View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

An international film dosimetry intercomparison to establish a multi‐center audit framework.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: An international film dosimetry intercomparison to establish a multi‐center audit framework.
Authors: Beveridge, Sabeena1 (AUTHOR) sabeena.beveridge@arpansa.gov.au, Alves, Andrew1 (AUTHOR), Hussein, Mohammad2 (AUTHOR), Clark, Catharine H.2,3,4 (AUTHOR), Jornet, Núria5 (AUTHOR), Viegas, Claudio C. B.6 (AUTHOR), Reniers, Brigitte7 (AUTHOR), Alvarez, Paola Elisa8,9 (AUTHOR), Azangwe, Godfrey10 (AUTHOR), Chelminski, Krzysztof10 (AUTHOR), Dimitriadis, Alexis10 (AUTHOR), Kazantsev, Pavel10 (AUTHOR), Swamidas, Jamema10 (AUTHOR)
Source: Medical Physics. Dec2024, Vol. 51 Issue 12, p9071-9087. 17p.
Subjects: Medical dosimetry, Systems software, Dosimeters, Standard deviations, Quality assurance
Abstract: Background: In 2021, a Technical Meeting was hosted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) where it was recommended that a standardized method for assessing the accuracy of film dose calculations should be established. Purpose: To design an audit that evaluates the accuracy of film dosimetry processes. To propose a framework for identifying out‐of‐tolerance results and to perform an international pilot study to test the audit design. Methods: Six members of an international Dosimetry Audit Network (DAN) developed an audit for radiochromic film dosimetry. A single host center provided the materials to each participating DAN member to conduct the audits. Materials included: (1) a set of two irradiated audit films (10 Sq: 10 cm × 10 cm, 15 Sq: 15 cm × 15 cm), (2) a reference calibration film set, and (3) a blank sheet of film. The participants were blinded to the dose and tasked with producing dose maps using their standard film dosimetry process. Average Region‐Of‐Interest (ROI: 2 cm × 2 cm) dose was measured from the dose maps and compared to the known dose. In the audit, all participants used their local scanning and software protocols. Film calibration was performed in two distinct ways: (1) using a calibration film set which was provided by the host center and (2) using a calibration film set which was locally irradiated. Several variations of the audit were also performed to examine how scanning and software processing can affect film dosimetry results. In the first variation of the audit (VariantA), a set of film scans was processed using five different software solutions. In the second variation of the audit (VariantB), all films were scanned on the same scanner and processed using two in‐house software solutions. Results: Taking one film scan from each participant, the standard deviations (1σ) (SD) in the dose returned from the host calibration and returned from the local calibration were ±7.2% and ±6.5% respectively, with variations from −12.4% to 12.9% of the known dose. The larger dose variations in the data set were attributed to the corrections applied for variations in scanner brightness during processing and incorrectly assigned calibration doses. When the raw image data set was processed by an expert user of each software solution (VariantA) the SDs were ±2.7% and ±3.7% for in‐house and vendor‐based software, respectively. When the films were scanned on a single scanner and processed with the two in‐house software solutions (VariantB) the results had a SD of ±2.3%. Conclusions: An audit has been designed and tested for radiotherapy film dosimetry at an international level. A framework for diagnosing issues within a film dosimetry process has been proposed that could be used to audit centers that use film as a dosimeter. Incorporating quality assurance throughout the film process is important in obtaining accurate and consistent film dosimetry. A better understanding of vendor‐based software systems is necessary for users to process accurate and consistent film dosimetry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Medical Physics is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: egs
DbLabel: Engineering Source
An: 181778100
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: An international film dosimetry intercomparison to establish a multi‐center audit framework.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Beveridge%2C+Sabeena%22">Beveridge, Sabeena</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> sabeena.beveridge@arpansa.gov.au</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Alves%2C+Andrew%22">Alves, Andrew</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hussein%2C+Mohammad%22">Hussein, Mohammad</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Clark%2C+Catharine+H%2E%22">Clark, Catharine H.</searchLink><relatesTo>2,3,4</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jornet%2C+Núria%22">Jornet, Núria</searchLink><relatesTo>5</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Viegas%2C+Claudio+C%2E+B%2E%22">Viegas, Claudio C. B.</searchLink><relatesTo>6</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Reniers%2C+Brigitte%22">Reniers, Brigitte</searchLink><relatesTo>7</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Alvarez%2C+Paola+Elisa%22">Alvarez, Paola Elisa</searchLink><relatesTo>8,9</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Azangwe%2C+Godfrey%22">Azangwe, Godfrey</searchLink><relatesTo>10</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chelminski%2C+Krzysztof%22">Chelminski, Krzysztof</searchLink><relatesTo>10</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Dimitriadis%2C+Alexis%22">Dimitriadis, Alexis</searchLink><relatesTo>10</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kazantsev%2C+Pavel%22">Kazantsev, Pavel</searchLink><relatesTo>10</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Swamidas%2C+Jamema%22">Swamidas, Jamema</searchLink><relatesTo>10</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Medical+Physics%22">Medical Physics</searchLink>. Dec2024, Vol. 51 Issue 12, p9071-9087. 