Results for “DOSIMETRY” — Page 94

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-749: Thorough Calibration of MOSFET Dosimeters

Purpose: To improve the accuracy of the MOSFET calibration procedure by performing the measurement several times and calculating the average value of the calibration factor for various photon and electron energies. Methods: The output of three photon and six electron beams of Varian Trilogy linear accelerator SN 5878 was calibrated. Five reinforced standard sensitivity MOSFET dosimeters were placed in the calibration jig and connected to the Reader Module. As the backscatter material was used 7 cm of Virtual Water. The MOSFET dosimeters were covered with 1.5 cm thick bolus for the regular and SRS 6 MV beams, 3 cm bolus for 15 MV beam, 1.5 cm bolus for 6 MeV electron beam, and 2 cm bolus for the electron energies of 9, 12, 15, 18, and 22 MeV. The dosimeters were exposed to 100 MU, and the calibration factor was determined using the mobileMOSFET software. To improve the accuracy of calibration, this procedure was repeated ten times and the calibration factors were averaged. Results: As the number of calibrations was increasing the variability of calibration factors of different dosimeters was decreasing. After ten calibrations, the calibration factors for all five dosimeters were within 1% of one another for all energies, except 6 MV SRS photons and 6 MeV electrons, for which the variability was 2%. Conclusions: The described process results in calibration factors which are almost independent of modality or energy. Once calibrated, the dosimeters may be used for in-vivo dosimetry or for daily verification of the beam output. Measurement of the radiation dose under bolus and scatter to the eye are examples of frequent use of calibrated MOSFET dosimeters. The calibration factor determined for full build-up is used under these circumstances. To the best of our knowledge, such thorough procedure for calibrating MOSFET dosimeters has not been reported previously. Best Medical Canada provided MOSFET dosimeters for this project.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-773: Use of a Commercial TPS for Deriving Exit Dose Distribution for Patient Specific QA with An EPID

Purpose: A method to derive exit dose distributions with a commercial treatment planning system for comparison to Epid measured doses. Methods: In contrast to published methods, we present an approach that uses a treatment planning system (Raystation, Raysearch) to calculate exit dose patterns based on a modified patient CT dataset. The EPID is assumed as water equivalent and therefore is represented as water filled ring in the images. This is done by: -Export a renamed copy of the patient CT and plan data set. —Manipulate the CT-data to a field of view of 1000 mm. — Insert the water filled cylinder ring, centered to the target point. — Manipulate plan file with the new target and dose prescription point. — Import and recalculate dose on the manipulated data set. — Export and extract exit field dose matrix from the cylinder (optional entrance dose). — Calibrate matrix to size and rebin data from the cylinder to EPID equivalent data. — Correct Epid measurement for scatter, position and field size. -Evaluate and compare data in Verisoft (PTW). Data manipulation and extraction is done by a simple tool (IDL, Exelis). Results: This method was tested on a Siemens Artiste 6MV for field sizes up to 27×27cm2 limited by used geometry and EPID size. First phantom measurements show good results for fields up to 20×20cm (pass rate > 95% for 3%, 3mm Gamma index) while larger fields have higher discrepancies towards the field edges. This might Result from off axis softening of the beam and the higher sensitivity of the detector to beam scatter. Conclusion: This method might simplify the use of exit dosimetry with the EPID for patient specific QA as it uses the dose calculation of a commercial treatment planning system. The concept was proven by phantom data sets, giving acceptable results.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-F-BRB-15: Dosimetric Study of Radiation Therapy for Head/Neck Patients with Metallic Dental Fixtures

Purpose: To investigate the dose contributions of scattered electrons from dental amalgams during head and neck radiotherapy, and to evaluate the protective role of dosimetric dental stents during treatment to prevent oral mucositis. Methods: A phantom was produced to accurately simulate the oral cavity and head. The oral cavity consisted of a tissue equivalent upper and lower jaw and complete set of teeth. A set of 4 mm ethylene copolymer dosimetric stents was made for the upper and lower teeth. Five removable gold caps were fitted to apposing right molars, and the phantom was crafted to accomodate horizontal and vertical film for 2D dosimetry and NanoDot dosimeter for recording point doses. The head was simulated using a small cylindrical glass water bath. CT simulation was performed on the phantom with and without metal fittings and, in each case, with and without the dental stent. The CT image sets were imported into Eclipse treatment planning system for contouring and treatment planning, and a 9-field IMRT treatment plan was developed for each scenario. These plans were delivered using a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator. Doses were recorded using GafChromic EBT2 films and NanoDot dosimeters. Results: The measurements revealed a 43% relative increase in dose measured adjacent to the metal fixtures in the horizontal plane without the use of the dental stent. This equates to a total dose of 100 Gy to the oral mucosa during a standard course of definitive radiotherapy. To our knowledge, this is the first dosimetric analysis of dental stents using an anatomically realistic phantom and modern beam arrangement. Conclusion: These results support the use of dosimetric dental stents in head and neck radiotherapy for patients with metallic dental fixtures as a way to effectively reduce dose to nearby mucosal surfaces and, hence, reduce the risk and severity of mucositis.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-AB-BRA-07: Prompt Gamma-Ray Spectroscopy for Range Verification of Clinical Proton Beams

