Performances analysis of Sugar/EPR, Lithium Formate Monohydrate/EPR and Sulfamic acid/EPR dosimetry systems in evaluation of doses delivered during the prostate cancer treatment, using an anthropomorphic phantom

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors

1 Laboratory of Mathematics, Computer Science and Engineering Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Hassan First University, Settat, Morocco

2 Laboratory of Sciences and Health Technologies, Higher Institute of Health Sciences (ISSS), Hassan First University, Settat, Morocco

3 Laboratory of Sciences and Health Technologies, Higher Institute of Health Sciences (ISSS), Hassan First University, Settat, Morocco. Department of Radiotherapy, Sheikh Khalifa International University Hospital, Casablanca, Morocco

4 Department of Radiotherapy, Sheikh Khalifa International University Hospital, Casablanca, Morocco

10.22038/ijmp.2025.77758.2368

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this work is to test the suitability of the three dosimetry systems: sugar/EPR (Electron Paramagnetic Resonance), lithium formate monohydrate/EPR (LFM/EPR) and sulfamic acid/EPR in the control and assessment of the dose delivered in tumor volume and surrounding organs during radiotherapy treatment of prostate cancer. Thus, the study proposes to compare the doses calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS) with the doses measured by the three dosimetry systems used, in order to verify their ability to evaluate the clinical doses administered.
Material and Methods: To perform this work, the various dosimeters studied were placed at the level of the tumor and the surrounding organs in a male anthropomorphic phantom. To simulate radiation therapy for prostate cancer, the phantom used was irradiated by 6 MV X-rays after careful implementation of a treatment plan for the determination and execution of the prescribed dose, using CT (Computed Tomography) imaging and TPS calculations.
Results: The irradiated dosimeters were analyzed by EPR and the determined doses were compared to the doses calculated by the TPS system. The results obtained show that the doses measured by the studied dosimetry systems are similar to calculated doses. The sugar/EPR system appears to be more accurate than the other two dosimetry systems.
Conclusion: The three dosimetry systems used show promise for applications as dosimeters in radiotherapy.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. ICRU Report 24. Determination of absorbed dose in a patient irradiated by beams of X or gamma rays in radiotherapy procedures. 1976.
  2. Della Atuwo-Ampoh V, Naab Manson E, Schandorf C, Nii Tagoe S, Addison EK, Fiagbedzi E. In Vivo Dosimetry Using a Flat Surface Sun Nuclear Corporation Diode in 60 co Beams for Some Radiotherapy Treatments in Ghana. Iran J Med Phys. 2019;16:329–
  3. Marzuki R, Rahman AA, Mustafa IS, Shabandi AN. Diode Dosimetric Characteristics Assessment for In-Vivo Dosimetry in Radiotherapy Treatment. J Phys Conf Ser. 2018;1083(1).
  4. Gopiraj A, Billimagga RS, Ramasubramanian V. Performance characteristics and commissioning of MOSFET as an in-vivo dosimeter for high energy photon external beam radiation therapy. Reports Pract Oncol Radiother. 2008;13(3):114–25: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1507-1367(10)60001-6
  5. Won Y, Kim J, Kwon K, Kim S. Application of Patient-Customized Cast Type M3 Wax Bolus using a 3D printing for Photon Beam Radiation Therapy in Patients with Scalp Malignant Tumor. Iran J Med Phys. 2020;17(6):428–
  6. Costa AM, Barbi GL, Bertucci EC, Ferreira H, Simone Z, Colenci B, et al. In vivo dosimetry with thermoluminescent dosimeters in external photon beam radiotherapy. Appl Radiat Isot. 2010;68(4–5):760–2: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2009.09.039
  7. Baradaran S, Taheri M, Moslehi A. Comparison and Correction of Thermo-Luminescent Responses in Different Neutron Fields. Iran J Med Phys. 2021;18(2):84–
  8. Yukihara EG, Mckeever SWS, Akselrod MS. State of art : Optically stimulated luminescence dosimetry e Frontiers of future research. Radiat Meas. 2014;71:15–24: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2014.03.023
  9. Marrale M, Longo A, Russo G, Casarino C, Candiano G, Gallo S, et al. Dosimetry for electron Intra-Operative RadioTherapy: Comparison of output factors obtained through alanine/EPR pellets, ionization chamber and Monte Carlo-GEANT4 simulations for IORT mobile dedicate accelerator. Nucl Instruments Methods Phys Res Sect B Beam Interact with Mater Atoms. 2015;358:52–8: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2015.05.022
