SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
   
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat
(or Email:book@scirp.org)

Article citations

More>>

Mizuno, H., Fukumura, A., Fukahori, M., Sakata, S., Yamashita, W., Takase, N., Yajima, K., Katayose, T., Abe-Sakama, K., Kusano, Y., Shimbo, M. and Kanai, T. (2014) Application of a Radiophotoluminescent Glass Dosimeter to Nonreference Condition Dosimetry in the Postal Dose Audit System. Medical Physics, 41, 112104.
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4898596

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Variations in Tomotherapy Beam Outputs: A Multiple-Institutional Investigation

    AUTHORS: Hidetoshi Shimizu, Koji Sasaki, Kentaro Sugi, Hiroshi Fukuma, Tadashi Nakabayashi, Taiki Isomura, Hiroyuki Tachibana, Takeshi Kodaira

    KEYWORDS: Tomotherapy, Machine-Specific Reference Field, Multiple Institutions, Beam Output

    JOURNAL NAME: International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology, Vol.7 No.1, February 27, 2018

    ABSTRACT: This study aimed to determine variations in tomotherapy beam outputs at multiple institutions. Measurements were obtained at 22 radiotherapy institutions. The first parameter was the absolute dose to water (Dfmsrw, Qmsr) in the machine-specific reference field (fmsr), which indicated a static field in the tomotherapy reference conditions defined by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) study group. The second measured parameter was the difference between the measured and the planed doses in the intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) verification plans, which were created using a solid phantom by the vendor during tomotherapy apparatus installation to adjust the beam output. The IMRT verification plan error at each institution was defined as the systematic error of the beam output; Dfmsrw, Qmsr was subsequently modified. The Dfmsrw, Qmsr values of four institutions with a modified energy fluence per ideal open time (EFIOT) were lower than the values at other institutions. The mean value of all institutions except those four was 0.994 ± 0.013 Gy (range: 0.974 Gy, 1.017 Gy). When the Dfmsrw, Qmsr value was corrected by the IMRT verification error, this variation decreased. In addition, the mean IMRT verification errors in the TomoDirectTM and TomoHelicalTM modes with the TomoEDGETM mode were 1.2% ± 0.8% (range: -0.6%, 1.8%) and 0.2% ± 0.5% (range: -0.6%, 0.9%), respectively (p p