Purpose: We developed a pre-clinical prototype system for range verification of proton pencil-beam scanning fields. The system was evaluated using phantom treatment plans delivered with a clinical dose rate. Methods: The absolute range of proton pencil-beams was verified through an optimization procedure, which matches energy- and time-resolved prompt gamma-ray measurements with models, based on cross sections for discrete prompt gamma-ray line excitations. Phantom experiments were performed with a pre-clinical prototype detector, using treatment plans delivered with a clinical pencil-beam scanning system. The detector consisted of an actively shielded lanthanum(III) bromide scintillator. Tungsten was used to collimate the gamma-rays. To support high event rates, the detector readout featured custom amplifiers and an active voltage divider for the photomultiplier. The detector signals were acquired by fast analog-to-digital converters and processed using digital algorithms. The data acquisition was also synchronized with the pencil-beam scanning and dosimetry systems. Results: We successfully acquired prompt gamma-ray spectra during the delivery of proton pencil-beams with a clinical beam current of 2 nA at the exit of the treatment head. The number of events in the primary detector ranged from 1 x 10{sup 6} to 2 x 10{sup 6} per second. In phantom experiments, non-uniform range errors were introduced by placing strips of plastic in the beam path. The magnitudes and positions of these range errors were correctly detected in two-dimensional range maps that were generated from the measurements. With our small scale prototype, a 1.0 mm standard deviation on the absolute range required about 5 x 10{sup 8} protons per delivered pencil-beam. Conclusions: Prompt gamma-ray spectroscopy to verify the absolute range of proton beams was demonstrated under clinical pencil-beam delivery conditions. A 1 mm to 2 mm range verification accuracy for a field delivering 1 Gy, appears feasible with a full scale system. This work was supported by the Federal Share of program income earned on C06-CA059267, Proton Therapy Research and Treatment Center.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-D-BRD-00: Electronic Brachytherapy

Electronic brachytherapy (eBT) has seen an insurgence of manufacturers entering the US market for use in radiation therapy. In addition to the established interstitial, intraluminary, and intracavitary applications of eBT, many centers are now using eBT to treat skin lesions. It is important for medical physicists working with electronic brachytherapy sources to understand the basic physics principles of the sources themselves as well as the variety of applications for which they are being used. The calibration of the sources is different from vendor to vendor and the traceability of calibrations has evolved as new sources came to market. In 2014, a new air-kerma based standard was introduced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to measure the output of an eBT source. Eventually commercial treatment planning systems should accommodate this new standard and provide NIST traceability to the end user. The calibration and commissioning of an eBT system is unique to its application and typically entails a list of procedural recommendations by the manufacturer. Commissioning measurements are performed using a variety of methods, some of which are modifications of existing AAPM Task Group protocols. A medical physicist should be familiar with the different AAPM Task Group recommendations for applicability to eBT and how to properly adapt them to their needs. In addition to the physical characteristics of an eBT source, the photon energy is substantially lower than from HDR Ir-192 sources. Consequently, tissue-specific dosimetry and radiobiological considerations are necessary when comparing these brachytherapy modalities and when making clinical decisions as a radiation therapy team. In this session, the physical characteristics and calibration methodologies of eBt sources will be presented as well as radiobiology considerations and other important clinical considerations. Learning Objectives: To understand the basic principles of electronic brachytherapy and the various applications for which it is being used. To understand the physics of the calibration and commissioning for electronic brachytherapy sources To understand the unique radiobiology and clinical implementation of electronic brachytherapy systems for skin and IORT techniques Xoft, Inc. contributed funding toward development of the NIST electronic brachytherapy facility (Michael Mitch).The University of Wisconsin (Wesley Culberson) has received research support funding from Xoft, Inc. Zoubir Ouhib has received partial funding from Elekta Esteya.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-D-BRB-00: Pediatric Radiation Therapy Planning, Treatment, and Late Effects

