Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2015 Sep;38(3):503-7. doi: 10.1007/s13246-015-0359-0. Epub 2015 Jun 30.

A comparison between direct TMR measurements and TMRs calculated from PDDs using BJR Supplement 25 data for flattened and unflattened photon beams.

Author information

1
Genesis CancerCare Queensland, Southport, QLD, 4215, Australia. bess.sutherland@genesiscare.com.au.
2
Genesis CancerCare Queensland, Southport, QLD, 4215, Australia.
3
Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.

Abstract

This study assessed the validity of the conversion from percentage depth dose (PDD) to tissue maximum ratio (TMR) using BJR Supplement 25 data for flattened and flattening filter free (FFF) beams. PDD and TMR scans for a variety of field sizes were measured in water using a Sun Nuclear Corporation 3D SCANNER™ on a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator in 6 MV, 10 MV and 6 MV FFF beams. The BJR Supplement 25 data was used to convert the measured PDDs to TMRs and these were compared with the directly measured TMR data. The TMR plots calculated from PDD were within 1% for the 10 MV and 6 MV flattened beams, for field sizes 3 cm × 3 cm to 40 cm × 40 cm inclusive, at depths measured beyond the depth of maximum dose. The disagreement between the measured and calculated TMR plots for the 6 MV FFF beam increased with depth and field size to a maximum of 1.7% for a 40 cm × 40 cm field. The results found in this study indicate that the BJR Supplement 25 data should not be used for field sizes larger than 20 cm × 20 cm at depths greater than 15 cm for the 6 MV FFF beam. It is advised that PDD to TMR conversion for FFF beams should be done with phantom scatter ratios appropriate to FFF beams, or the TMR should be directly measured if required.

KEYWORDS:

BJR Supplement 25; FFF; PDD; TMR; TPR

PMID:
26123946
DOI:
10.1007/s13246-015-0359-0
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center