Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.15146 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866910703803170816 |
|---|---|
| author | Palmiero, Allison Liu, Kevin Colnot, Julie Chopra, Nitish Neill, Denae Connell, Luke Velasquez, Brett Koong, Albert C. Lin, Steven H. Balter, Peter Tailor, Ramesh Robert, Charlotte Germond, Jean-François Jorge, Patrik Gonçalves Geyer, Reiner Beddar, Sam Moeckli, Raphael Schüler, Emil |
| author_facet | Palmiero, Allison Liu, Kevin Colnot, Julie Chopra, Nitish Neill, Denae Connell, Luke Velasquez, Brett Koong, Albert C. Lin, Steven H. Balter, Peter Tailor, Ramesh Robert, Charlotte Germond, Jean-François Jorge, Patrik Gonçalves Geyer, Reiner Beddar, Sam Moeckli, Raphael Schüler, Emil |
| contents | Background & Purpose: FLASH or ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) radiation therapy (RT) has gained attention in recent years for its ability to spare normal tissues relative to conventional dose rate (CDR) RT in various preclinical trials. However, clinical implementation of this promising treatment option has been limited because of the lack of availability of accelerators capable of delivering UHDR RT. We established a framework for the acceptance, commissioning, and periodic quality assurance (QA) of electron FLASH units and present an example of commissioning.
Methods: A protocol for acceptance, commissioning, and QA of UHDR linear accelerators was established by combining and adapting standards and professional recommendations for standard linear accelerators based on the experience with UHDR at four clinical centers that use different UHDR devices. Non-standard dosimetric beam parameters considered included pulse width, pulse repetition frequency, dose per pulse, and instantaneous dose rate, together with recommendations on how to acquire these measurements.
Results: The 6 and 9 MeV beams of an UHDR electron device were commissioned by using this developed protocol. Measurements were acquired with a combination of ion chambers, beam current transformers (BCTs), and dose rate independent passive dosimeters. The unit was calibrated according to the concept of redundant dosimetry using a reference setup.
Conclusions: This study provides detailed recommendations for the acceptance testing, commissioning, and routine QA of low-energy electron UHDR linear accelerators. The proposed framework is not limited to any specific unit, making it applicable to all existing eFLASH units in the market. Through practical insights and theoretical discourse, this document establishes a benchmark for the commissioning of UHDR devices for clinical use. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2405_15146 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | On the acceptance, commissioning, and quality assurance of electron FLASH units Palmiero, Allison Liu, Kevin Colnot, Julie Chopra, Nitish Neill, Denae Connell, Luke Velasquez, Brett Koong, Albert C. Lin, Steven H. Balter, Peter Tailor, Ramesh Robert, Charlotte Germond, Jean-François Jorge, Patrik Gonçalves Geyer, Reiner Beddar, Sam Moeckli, Raphael Schüler, Emil Medical Physics Background & Purpose: FLASH or ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) radiation therapy (RT) has gained attention in recent years for its ability to spare normal tissues relative to conventional dose rate (CDR) RT in various preclinical trials. However, clinical implementation of this promising treatment option has been limited because of the lack of availability of accelerators capable of delivering UHDR RT. We established a framework for the acceptance, commissioning, and periodic quality assurance (QA) of electron FLASH units and present an example of commissioning. Methods: A protocol for acceptance, commissioning, and QA of UHDR linear accelerators was established by combining and adapting standards and professional recommendations for standard linear accelerators based on the experience with UHDR at four clinical centers that use different UHDR devices. Non-standard dosimetric beam parameters considered included pulse width, pulse repetition frequency, dose per pulse, and instantaneous dose rate, together with recommendations on how to acquire these measurements. Results: The 6 and 9 MeV beams of an UHDR electron device were commissioned by using this developed protocol. Measurements were acquired with a combination of ion chambers, beam current transformers (BCTs), and dose rate independent passive dosimeters. The unit was calibrated according to the concept of redundant dosimetry using a reference setup. Conclusions: This study provides detailed recommendations for the acceptance testing, commissioning, and routine QA of low-energy electron UHDR linear accelerators. The proposed framework is not limited to any specific unit, making it applicable to all existing eFLASH units in the market. Through practical insights and theoretical discourse, this document establishes a benchmark for the commissioning of UHDR devices for clinical use. |
| title | On the acceptance, commissioning, and quality assurance of electron FLASH units |
| topic | Medical Physics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.15146 |