Most Medical Physicists working in radiotherapy departments see few pediatric patients. This is because, fortunately, children get cancer at a rate nearly 100 times lower than adults. Children have not smoked, abused alcohol, or been exposed to environmental carcinogens for decades, and of course, have not fallen victim to the aging process. Children get very different cancers than adults. Breast or prostate cancers, typical in adults, are rarely seen in children but instead a variety of tumors occur in children that are rarely seen in adults; examples are germinomas, ependymomas and primitive neuroectodermal tumors, which require treatment of the child’s brain or neuroblastoma, requiring treatment in the abdomen. The treatment of children with cancer using radiation therapy is one of the most challenging planning and delivery problems facing the physicist. This is because bones, brain, breast tissue, and other organs are more sensitive to radiation in children than in adults. Because most therapy departments treat mostly adults, when the rare 8 year-old patient comes to the department for treatment, the physicist may not understand the clinical issues of his disease which drive the planning and delivery decisions. Additionally, children are more prone than adults to developing secondary cancers after radiation. For bilateral retinoblastoma for example, an irradiated child has a 40% chance of developing a second cancer by age 50. The dosimetric tradeoffs made during the planning process are complex and require careful consideration for children treated with radiotherapy. In the first presentation, an overview of childhood cancers and their corresponding treatment techniques will be given. These can be some of the most complex treatments that are delivered in the radiation therapy department. These cancers include leukemia treated with total body irradiation, medulloblastoma, treated with craniospinal irradiation plus a conformal boost to the posterior fossa, neuroblastoma, requiring focal abdominal irradiation to avoid kidney, liver, and vertebral body damage, retinoblastoma, requiring treatment to an eye while minimizing dose to surrounding tissues, and a variety of other tumors which occur anywhere in the body. Case studies will be presented showing the treatment technique and resulting dosimetry, highlighting the objectives for tumor coverage and organ-at-risk sparing. Practical issues that have to be faced when treating children will also be discussed such as daily sedation and immobilization. Late effects based on the current understanding of dose-volume response in normal tissues will be discussed. In the second presentation, specific focus will be on pediatric proton therapy. We will review literature publications on dosimetric comparison of proton versus photon plans, common pediatric tumors treated with protons, and available clinical outcomes. We will describe simulation technique, treatment planning, image guidance for setup verification, and proton beam delivery unique to pediatric and adolescent patients. Finally, we will discuss desired improvements, outlook, and opportunities for medical physicists in pediatric proton therapy. Learning Objectives: Improve understanding about childhood cancer and treatment with radiation Understand treatment planning and delivery issues and associated late effects specific to children Become aware of specific treatment methods for the most challenging pediatric cancers Know the current status, techniques, and desired improvements for pediatric proton therapy.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-D-BRB-01: Pediatric Treatment Planning I: Overview of Planning Strategies and Challenges

