Which accelerator photon beams are "clinic-like" for reference dosimetry purposes?

Previous work has demonstrated that, for photon beam dosimetry, TPR10(20) is not an ideal beam quality specifier for all bremsstrahlung beams, especially for lightly filtered beams in some standards laboratories. This paper addresses the following questions: Is TPR10(20) an adequate beam quality specifier for all modern clinical therapy accelerators? When can nonclinical beams in standards laboratories be used to calibrate ion chambers or measure kQ factors as a function of TPR10(20)? Based on detailed Monte Carlo simulations of Varian, Siemens, Elekta, and GE (Saturn) accelerators one can conclude that TPR10(20) is an adequate beam quality specifier for all these machines in the sense that for a given value of TPR10(20), the value of stopping-power ratios is the same. It is shown that, for the heavily filtered beams used in standards laboratories, TPR10(20) is an adequate beam quality specifier. It is also demonstrated that, for a larger range of bremsstrahlung beams than previously, %dd(10)x is a good beam quality specifier for all clinical beams as well as the lightly and heavily filtered beams in some standards laboratories. A criterion, based on the measured values of TPR10(20) and %dd(10)x for the beam, is proposed for determining whether a nonclinical beam is well specified by TPR10(20). Agreement between calculations for specific accelerators and measured beam quality specifiers is shown to be good, but agreement with published data for a variety of clinical accelerators is not as good. Possible reasons for the discrepancy are discussed.

Predictability of electron cone ratios with respect to linac make and model.

In the past, the Radiological Physics Center (RPC) has developed standard sets of photon depth-dose and wedge-factor data, specific to the make, model, and wedge design of the linear accelerator (linac). In this paper, the RPC extends the same concept to electron-cone ratios. Since 1987, the RPC has measured and documented cone-ratio (CR) values during on-site dosimetry review visits to institutions participating in National Cancer Institute cooperative clinical trials. Data have been collected for approximately 500 electron beams from a wide spectrum of linac models. The analysis presented in this paper indicates that CR values are predictable to 2% to 3% (two standard deviations) for a given make and model of linac with a few exceptions. The analysis also revealed some other interesting systematics. For some models, such as the Varian Clinac 2500 and the Elekta/Philips SL18, SL20, and SL25, CR values were nearly identical for cone sizes 15 cm x 15 cm (or 14 cm x 14 cm) and 20 cm x 20 cm across the range of available energies. Certain models of the same make of linac, such as the Mevatron MD, KD, and 6700 series models or the Clinac 2100 and 2300 models, exhibited indistinguishable CRs. Irrespective of linac model, two consistent general trends were observed: namely, an increase in CR value with incident beam energy for cone sizes smaller than 10 cm x 10 cm and a decrease with energy for cone sizes larger than 10 cm x 10 cm. These data are valuable to the RPC as a quality assurance remote-monitoring tool to identify potential dosimetry errors. The physics community will also find the data useful in several ways: as a redundant check for clinical values in use, to validate the values measured during commissioning of new machines or to ensure consistency of values measured during annual quality assurance procedures.