Field calibration of PADC track etch detectors for local neutron dosimetry in man using different radiation qualities

Hälg, Roger A.; Besserer, Jürgen; Boschung, M.; Mayer, Sabine; Clasie, B.; Kry, Stephen F.; Schneider, Uwe

doi:10.1016/j.nima.2012.08.021

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such applications are difficult and require careful consideration of the energy of the neutrons at the measurement location compared with the energy of the neutrons during calibration. Neutron dosimeters with location‐specific calibration factors have been proposed as a solution to this very difficult problem …”

Section: Measurement Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is possible to avoid these substantially erroneous results by requiring that the detectors are separately calibrated for each specific measurement location in the phantom (accounting for changes in the neutron spectrum and the response of TLD‐600). Such location‐specific calibrations have been successfully employed …”

Section: Measurement Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Panel a is courtesy of Landauer Inc.(Glenwood Illinois), while panel b is reproduced with permission from Ref. .…”

Section: Measurement Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Calibration of these detectors for in vivo measurements is possible through application of multiple detector calibration factors that vary as a function of position in the phantom/patient, thereby accounting for the changes in the neutron spectrum. The variation in neutron spectrum with depth in a phantom was found to make a 30–40% difference in the calibration factor for PN3 track etch detectors …”

Section: Measurement Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neutron dosimeters with location-specific calibration factors have been proposed as a solution to this very difficult problem. 86,212 While neutron dosimetry is often conducted in air to provide the most accurate measurements of neutron spectrum or dose, the dose equivalent in air (or at the surface of a patient) substantially overestimates the dose to organs within the patient because of the very sharp depth-dose dependency of neutrons. An estimate of the dose in the patient can be made by propagating the dose in air/at the surface to dose in a phantom or patient based on neutron percent depth doseequivalent curves.…”

Section: B Neutron Dosimetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

AAPM TG158: Measurement and calculation of doses outside the treated volume from external‐beam radiation therapy

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of advanced techniques and technology in radiotherapy has greatly improved our ability to deliver highly conformal tumor doses while minimizing the dose to adjacent organs at risk. Despite these tremendous improvements, there remains a general concern about doses to normal tissues that are not the target of the radiation treatment; any "nontarget" radiation should be minimized as it offers no therapeutic benefit. As patients live longer after treatment, there is increased opportunity for late effects including second cancers and cardiac toxicity to manifest. Complicating the management of these issues, there are unique challenges with measuring, calculating, reducing, and reporting nontarget doses that many medical physicists may have limited experience with. Treatment planning systems become dramatically inaccurate outside the treatment field, necessitating a measurement or some other means of assessing the dose. However, measurements are challenging because outside the treatment field, the radiation energy spectrum, dose rate, and general shape of the dose distribution (particularly the percent depth dose) are very different and often require special consideration. Neutron dosimetry is also particularly challenging, and common errors in methodology can easily manifest as errors of several orders of magnitude. Task Group 158 was, therefore, formed to provide guidance for physicists in terms of assessing and managing nontarget doses. In particular, the report: (a) highlights major concerns with nontarget radiation; (b) provides a rough estimate of doses associated with different treatment approaches in clinical practice; (c) discusses the uses of dosimeters for measuring photon, electron, and neutron doses; (d) discusses the use of calculation techniques for dosimetric evaluations; (e) highlights techniques that may be considered for reducing nontarget doses; (f) discusses dose reporting; and (g) makes recommendations for both clinical and research practice.

show abstract

Section: Measurement Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measurement Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Panel a is courtesy of Landauer Inc.(Glenwood Illinois), while panel b is reproduced with permission from Ref. .…”

Section: Measurement Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measurement Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Neutron Dosimetrymentioning

confidence: 99%