Most Medical Physicists working in radiotherapy departments see few pediatric patients. This is because, fortunately, children get cancer at a rate nearly 100 times lower than adults. Children have not smoked, abused alcohol, or been exposed to environmental carcinogens for decades, and of course, have not fallen victim to the aging process. Children get very different cancers than adults. Breast or prostate cancers, typical in adults, are rarely seen in children but instead a variety of tumors occur in children that are rarely seen in adults; examples are germinomas, ependymomas and primitive neuroectodermal tumors, which require treatment of the child’s brain or neuroblastoma, requiring treatment in the abdomen. The treatment of children with cancer using radiation therapy is one of the most challenging planning and delivery problems facing the physicist. This is because bones, brain, breast tissue, and other organs are more sensitive to radiation in children than in adults. Because most therapy departments treat mostly adults, when the rare 8 year-old patient comes to the department for treatment, the physicist may not understand the clinical issues of his disease which drive the planning and delivery decisions. Additionally, children are more prone than adults to developing secondary cancers after radiation. For bilateral retinoblastoma for example, an irradiated child has a 40% chance of developing a second cancer by age 50. The dosimetric tradeoffs made during the planning process are complex and require careful consideration for children treated with radiotherapy. In the first presentation, an overview of childhood cancers and their corresponding treatment techniques will be given. These can be some of the most complex treatments that are delivered in the radiation therapy department. These cancers include leukemia treated with total body irradiation, medulloblastoma, treated with craniospinal irradiation plus a conformal boost to the posterior fossa, neuroblastoma, requiring focal abdominal irradiation to avoid kidney, liver, and vertebral body damage, retinoblastoma, requiring treatment to an eye while minimizing dose to surrounding tissues, and a variety of other tumors which occur anywhere in the body. Case studies will be presented showing the treatment technique and resulting dosimetry, highlighting the objectives for tumor coverage and organ-at-risk sparing. Practical issues that have to be faced when treating children will also be discussed such as daily sedation and immobilization. Late effects based on the current understanding of dose-volume response in normal tissues will be discussed. In the second presentation, specific focus will be on pediatric proton therapy. We will review literature publications on dosimetric comparison of proton versus photon plans, common pediatric tumors treated with protons, and available clinical outcomes. We will describe simulation technique, treatment planning, image guidance for setup verification, and proton beam delivery unique to pediatric and adolescent patients. Finally, we will discuss desired improvements, outlook, and opportunities for medical physicists in pediatric proton therapy. Learning Objectives: Improve understanding about childhood cancer and treatment with radiation Understand treatment planning and delivery issues and associated late effects specific to children Become aware of specific treatment methods for the most challenging pediatric cancers Know the current status, techniques, and desired improvements for pediatric proton therapy.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-D-BRB-02: Pediatric Treatment Planning II: Applications of Proton Beams for Pediatric Treatment

Most Medical Physicists working in radiotherapy departments see few pediatric patients. This is because, fortunately, children get cancer at a rate nearly 100 times lower than adults. Children have not smoked, abused alcohol, or been exposed to environmental carcinogens for decades, and of course, have not fallen victim to the aging process. Children get very different cancers than adults. Breast or prostate cancers, typical in adults, are rarely seen in children but instead a variety of tumors occur in children that are rarely seen in adults; examples are germinomas, ependymomas and primitive neuroectodermal tumors, which require treatment of the child’s brain or neuroblastoma, requiring treatment in the abdomen. The treatment of children with cancer using radiation therapy is one of the most challenging planning and delivery problems facing the physicist. This is because bones, brain, breast tissue, and other organs are more sensitive to radiation in children than in adults. Because most therapy departments treat mostly adults, when the rare 8 year-old patient comes to the department for treatment, the physicist may not understand the clinical issues of his disease which drive the planning and delivery decisions. Additionally, children are more prone than adults to developing secondary cancers after radiation. For bilateral retinoblastoma for example, an irradiated child has a 40% chance of developing a second cancer by age 50. The dosimetric tradeoffs made during the planning process are complex and require careful consideration for children treated with radiotherapy. In the first presentation, an overview of childhood cancers and their corresponding treatment techniques will be given. These can be some of the most complex treatments that are delivered in the radiation therapy department. These cancers include leukemia treated with total body irradiation, medulloblastoma, treated with craniospinal irradiation plus a conformal boost to the posterior fossa, neuroblastoma, requiring focal abdominal irradiation to avoid kidney, liver, and vertebral body damage, retinoblastoma, requiring treatment to an eye while minimizing dose to surrounding tissues, and a variety of other tumors which occur anywhere in the body. Case studies will be presented showing the treatment technique and resulting dosimetry, highlighting the objectives for tumor coverage and organ-at-risk sparing. Practical issues that have to be faced when treating children will also be discussed such as daily sedation and immobilization. Late effects based on the current understanding of dose-volume response in normal tissues will be discussed. In the second presentation, specific focus will be on pediatric proton therapy. We will review literature publications on dosimetric comparison of proton versus photon plans, common pediatric tumors treated with protons, and available clinical outcomes. We will describe simulation technique, treatment planning, image guidance for setup verification, and proton beam delivery unique to pediatric and adolescent patients. Finally, we will discuss desired improvements, outlook, and opportunities for medical physicists in pediatric proton therapy. Learning Objectives: Improve understanding about childhood cancer and treatment with radiation Understand treatment planning and delivery issues and associated late effects specific to children Become aware of specific treatment methods for the most challenging pediatric cancers Know the current status, techniques, and desired improvements for pediatric proton therapy.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-E-213-00: What Is Medical Physics Without Radiation Safety?

