Comparison of TLD calibration methods for 192Ir dosimetry

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 258-272

  Haworth, Annette ^a,b   Butler, Duncan J ^c   Wilfert, Lisa ^d,e   Ebert, Martin A ^f,g   Todd, Stephen P ^a   Hayton, Anna J M ^b,c   Kron, Tomas ^a,b  

^a PETER MACCALLUM CANCER CENTRE   (Australia)

^b RMIT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c AUSTRALIAN RADIATION PROTECTION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AGENCY   (Australia)

^d CALVARY MATER NEWCASTLE HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^e UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

^f SIR CHARLES GAIRDNER HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^g UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

Brachytherapy; Calibration; LiF:Mg; Thermoluminescence dosimetry; Ti

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873550077     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15269914     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v14i1.4037     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Kron T, Duggan L, Smith T, et al. Dose response of various radiation detectors to synchrotron radiation. Phys Med Biol. 1998;43(11):3235-59.
2. Meigooni AS, Meli JA, Nath R. Influence of the variation of energy spectra with depth in the dosimetry of 192Ir using LiF TLD. Phys Med Biol. 1988;33(10):1159-70.
3. Carlsson Tedgren A, Elia R, Hedtjarn H, Olsson S Alm Carlsson G. Determination of absorbed dose to water around a clinical HDR (192)Ir source using LiF:Mg,Ti TLDs demonstrates an LET dependence of detector response. Med Phys. 2012;39(2):1133-40.
4. Tedgren AC, Hedman A, Grindborg JE, Carlsson GA. Response of LiF:Mg,Ti thermoluminescent dosimeters at photon energies relevant to the dosimetry of brachytherapy (1 MeV). Med Phys. 2011;38(10):5539-50.
5. Thomason C and Higgins P. Reply to comments of Meli, Meigooni, and Nath. Med Phys. 1989;16(5):825.
6. Karaiskos P, Angelopoulos A, Sakelliou L, et al. Monte Carlo and TLD dosimetry of an 192Ir high dose-rate brachytherapy source. Med Phys. 1998;25(10):1975-84.
7. International Atomic Energy Agency. Absorbed dose determination in external beam radiotherapy: an international code of practice for dosimetry based on standards of absorbed dose to water. Technical Report Series 398. Vienna: IAEA; 2000.
8. Almond PR, Biggs PJ, Coursey BM, et al. AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams. Med Phys. 1999;26(9):1847-70.
9. Nath R, Anderson LL, Luxton G, Weaver KA, Williamson JF, Meigooni AS. Dosimetry of interstitial brachytherapy sources: recommendations of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 43. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Med Phys. 1995;22(2):209-34.
10. Ibbott G, Aguirre F, Alvarez P, Homnick J, Springer A, Followill D. Commissioning of optically stimulated luminescence (osl) dosimeters for remote dosimetry audits. Date accessed: August 21, 2012 Available from: http://www.landauer.com/uploadedFiles/Resource_Center/Implementation%20of%20OSL%20at%20RPC.pdf
11. Butler D, Haworth A, Sander T Todd S. Comparison of 192Ir air kerma calibration coefficients derived at ARPANSA using the interpolation method and at the National Physical Laboratory using a direct measurement. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2008;31(4):332-38.
12. Sander T and Nutbrown RF. The NPL air kerma primary standard TH100C for high dose rate 192Ir brachytherapy sources, NPL Report DQL-RD 004. 2006. Available from: http://publications.npl.co.uk
13. International Atomic Energy Agency. Calibration of photon and beta ray sources used in brachytherapy. TecDoc-1274. Vienna: IAEA; 2002.
14. Roue A, Venselaar JL, Ferreira IH, Bridier A Van Dam J. Development of a TLD mailed system for remote dosimetry audit for (192)Ir HDR and PDR sources. Radiother Oncol. 2007;83(1):86-93.
15. Johns HE and Cunningham JR, eds. The Physics of Radiology, 4th edition. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas; 1983.
16. Bielajew AF. Correction factors for thick-walled ionization chambers in point-source photon beams. Phys Med Biol. 1990;35(4):501-16.
17. Daskalov GM, Loffler E, Williamson JF. Monte Carlo-aided dosimetry of a new high dose-rate brachytherapy source. Med Phys. 1998;25(11):2200-08.
18. Tolli H and Johansson KA. Absorbed dose determination at short distance from 60Co and 192Ir brachytherapy sources. Phys Med Biol. 1998;43(11):3183-94.
19. Tolli H and Johansson KA. Correction factors for Farmer-type chambers for absorbed dose determination in 60Co and 192Ir brachytherapy dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 1998;43(11):3171-81.
20. International Atomic Energy Agency. Absorbed dose determination in photon and electron beams. Technical Report Series 277. Vienna: IAEA; 1997.
21. Ferreira IH, de Almeida CE, Marre D, Marechal MH, Bridier A, Chavaudra J. Monte Carlo calculations of the ionization chamber wall correction factors for 192Ir and 60Co gamma rays and 250 kV x-rays for use in calibration of 192Ir HDR brachytherapy sources. Phys Med Biol. 1999;44(8):1897-904.
22. Rivard MJ, Coursey BM, DeWerd LA, et al. Update of AAPM Task Group No. 43 Report: A revised AAPM protocol for brachytherapy dose calculations. Med Phys. 2004;31(3):633-74.
23. Pradhan AS and Quast U. In-phantom response of LiF TLD-100 for dosimetry of 192Ir HDR source. Med Phys. 2000;27(5):1025-29.
24. Ochoa R, Gomez F, Ferreira IH, Gutt F, de Almeida CE. Design of a phantom for the quality control of high dose rate 192Ir source used in brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2007;82(2):222-28.
25. Nunn AA, Davis SD, Micka JA, DeWerd LA. LiF:Mg,Ti TLD response as a function of photon energy for moderately filtered x-ray spectra in the range of 20-250 kVp relative to 60Co. Med Phys. 2008;35(5):1859-69.
26. Carinou E, A. Boziari, P. Askounis, A. Mikulis, V. Kamenopoulou. Energy dependence of TLD 100 and MCP-N detectors. Radiation Measurements. 2008;43(2-6):599-602.
27. Duggan L, Hood C, Warren-Forward H, Haque M Kron T. Variations in dose response with x-ray energy of LiF:Mg,Cu,P thermoluminescence dosimeters: implications for clinical dosimetry. Phys Med Biol, 2004. 49(17). 3831-45.
28. Hranitzky C, Stadtmann H, Olko P. Determination of LiF:Mg,Ti and LiF:Mg,Cu,P TL efficiency for X-rays and their application to Monte Carlo simulations of dosemeter response. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2006;119(1-4):483-86.
29. Jursinic PA. Characterization of optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters, OSLDs, for clinical dosimetric measurements. Med Phys. 2007;34(12):4594-604.