17p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Medical+dosimetry%22">Medical dosimetry</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Systems+software%22">Systems software</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Dosimeters%22">Dosimeters</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Standard+deviations%22">Standard deviations</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Quality+assurance%22">Quality assurance</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Background: In 2021, a Technical Meeting was hosted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) where it was recommended that a standardized method for assessing the accuracy of film dose calculations should be established. Purpose: To design an audit that evaluates the accuracy of film dosimetry processes. To propose a framework for identifying out‐of‐tolerance results and to perform an international pilot study to test the audit design. Methods: Six members of an international Dosimetry Audit Network (DAN) developed an audit for radiochromic film dosimetry. A single host center provided the materials to each participating DAN member to conduct the audits. Materials included: (1) a set of two irradiated audit films (10 Sq: 10 cm × 10 cm, 15 Sq: 15 cm × 15 cm), (2) a reference calibration film set, and (3) a blank sheet of film. The participants were blinded to the dose and tasked with producing dose maps using their standard film dosimetry process. Average Region‐Of‐Interest (ROI: 2 cm × 2 cm) dose was measured from the dose maps and compared to the known dose. In the audit, all participants used their local scanning and software protocols. Film calibration was performed in two distinct ways: (1) using a calibration film set which was provided by the host center and (2) using a calibration film set which was locally irradiated. Several variations of the audit were also performed to examine how scanning and software processing can affect film dosimetry results. In the first variation of the audit (VariantA), a set of film scans was processed using five different software solutions. In the second variation of the audit (VariantB), all films were scanned on the same scanner and processed using two in‐house software solutions. Results: Taking one film scan from each participant, the standard deviations (1σ) (SD) in the dose returned from the host calibration and returned from the local calibration were ±7.2% and ±6.5% respectively, with variations from −12.4% to 12.9% of the known dose. The larger dose variations in the data set were attributed to the corrections applied for variations in scanner brightness during processing and incorrectly assigned calibration doses. When the raw image data set was processed by an expert user of each software solution (VariantA) the SDs were ±2.7% and ±3.7% for in‐house and vendor‐based software, respectively. When the films were scanned on a single scanner and processed with the two in‐house software solutions (VariantB) the results had a SD of ±2.3%. Conclusions: An audit has been designed and tested for radiotherapy film dosimetry at an international level. A framework for diagnosing issues within a film dosimetry process has been proposed that could be used to audit centers that use film as a dosimeter. Incorporating quality assurance throughout the film process is important in obtaining accurate and consistent film dosimetry. A better understanding of vendor‐based software systems is necessary for users to process accurate and consistent film dosimetry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Medical Physics is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=181778100
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/mp.17428
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 17
        StartPage: 9071
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Medical dosimetry
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Systems software
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Dosimeters
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Standard deviations
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Quality assurance
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: An international film dosimetry intercomparison to establish a multi‐center audit framework.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Beveridge, Sabeena
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Alves, Andrew
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hussein, Mohammad
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Clark, Catharine H.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Jornet, Núria
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Viegas, Claudio C. B.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Reniers, Brigitte
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Alvarez, Paola Elisa
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Azangwe, Godfrey
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chelminski, Krzysztof
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Dimitriadis, Alexis
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kazantsev, Pavel
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Swamidas, Jamema
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Text: Dec2024
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 00942405
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 51
            – Type: issue
              Value: 12
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Medical Physics
              Type: main
ResultId 1