The focus of work of medical physicists in 1980’s was on quality control and quality assurance. Radiation safety was important but was dominated by occupational radiation protection. A series of over exposures of patients in radiotherapy, nuclear medicine and observation of skin injuries among patients undergoing interventional procedures in 1990’s started creating the need for focus on patient protection. It gave medical physicists new directions to develop expertise in patient dosimetry and dose management. Publications creating awareness on cancer risks from CT in early part of the current century and over exposures in CT in 2008 brought radiation risks in public domain and created challenging situations for medical physicists. Increasing multiple exposures of individual patient and patient doses of few tens of mSv or exceeding 100 mSv are increasing the role of medical physicists. Expansion of usage of fluoroscopy in the hands of clinical professionals with hardly any training in radiation protection shall require further role for medical physicists. The increasing publications in journals, recent changes in Safety Standards, California law, all increase responsibilities of medical physicists in patient protection. Newer technological developments in dose efficiency and protective devices increase percentage of time devoted by medical physicists on radiation protection activities. Without radiation protection, the roles, responsibilities and day-to-day involvement of medical physicists in diagnostic radiology becomes questionable. In coming years either medical radiation protection may emerge as a specialty or medical physicists will have to keep major part of day-to-day work on radiation protection. Learning Objectives: To understand how radiation protection has been increasing its role in day-to-day activities of medical physicist To be aware about international safety Standards, national and State regulations that require higher attention to radiation protection than in past To be aware about possible emergence of medical radiation protection as a specialty and challenges for medical physicists.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-F-CAMPUS-T-01: IROC Houston QA Center’s Anthropomorphic Proton Phantom Program

Purpose: To describe the proton phantoms that IROC Houston uses to approve and credential proton institutions to participate in NCI-sponsored clinical trials. Methods: Photon phantoms cannot necessarily be used for proton measurements because protons react differently than photons in some plastics. As such plastics that are tissue equivalent for protons were identified. Another required alteration is to ensure that the film dosimeters are housed in the phantom with no air gap to avoid proton streaming. Proton-equivalent plastics/materials used include RMI Solid Water, Techron HPV, blue water, RANDO soft tissue material, balsa wood, compressed cork and polyethylene. Institutions wishing to be approved or credentialed request a phantom and are prioritized for delivery. At the institution, the phantom is imaged, a treatment plan is developed, positioned on the treatment couch and the treatment is delivered. The phantom is returned and the measured dose distributions are compared to the institution’s electronically submitted treatment plan dosimetry data. Results: IROC Houston has developed an extensive proton phantom approval/credentialing program consisting of five different phantoms designs: head, prostate, lung, liver and spine. The phantoms are made with proton equivalent plastics that have HU and relative stopping powers similar (within 5%) of human tissues. They also have imageable targets, avoidance structures, and heterogeneities. TLD and radiochromic film are contained in the target structures. There have been 13 head, 33 prostate, 18 lung, 2 liver and 16 spine irradiations with either passive scatter, or scanned proton beams. The pass rates have been: 100%, 69.7%, 72.2%, 50%, and 81.3%, respectively. Conclusion: IROC Houston has responded to the recent surge in proton facilities by developing a family of anthropomorphic phantoms that are able to be used for remote audits of proton beams. Work supported by PHS grant CA10953 and CA081647.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-304-05: 4Ï€ Non-Coplanar Radiotherapy: From Mathematical Modeling to Clinical Implementation

Purpose: To develop and clinically implement 4π radiotherapy, an inverse optimization platform that maximally utilizes non-coplanar intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) beams to significantly improve critical organ sparing. Methods: A 3D scanner was used to digitize the human and phantom subject surfaces, which were positioned in the computer assisted design (CAD) model of a TrueBeam machine to create a virtual geometrical model, based on which, the feasible beam space was calculated for different tumor locations. Beamlets were computed for all feasible beams using convolution/superposition. A column generation algorithm was employed to optimize patient specific beam orientations and fluence maps. Optimal routing through all selected beams were calculated by a level set method. The resultant plans were converted to XML files and delivered to phantoms in the TrueBeam developer mode. Finally, 4π plans were recomputed in Eclipse and manually delivered to recurrent GBM patients. Results: Compared to IMRT utilizing manually selected beams and volumetric modulated arc therapy plans, markedly improved dosimetry was observed using 4π for the brain, head and neck, liver, lung, and prostate patients. The improvements were due to significantly improved conformality and reduced high dose spillage to organs mediolateral to the PTV. The virtual geometrical model was experimentally validated. Safety margins with 99.9% confidence in collision avoidance were included to the model based model accuracy estimates determined via 300 physical machine to phantom distance measurements. Automated delivery in the developer mode was completed in 10 minutes and collision free. Manual 4 π treatment on the GBM cases resulted in significant brainstem sparing and took 35–45 minutes including multiple images, which showed submillimeter cranial intrafractional motion. Conclusion: The mathematical modeling utilized in 4π is accurate to create and guide highly complex non-coplanar IMRT treatments that consistently and significantly outperform human-operator-created plans. Deliverability of such plans is clinically demonstrated. This work is funded by Varian Medical Systems and the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship DGE-1144087.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-304-07: Intensity Modulated Electron Beam Therapy Employing Small Fields in Virtual Scanning Mode

