overall audit result is determined by the maximum dose difference over all scoring points, cases, and planes. Pass (Optimal Level) is defined as maximum dose difference .3.3%, Pass (Action Level) is ≤5.0%, and Fail (Out of Tolerance) is 5.0%.Results: At close of 2013, the ACDS had performed 24 Level II audits. 63% of the audits passed, 33% failed, and the remaining audit was not assessable. Of the 15 audits that passed, 3 were at Pass (Action Level). The high fail rate is largely due to a systemic issue with modeling asymmetric 60. wedges which caused a delivered overdose of 5%.8%.Conclusions: The ACDS has implemented a nonreference condition Level II type audit, based on ion chamber 2D array measurements in an inhomogeneous slab phantom. The powerful diagnostic ability of this audit has allowed the ACDS to rigorously test the treatment planning systems implemented in Australian radiotherapy facilities. Recommendations from audits have led to facilities modifying clinical practice and changing planning protocols. C 2014 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.


Lye J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Dunn L.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Kenny J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | Lehmann J.,Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service | And 10 more authors.
Medical Physics | Year: 2014

Purpose: On 1 July 2012, the Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service (ACDS) released its Optically Stimulated Luminescent Dosimeter (OSLD) Level I audit, replacing the previous TLD based audit. The aim of this work is to present the results from this new service and the complete uncertainty analysis on which the audit tolerances are based. Methods: The audit release was preceded by a rigorous evaluation of the InLight® nanoDot OSLD system from Landauer (Landauer, Inc., Glenwood, IL). Energy dependence, signal fading from multiple irradiations, batch variation, reader variation, and dose response factors were identified and quantified for each individual OSLD. The detectors are mailed to the facility in small PMMA blocks, based on the design of the existing Radiological Physics Centre audit. Modeling and measurement were used to determine a factor that could convert the dose measured in the PMMA block, to dose in water for the facility's reference conditions. This factor is dependent on the beam spectrum. The TPR20,10 was used as the beam quality index to determine the specific block factor for a beam being audited. The audit tolerance was defined using a rigorous uncertainty calculation. The audit outcome is then determined using a scientifically based two tiered action level approach. Audit outcomes within two standard deviations were defined as Pass (Optimal Level), within three standard deviations as Pass (Action Level), and outside of three standard deviations the outcome is Fail (Out of Tolerance). Results: To-date the ACDS has audited 108 photon beams with TLD and 162 photon beams with OSLD. The TLD audit results had an average deviation from ACDS of 0.0% and a standard deviation of 1.8%. The OSLD audit results had an average deviation of -0.2% and a standard deviation of 1.4%. The relative combined standard uncertainty was calculated to be 1.3% (1σ). Pass (Optimal Level) was reduced to ≤2.6% (2σ), and Fail (Out of Tolerance) was reduced to >3.9% (3σ) for the new OSLD audit. Previously with the TLD audit the Pass (Optimal Level) and Fail (Out of Tolerance) were set at ≤4.0% (2σ) and >6.0% (3σ). Conclusions: The calculated standard uncertainty of 1.3% at one standard deviation is consistent with the measured standard deviation of 1.4% from the audits and confirming the suitability of the uncertainty budget derived audit tolerances. The OSLD audit shows greater accuracy than the previous TLD audit, justifying the reduction in audit tolerances. In the TLD audit, all outcomes were Pass (Optimal Level) suggesting that the tolerances were too conservative. In the OSLD audit 94% of the audits have resulted in Pass (Optimal level) and 6% of the audits have resulted in Pass (Action Level). All Pass (Action level) results have been resolved with a repeat OSLD audit, or an on-site ion chamber measurement. © 2014 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.


PubMed | Australia and Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, RMIT University and Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Medical physics | Year: 2014

The Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service (ACDS) has implemented a new method of a nonreference condition Level II type dosimetric audit of radiotherapy services to increase measurement accuracy and patient safety within Australia. The aim of this work is to describe the methodology, tolerances, and outcomes from the new audit.The ACDS Level II audit measures the dose delivered in 2D planes using an ionization chamber based array positioned at multiple depths. Measurements are made in rectilinear homogeneous and inhomogeneous phantoms composed of slabs of solid water and lung. Computer generated computed tomography data sets of the rectilinear phantoms are supplied to the facility prior to audit for planning of a range of cases including reference fields, asymmetric fields, and wedged fields. The audit assesses 3D planning with 6 MV photons with a static (zero degree) gantry. Scoring is performed using local dose differences between the planned and measured dose within 80% of the field width. The overall audit result is determined by the maximum dose difference over all scoring points, cases, and planes. Pass (Optimal Level) is defined as maximum dose difference 3.3%, Pass (Action Level) is 5.0%, and Fail (Out of Tolerance) is >5.0%.At close of 2013, the ACDS had performed 24 Level II audits. 63% of the audits passed, 33% failed, and the remaining audit was not assessable. Of the 15 audits that passed, 3 were at Pass (Action Level). The high fail rate is largely due to a systemic issue with modeling asymmetric 60 wedges which caused a delivered overdose of 5%-8%.The ACDS has implemented a nonreference condition Level II type audit, based on ion chamber 2D array measurements in an inhomogeneous slab phantom. The powerful diagnostic ability of this audit has allowed the ACDS to rigorously test the treatment planning systems implemented in Australian radiotherapy facilities. Recommendations from audits have led to facilities modifying clinical practice and changing planning protocols.


PubMed | RMIT University and Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Radiation protection dosimetry | Year: 2015

Production of radioisotopes in medical linear accelerators (linacs) is of concern when the beam energy exceeds the threshold for the photonuclear interaction. Staff and patients may receive a radiation dose as a result of the induced radioactivity in the linac. Gamma-ray spectroscopy was used to identify the isotopes produced following the delivery of 18 MV photon beams from a Varian 21EX and an Elekta Synergy. The prominent radioisotopes produced include

Loading Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service collaborators
Loading Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service collaborators