Home > Publications database > On the feasibility of absolute 3D dosimetry using LiF thermoluminescence detectors and polymer gels on a 0.35T MR-LINAC. > print

001     164172
005     20240229123206.0
024 7 _ |a 10.1088/1361-6560/aba6d7
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a pmid:33104524
|2 pmid
024 7 _ |a 0031-9155
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a 1361-6560
|2 ISSN
037 _ _ |a DKFZ-2020-02301
041 _ _ |a eng
082 _ _ |a 530
100 1 _ |a Schwahofer, Andrea
|0 P:(DE-He78)8918404541688dee7976f7546be900fe
|b 0
|e First author
|u dkfz
245 _ _ |a On the feasibility of absolute 3D dosimetry using LiF thermoluminescence detectors and polymer gels on a 0.35T MR-LINAC.
260 _ _ |a Bristol
|c 2020
|b IOP Publ.
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1604064622_17730
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
500 _ _ |a #EA:E040#LA:E040#
520 _ _ |a As shown in our previous study, highly accurate absolute dosimetry in 3D is feasible by combining polymer gels (PG) with thermoluminescence dosimetry (TLD). In this setup, the thermoluminescence (TL)-based point dose information is used to renormalize the PG. This new PG-TLD reference system is now extended to measurements in magnetic fields.Experiments were carried out on a conventional 6 MV linear accelerator (LINAC) and a 6 MV 0.35 T magnetic resonance (MR)-LINAC. Signal stability of TLD600 and TLD700 was examined without and with magnetic field. Afterwards, the combination of PAGAT PG and TL detectors was employed within a cylindrical phantom in presence of the magnetic field. Two scenarios were tested: (I) an air-filled phantom and (II) a water-filled phantom. For each scenario, two plans were irradiated: (a) opposed beams with a field size of 10 × 10 cm2 and (b) a 3D conformal plan assuring homogeneous target coverage using three equally distributed coplanar beams.Mean relative uncertainty of TL calibration reproducibility for TLD600/TLD700 was 0.49%/0.85% at the MR-LINAC and 0.48%/0.83% for the conventional LINAC. Individual TL calibration coefficients of TLD600 and TLD700 behaved differently in the presence of the magnetic field. An average difference of (3.29 ± 0.89)% occurred for all TLD600, whereas the result for TLD700 is not quite as clear with (1.09 ± 0.89)% after excluding some outliers. Using the TL dose information for PG renormalization, high 3D gamma passing rates were achieved using the 3%/2 mm criteria: 91.0% (Ia), 92.6% (Ib), 94.3% (IIa), 97.4% (IIb).This study shows that TL signal reproducibility is not affected by a low magnetic field. Nevertheless, absolute calibration coefficients of the individual detectors indicate a dependency on the magnetic field. Hence, a calibration at the appropriate LINAC type is recommended. Furthermore, the previously established renormalization method for PG was applied to measurements at a MR-LINAC and was verified as suitable for evaluations of homogeneous dose distribution in the target volume.
536 _ _ |a 315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315
|c POF3-315
|f POF III
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
700 1 _ |a Mann, P.
|0 P:(DE-He78)d26409e0d07007daf771142a945102ef
|b 1
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |a Spindeldreier, C. K.
|0 P:(DE-He78)68622f6bdd6a5e6841631a06e4a67f7e
|b 2
700 1 _ |a Karger, C. P.
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 3
|e Last author
773 _ _ |a 10.1088/1361-6560/aba6d7
|g Vol. 65, no. 21, p. 215002 -
|0 PERI:(DE-600)1473501-5
|n 21
|p 215002
|t Physics in medicine and biology
|v 65
|y 2020
|x 1361-6560
909 C O |o oai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:164172
|p VDB
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 0
|6 P:(DE-He78)8918404541688dee7976f7546be900fe
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 1
|6 P:(DE-He78)d26409e0d07007daf771142a945102ef
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 3
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|l Krebsforschung
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300
|v Imaging and radiooncology
|x 0
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3
|b Gesundheit
914 1 _ |y 2020
915 _ _ |a Nationallizenz
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0420
|2 StatID
|d 2020-02-27
|w ger
915 _ _ |a National-Konsortium
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0430
|2 StatID
|d 2020-02-27
|w ger
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0110
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0111
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index Expanded
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0160
|2 StatID
|b Essential Science Indicators
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1190
|2 StatID
|b Biological Abstracts
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1030
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Life Sciences
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1050
|2 StatID
|b BIOSIS Previews
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b PHYS MED BIOL : 2018
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600
|2 StatID
|b Ebsco Academic Search
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b ASC
|d 2020-02-27
915 _ _ |a IF < 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900
|2 StatID
|d 2020-02-27
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)E040-20160331
|k E040
|l E040 Med. Physik in der Strahlentherapie
|x 0
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)E040-20160331
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED

LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21