Purpose: Dynamic electron radiation therapies such as dynamic electron arc radiotherapy (DEAR) utilize small fields to provide target conformity and fluence modulation. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the feasibility of virtual scanning mode using small fields. Methods: Monte Carlo simulations (EGSnrc/BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc) were performed using validated Varian TrueBeam phase space files for electron beam energies of 6, 9, 12, and 16 MeV and square/circular fields (1×1/1, 2×2/2, 3×3/3, 4×4/4, 5×5/5 cm{sup 2}/cm diameter). Resulting dose distributions (kernels) were used for subsequent calculations. The following analyses were performed: (1) Comparison of composite square fields and reference 10×10 cm{sup 2} dose distributions and (2) Scanning beam deliveries for square and circular fields realized as the convolution of kernels and scanning pattern. Preliminary beam weight and pattern optimization were also performed. Two linear scans of 10 cm with/without overlap were modeled. Comparison metrics included depth and orthogonal profiles at dmax. Results: (1) Composite fields regained reference depth dose profiles for most energies and fields within 5%. Smaller kernels and higher energies increased dose in the build-up and Bremsstrahlung region (30%, 16MeV and 1×1 cm{sup 2}), while reference dmax was maintained for all energies and composite fields. Smaller kernels (<2×2 cm{sup 2}) maintained penumbra and field size within 0.2 cm, and flatness within 2%. Deterioration of penumbra for larger kernels (5×5 cm{sup 2}) were observed. Balancing desirable dosimetry and efficiencies suggests that smaller kernels are used at edges and larger kernels in the center of the target. (2) Beam weight optimization improved cross-plane penumbra (0.2 cm) and increased the field size (0.4 cm) on average. In-plane penumbra and field size remained unchanged. Overlap depended on kernel size and optimal overlap resulted in flatness ±2%. Conclusion: Dynamic electron beam therapy in virtual scanning mode is feasible by employing small fields to achieve desired dose distributions and acceptable efficiencies.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

TU-F-CAMPUS-T-05: Replacement Computational Phantoms to Estimate Dose in Out-Of-Field Organs and Tissues

Purpose: To estimate the absorbed dose in organs and tissues at risk for radiogenic cancer for children receiving photon radiotherapy for localized brain tumors (LBTs) by supplementing their missing body anatomies with those of replacement computational phantoms. Applied beyond the extent of the RT Images collected by computed tomography simulation, these phantoms included RT Image and RT Structure Set objects that encompassed sufficient extents and contours for dosimetric calculations. Method: Nine children, aged 2 to 14 years, who received three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for low-grade LBTs, were randomly selected for this study under Institutional-Review-Board protocol. Because the extents of their RT Images were cranial only, they were matched for size and sex with patients from a previous study with larger extents and for whom contours of organs at risk for radiogenic cancer had already been delineated. Rigid fusion was performed between the patients’ data and those of the replacement computational phantoms using commercial software. In-field dose was calculated with a clinically-commissioned treatment planning system, and out-of-field dose was estimated with an analytical model. Results: Averaged over all nine children and normalized for a therapeutic dose of 54 Gy prescribed to the PTV, where the PTV is the GTV, the highest mean organ doses were 3.27, 2.41, 1.07, 1.02, 0.24, and 0.24 Gy in the non-tumor remainder, red bone marrow, thyroid, skin, breasts, and lungs, respectively. The mean organ doses ranged by a factor of 3 between the smallest and largest children. Conclusion: For children receiving photon radiotherapy for LBTs, we found their doses in organs at risk for second cancer to be non-negligible, especially in the non-tumor remainder, red bone marrow, thyroid, skin, breasts, and lungs. This study demonstrated the feasibility for patient dosimetry studies to augment missing patient anatomy by applying size- and sex-matched replacement computational phantoms with pre-contoured organs. Funding is in part by the Fogarty International Center award K01TW008409, and the Portland Chapter of the Achievement Rewards for College Scientists. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors, and does not necessarily represent the official views of the sponsors. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-BRB-06: A Temperature Independent Plastic Scintillation Detector Capable of Simultaneous Dose and Temperature Measurement