  10. Rushdi MAH, Abdel-Fattah AA, Soliman YS. Physico-chemical studies for strontium sulfate radiation dosimeter. J Radiat Res Appl Sci. 2015;8(2):221–5: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2015.01.006
  11. Gallo S, Iacoviello G, Panzeca S, Veronese I, Bartolotta A, Dondi D, et al. Characterization of phenolic pellets for ESR dosimetry in photon beam radiotherapy. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2017;56(4):471–
  12. Aboelezz E, De Angelis C, Fattibene P. A study on energy dependence of nano barium sulfate powder using the EPR technique in photon, electron and proton beams. Meas J Int Meas Confed. 2021;175(March):109108: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2021.109108
  13. Nagy V. Accuracy considerations in EPR dosimetry. Appl Radiat Isot. 2000;52(5):1039–
  14. Regulla DF. ESR spectrometry: A future-oriented tool for dosimetry and dating. In: Applied Radiation and Isotopes. Elsevier Ltd; 2005. p. 117–
  15. Belahmar A, Mikou M, Hoehr C, El Ghalmi M. Cumulative dose experiments on Lithium formate monohydrate as an EPR-dosimeter for use in different radiation therapy scenarios. Nucl Instruments Methods Phys Res Sect B Beam Interact with Mater Atoms. 2022;532:1–6: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2022.10.001
  16. Einar Waldeland, Magnus H¨orling, Eli Olaug Hole ES and EM. Dosimetry of stereotactic radiosurgery using lithium formate EPR dosimeters. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55(8):2307–
  17. Schaeken, Lelie, Meijnders and D. Van den Weyngaert, Janssens V. Alanine/EPR dosimetry applied to the verification of a total body irradiation protocol and treatment planning dose calculation using a humanoid phantom. Med Phys. 2010;37(12):6292–
  18. Knudtsen IS, Svestad JG, Skaug Sande EP, Rekstad BL, Rødal J, Van Elmpt W, et al. Validation of dose painting of lung tumours using alanine/EPR dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61(6):2243–
  19. Höfel S, Fix MK, Drescher M, Zwicker F. Suitability of superficial electron paramagnetic resonance dosimetry for in vivo measurement and verification of cumulative total doses during IMRT: A proof of principle. Z Med Phys. 2021;31(4):365–77: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zemedi.2021.03.006
  20. Papoutsis I, Skjei Knudtsen I, Peter Skaug Sande E, Louni Rekstad B, Öllers M, van Elmpt W, et al. Positron emission tomography guided dose painting by numbers of lung cancer: Alanine dosimetry in an anthropomorphic phantom. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2022;21(September 2021):101–
  21. Mikou M, Ghosne N, El Baydaoui R, Zirari Z, Kuntz F. Performance characteristics of the EPR dosimetry system with table sugar in radiotherapy applications. Appl Radiat Isot. 2015;99:1–
  22. Belahmar A, Mikou M, El Ghalmi M. Analysis by EPR measurements and spectral deconvolution of the dosimetric properties of lithium formate monohydrate. Nucl Instruments Methods Phys Res Sect B Beam Interact with Mater Atoms. 2018 Sep 15;431:19–
  23. Zahiri F, Gouache H El, Mikou M, Hoehr C, Saidi K. EPR analysis of the dosimetric properties of sulfamic acid irradiated by different ionizing radiations for radiotherapy and hadrontherapy applications. Nucl Instruments Methods Phys Res Sect B Beam Interact with Mater Atoms. 2021;506:23–31: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2021.08.010
  24. Zirari Z, Belahmar A, Mikou M, Hoehr C. Dosimetric and spectroscopic study of table sugar irradiated by X-ray and accelerated protons for therapeutic applications. Radiat Phys Chem. 2023;203(PA):110621: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.110621
  25. IAEA-TECDOC-1540. Specification and Acceptance Testing of Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Systems. 2007;1–
  26. IAEA TRS-398. Absorbed Dose Determination in External Beam Radiotherapy. An International Code of Practice for Dosimetry Based on Standards of Absorbed Dose to Water. 2000;1–
  27. Taylor, Barry N, Kuyatt CE. NIST Technical Note 1297 Guidelines for Evaluating and Expressing the Uncertainty of NIST Measurement Results. Technology. 1994.

 

 

 

 

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 22, Issue 2
March and April 2025
Pages 120-129

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 26 January 2024
  • Revise Date: 17 September 2024
  • Accept Date: 09 June 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics