The use of small fields in radiotherapy techniques has increased substantially, in particular in stereotactic treatments and large uniform or nonuniform fields that are composed of small fields such as for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). This has been facilitated by the increased availability of standard and add-on multileaf collimators and a variety of new treatment units. For these fields, dosimetric errors have become considerably larger than in conventional beams mostly due to two reasons; (i) the reference conditions recommended by conventional Codes of Practice (CoPs) cannot be established in some machines and (ii) the measurement of absorbed dose to water in composite fields is not standardized. In order to develop standardized recommendations for dosimetry procedures and detectors, an international working group on reference dosimetry of small and nonstandard fields has been established by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in cooperation with the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Therapy Physics Committee. This paper outlines a new formalism for the dosimetry of small and composite fields with the intention to extend recommendations given in conventional CoPs for clinical reference dosimetry based on absorbed dose to water. This formalism introduces the concept of two new intermediate calibration fields: (i) a static machine-specific reference field for those modalities that cannot establish conventional reference conditions and (ii) a plan-class specific reference field closer to the patient-specific clinical fields thereby facilitating standardization of composite field dosimetry. Prior to progressing with developing a CoP or other form of recommendation, the members of this IAEA working group welcome comments from the international medical physics community on the formalism presented here.

This addendum to the code of practice for the determination of absorbed dose for x-rays below 300 kV has recently been approved by the IPEM and introduces three main changes: (i) Due to a lack of available data the original code recommended a value of unity for k(ch) in the very-low-energy range (0.035-1.0 mm Al HVL). A single table of k(ch) values, ranging from 1.01 to 1.07, applicable to both designated chamber types is now presented. (ii) For medium-energy x-rays (0.5-4 mm Cu HVL) methods are given to determine the absorbed dose to water either at 2 cm depth or at the surface of a phantom depending on clinical needs. Determination of the dose at the phantom surface is derived from an in-air measurement and by extending the low-energy range up to 4 mm Cu HVL. Relevant backscatter factors and ratios of mass energy absorption coefficients are given in the addendum. (iii) Relative dosimetry: although not normally forming part of a dosimetry code of practice a brief review of the current literature on this topic has been added as an appendix. This encompasses advice on techniques for measuring depth doses, applicator factors for small field sizes, dose fall off with increasing SSD and choice of appropriate phantom materials and ionization chambers.

No abstract

Recent studies have indicated that radiotherapy treatments undertaken on a flattening filter-free (FFF) linear accelerator have a number of advantages over treatments undertaken on a conventional linear accelerator. In addition, 4 MV photon beams may give improved isodose coverage for some treatment volumes at air/tissue interfaces, compared to when utilizing the clinical standard of 6 MV photons. In order to investigate these benefits, FFF beams were established on an Elekta Beam Modulator linear accelerator for 4 MV photons. Commissioning beam data were obtained for open and wedged fields. The measured data were then imported into a treatment planning system and a beam model was commissioned. The beam model was optimized to improve dose calculations at shallow, clinically relevant depths. Following verification, the beam model was utilized in a treatment planning study, including volumetric modulated arc therapy, for a selection of lung, breast/chest wall and larynx patients. Increased dose rates of around 800 MU min(-1) were recorded for open fields (relative to 320 MU min(-1) for filtered open fields) and reduced head scatter was inferred from output factor measurements. Good agreement between planned and delivered dose was observed in verification of treatment plans. The planning study indicated that with a FFF beam, equivalent (and in some cases improved) isodose profiles could be achieved for small lung and larynx treatment volumes relative to 4 MV filtered treatments. Furthermore, FFF treatments with wedges could be replicated using open fields together with an 'effective wedge' technique and isocentre shift. Clinical feasibility of a FFF beam was therefore demonstrated, with beam modelling, treatment planning and verification being successfully accomplished.