Purpose: To evaluate a measurement method that renders plastic scintillation detectors temperature independent and capable of recovering dose and temperature information simultaneously. Methods: A novel approach was developed to account for the temperature dependence of plastic scintillation detectors (PSDs) without prior knowledge of the temperature. To enable this, the optical response of the scintillating element is separated into two sub-components, one being the response at a given temperature and the other accounting for the change in the optical emission spectrum with temperature. Using a previously demonstrated hyperspectral approach and following the proper calibration protocol, the contribution to scintillator emission and physical value of both dose and temperature can be obtained in real-time. To validate the method, dose and temperature were measured under cobalt irradiation in a temperature controlled water tank developed for this study. The temperature was varied from 22°C to 42°C. Depth-dose curves were also obtained during irradiations from a linear accelerator, first maintaining the water at room temperature and then warming it to 40°C and letting it cool down naturally over the course of the second measurement. Results: Dose measurements delivered with the Co-60 unit showed an average relative difference to the expected value of (1.0±0.8)%, with a maximum difference of 2.3% over the entire range of temperatures. The measured temperatures using the PSD were all within 1°C of the expected values. The difference between room temperature and warmer depth dose measurements differed by only (1.2±0.4)%. The dosimeter showed to be accurate for temporal resolution down to 0.1s. Conclusion: The proposed method was shown to reliably correct for the temperature dependence of a PSD. Additionally, it makes it possible to assess the temperature at the point of measurement. These are significant advances in PSD technology, particularly in relation to real-time in vivo dosimetry. Part of this research was supported by the Odyssey Program at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-213-04: Preparing for Parts 2 & 3 of the ABR Nuclear Medicine Physics Exam

Adequate, efficient preparation for the ABR Diagnostic and Nuclear Medical Physics exams is key to successfully obtain ABR professional certification. Each part of the ABR exam presents its own challenges: Part I: Determine the scope of basic medical physics study material, efficiently review this material, and solve related written questions/problems. Part II: Understand imaging principles, modalities, and systems, including image acquisition, processing, and display. Understand the relationship between imaging techniques, image quality, patient dose and safety, and solve related written questions/problems. Part III: Gain crucial, practical, clinical medical physics experience. Effectively communicate and explain the practice, performance, and significance of all aspects of clinical medical physics. All three parts of the ABR exam require specific skill sets and preparation: mastery of basic physics and imaging principles; written problem solving often involving rapid calculation; responding clearly and succinctly to oral questions about the practice, methods, and significance of clinical medical physics. This symposium focuses on the preparation and skill sets necessary for each part of the ABR exam. Although there is some overlap, the nuclear exam covers a different body of knowledge than the diagnostic exam. A separate speaker will address those aspects that are unique to the nuclear exam. Medical physicists who have recently completed each of part of the ABR exam will share their experiences, insights, and preparation methods to help attendees best prepare for the challenges of each part of the ABR exam. In accordance with ABR exam security policy, no recalls or exam questions will be discussed. Learning Objectives: How to prepare for Part 1 of the ABR exam by determining the scope of basic medical physics study material and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 2 of the ABR exam by understanding diagnostic and/or nuclear imaging physics, systems, dosimetry, safety and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 3 of the ABR exam by effectively communicating the practice, methods, and significance of clinical diagnostic and/or nuclear medical physics.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-213-00: Preparing for the ABR Diagnostic and Nuclear Medicine Physics Exams

