title: A dosimetry study comparing NCS report-5, IAEA TRS-381, AAPM TG-51 and IAEA TRS-398 in three clinical electron beam energies.
abstract: New codes of practice for reference dosimetry in clinical high-energy photon and electron beams have been published recently, to replace the air kerma based codes of practice that have determined the dosimetry of these beams for the past twenty years. In the present work, we compared dosimetry based on the two most widespread absorbed dose based recommendations (AAPM TG-51 and IAEA TRS-398) with two air kerma based recommendations (NCS report-5 and IAEA TRS-381). Measurements were performed in three clinical electron beam energies using two NE2571-type cylindrical chambers, two Markus-type plane-parallel chambers and two NACP-02-type plane-parallel chambers. Dosimetry based on direct calibrations of all chambers in 60Co was investigated, as well as dosimetry based on cross-calibrations of plane-parallel chambers against a cylindrical chamber in a high-energy electron beam. Furthermore, 60Co perturbation factors for plane-parallel chambers were derived. It is shown that the use of 60Co calibration factors could result in deviations of more than 2% for plane-parallel chambers between the old and new codes of practice, whereas the use of cross-calibration factors, which is the first recommendation in the new codes, reduces the differences to less than 0.8% for all situations investigated here. The results thus show that neither the chamber-to-chamber variations, nor the obtained absolute dose values are significantly altered by changing from air kerma based dosimetry to absorbed dose based dosimetry when using calibration factors obtained from the Laboratory for Standard Dosimetry, Ghent, Belgium. The values of the 60Co perturbation factor for plane-parallel chambers (k(att) x k(m) for the air kerma based and p(wall) for the absorbed based codes of practice) that are obtained from comparing the results based on 60Co calibrations and cross-calibrations are within the experimental uncertainties in agreement with the results from other investigators.
authors.affiliation: Department of Medical Physics, Ghent University, Proeftuinstraat 86, B-9000 Gent, Belgium. hugo.palmans@npl.co.uk
authors.forename: Hugo
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Palmans
authors.forename: Laila
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Nafaa
authors.forename: Nathalie
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: de Patoul
authors.forename: Jean-Marc
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Denis
authors.forename: Milan
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Tomsej
authors.forename: Stefaan
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Vynckier
mesh_terms: D002138:Calibration / Q000592:standards*; D003036:Cobalt Isotopes; D004583:Electrons; D011786:Quality Control; D011874:Radiometry / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011882:Radiotherapy, High-Energy / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D012015:Reference Standards; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity
chemical_list: D003036:Cobalt Isotopes