Dosimetric performance of an enhanced dose range radiographic film for intensity-modulated radiation therapy quality assurance

• Published in: Medical physics (Lancaster) 2002-09, Vol.29 (9), p.2159-2168
• Main Author: Olch, Arthur J.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Ancillary equipment; dosimetry; Dosimetry/exposure assessment; Equipment Failure Analysis; Field size; film dosimetry; Film Dosimetry - instrumentation; Film Dosimetry - methods; intensity modulated radiation therapy; intensity modulation; Ionization chambers; Materials Testing - methods; Physicists; quality assurance; Quality assurance equipment; Quality assurance in radiotherapy; Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods; Quality Control; radiation therapy; radiography; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - instrumentation; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - methods; Radiotherapy, Conformal - instrumentation; Radiotherapy, Conformal - methods; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity
• ISSN: 0094-2405; 2473-4209
• DOI: 10.1118/1.1500398

Film-based quality assurance (QA) is an important element of any intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) program. XV2 film is often used for IMRT QA, however, it has saturation and energy response limitations which hinder accurate film dosimetry. A new commercially released ready-pack film has been introduced that has an extended dose range (EDR2), reportedly allowing measured doses above 600 cGy without saturation. Also, this film may have less energy dependence due to its composition. The purpose of this paper is to study and compare the two types of film with respect to absolute dose accuracy for IMRT plans, percent depth dose accuracy for square fields between 2 and 20 cm, ability to measure composite plan isodoses and single beam fluence maps for IMRT cases, and sensitivity to processor variations over time. In 19 IMRT patient QA tests, the EDR2 film was able to achieve an absolute dose accuracy of better than 2% vs over 4% for XV2 film. The EDR2 film was able to reproduce ionization chamber and diode-measured percent depth doses to 20 cm depth generally to within 1% over the range of field sizes tested compared to about 10% for the XV2 film. When compared to calculations, EDR2 film agreed better than XV2 film for both composite plan isodoses and single beam fluence intensity maps. The EDR2 film was somewhat more resistant to processor changes over time than the XV2 film, with a standard deviation of dose reproducibility of less than 2% compared to 6%, respectively.