Adequate, efficient preparation for the ABR Diagnostic and Nuclear Medical Physics exams is key to successfully obtain ABR professional certification. Each part of the ABR exam presents its own challenges: Part I: Determine the scope of basic medical physics study material, efficiently review this material, and solve related written questions/problems. Part II: Understand imaging principles, modalities, and systems, including image acquisition, processing, and display. Understand the relationship between imaging techniques, image quality, patient dose and safety, and solve related written questions/problems. Part III: Gain crucial, practical, clinical medical physics experience. Effectively communicate and explain the practice, performance, and significance of all aspects of clinical medical physics. All three parts of the ABR exam require specific skill sets and preparation: mastery of basic physics and imaging principles; written problem solving often involving rapid calculation; responding clearly and succinctly to oral questions about the practice, methods, and significance of clinical medical physics. This symposium focuses on the preparation and skill sets necessary for each part of the ABR exam. Although there is some overlap, the nuclear exam covers a different body of knowledge than the diagnostic exam. A separate speaker will address those aspects that are unique to the nuclear exam. Medical physicists who have recently completed each of part of the ABR exam will share their experiences, insights, and preparation methods to help attendees best prepare for the challenges of each part of the ABR exam. In accordance with ABR exam security policy, no recalls or exam questions will be discussed. Learning Objectives: How to prepare for Part 1 of the ABR exam by determining the scope of basic medical physics study material and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 2 of the ABR exam by understanding diagnostic and/or nuclear imaging physics, systems, dosimetry, safety and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 3 of the ABR exam by effectively communicating the practice, methods, and significance of clinical diagnostic and/or nuclear medical physics.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-EF-BRA-09: Microbeam Radiation Therapy Enhances Tumor Drug Uptake of PEGylated Liposomal Doxorubicin (PLD) in a Triple Negative Breast Cancer GEM Model

Purpose: Overcoming low anti-cancer drug uptake in tumors is a key challenge limiting its clinical use. We propose to enhance the drug delivery using upfront Microbeam Radiation Therapy (MRT). MRT is a preclinical cancer therapy that utilizes microplanar beams to deliver spatially oscillating planes of high and low doses. Animal studies have demonstrated that ultrahigh dose (100s Gy) MRT eradicates tumors without damaging the function of normal tissue exposed to the same radiation. Our previous study indicated that MRT induces intense angiogenesis in tumor rim and surrounding normal tissue 1–2 days post radiation. We hypothesize that the tumor microenvironment modulation induced by MRT may enhance carrier-mediated agent drug delivery to tumors with inherent poor drug uptake. We thus investigated MRT-induced pharmacokinetics (PK) of PEGylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), a nano-scale doxorubicin, in T11 genetically engineered mouse model of triple negative breast cancer. Methods: A research irradiator (160kVp, RadSource Technologies) with a customized collimator was used to produce the MRT microbeam of in average 390µm width and 1190µm peak-to-peak distance. The peak dose rate of 1–2Gy/min. Dosimetry is by EBT3 film cross-calibrated with ion chamber at large fields. All mice were administered PLD at 6mg/kg IV x1 at 16h post MRT and sacrificed at 5min, 6h, 24h, and 96h post PLD administration (n=3 or 4 per group). Results: The MRT(28Gy)+PLD group mice had a total doxorubicin tumor concentration (area-under-the concentration-curve, AUC) of 206,040ng/mL•h, 3.71 times the concentration of the PLD-alone group. The MRT(34Gy)+PLD group had a higher mean total doxorubicin concentration in tumor (20,779ng/ml) than the MRT(28Gy)+PLD group (10,665ng/ml). Conclusion: Our preliminary results indicate that microbeam radiation therapy (MRT) can enhance nano-scale anti-cancer drug delivery to tumors approximately 4-fold. The exact working mechanism, the comparison with broad beam irradiation, and optimization of MRT for drug delivery enhancement are under investigation.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

Detector dose response in megavoltage small photon beams. I. Theoretical concepts

Purpose: To explain the reasons for significant quality correction factors in megavoltage small photon fields and clarify the underlying concepts relevant to dosimetry under such conditions. Methods: The validity of cavity theory and the requirement of charged particle equilibrium (CPE) are addressed from a theoretical point of view in the context of nonstandard beams. Perturbation effects are described into four main subeffects, explaining their nature and pointing out their relative importance in small photon fields. Results: It is demonstrated that the failure to meet classical cavity theory requirements, such as CPE, is not the reason for significant quality correction factors. On the contrary, it is shown that the lack of CPE alone cannot explain these corrections and that what matters most, apart from volume averaging effects, is the relationship between the lack of CPE in the small field itself and the density of the detector cavity. The density perturbation effect is explained based on Fano’s theorem, describing the compensating effect of two main contributions to cavity absorbed dose. Using the same approach, perturbation effects arising from the difference in atomic properties of the cavity medium and the presence of extracameral components are explained. Volume averaging effects are also discussed in detail. Conclusions: Quality correction factors of small megavoltage photon fields are mainly due to differences in electron density between water and the detector medium and to volume averaging over the detector cavity. Other effects, such as the presence of extracameral components and differences in atomic properties of the detection medium with respect to water, can also play an accentuated role in small photon fields compared to standard beams.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