skip to main content

Verification of Point Dose on MU Calculator for Bleeding Cases

*Mohammad Zamakhsari Alhamid  -  Departement of Radiation Oncology, Mitra Plumbon Hospital, Cirebon, Indonesia
Arief Dian Ramadan  -  Departement of Radiation Oncology, Mitra Plumbon Hospital, Cirebon, Indonesia
Wahyu Edy Wibowo  -  Departement of Radiation Oncology, Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia
Choirul Anam  -  Departement of Physics, Faculty of Science and Mathematics, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia
Received: 17 Oct 2024; Revised: 18 Mar 2025; Accepted: 13 Apr 2025; Available online: 31 May 2025; Published: 31 May 2025.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Bleeding is a frequent issue among cancer patients, affecting about 6% to 10% of those with advanced-stage cancer. External radiation therapy is a highly effective method for reducing or even stopping bleeding, with success rates ranging from 45% to 100%. In bleeding cases, radiation therapy must be delivered quickly and precisely. To expedite the process, some standard steps in radiation therapy, such as the CT simulation and planning via the treatment planning system (TPS), are often skipped. Consequently, accurate Monitor Unit (MU) calculations are essential to ensure that the dose received by the patient does not deviate by more than 5%, as recommended by the ICRU. Using guidelines from AAPM TG 71, MU calculations were formulated and compiled into a Microsoft Excel worksheet called the MU Calculator. Several key parameters, including dose prescription, output factor (OF), and tissue maximum ratio (TMR), were input into the MU Calculator and verified through point dose verification on a slab phantom using the SAD technique. The verification was conducted using 10 MV energy across various field sizes (10 x 10, 12 x 12, 14 x 14, 16 x 16, 18 x 18, and 20 x 20) cm² at depths of 6, 8, and 10 cm, utilizing a PTW Farmer detector with dose prescriptions of 200, 300, and 400 cGy. The field size, depth, and dose prescription were selected to align with common requirements for bleeding cases. By applying the dose calculation formula recommended by TRS 398, the deviation between the prescribed and measured doses was found to be less than 2.5%. These deviations were attributed to factors such as measurement setup, temperature and pressure conditions, polarity effects, and detector recombination effects. The MU Calculator has been validated, demonstrating compliance with ICRU recommendations, and is thus suitable for use in bleeding cases that demand swift and precise external radiation therapy.

Fulltext View|Download
Keywords: Verification, Point dose, MU Calculator, Bleeding
Funding: Mitra Plumbon Hospital Cirebon

Article Metrics:

  1. . J. Pereira and T. Phan, "Management of Bleeding in Patients with Advanced Cancer" The Oncologist, 9, 561-570, (2004)
  2. . J. Strijbos, Linder, Y. M. V. D., and Vos-Westerman, H., "Patterns of practice in palliative radiotherapy for bleeding tumours in the Netherlands; a survey study among radiation oncologists" Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology, 15, 70-75, (2019)
  3. . L. Nierer, F. Walter, M. Niyazi, R. Shpani, G. Landry, S. Marschner, R. von Bestenbostel, D. Dinkel, G. Essenbach, M. Reiner, C. Belka, and S. Corradini, "Radiotherapy in oncological emergencies fast-track treatment planning" Radiation Oncology, 15, 215, (2020)
  4. . A. Kumar, G. Mukherjee, G. Yadav, V. Pandey, and K. Bhattacharya, "Optimized point dose measurement: An effective tool for QA in intensity-modulated radiotherapy" Journal of Medical Physics, 32, 4, (2007)
  5. . L. Dong, J. Antolak, M. Salehpour, K. Forster, L. O'Neill, R. Kendall, and I. Rosen, "Patient-specific point dose measurement for IMRT Monitor Unit Verification" International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 56, 3, (2003)
  6. . J. P. Gibbons, J. A. Antolak, D. S. Followill, M. S. Huq, E. E. Klein, K. L. Lam, J. R. Palta, D. M. Roback, M. Reid, and F. M. Khan, "Monitor unit calculations for external photon and electron beams: Report of the AAPM Therapy Physics Committee Task Group No. 71" Medical Physics, 41, 3, (2014)
  7. . ICRU, "International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Photon Beam Therapy, Supplement to ICRU Report No. 50. ICRU Report 62" Bethesda, MD: ICRU, (1999)
  8. . B. J. Mijnheer, J. J. Battermann, and A. Wambersie, "What degree of accuracy is required and can be achieved in photon and neutron therapy" Radiotherapy and Oncology, 8, 237-252, (1987)
  9. . IAEA, "International Atomic Energy Agency. Absorbed dose determination in external beam radiotherapy" Technical Reports Series no. 398 (Rev.1), IAEA, (2024)
  10. . E. E. Klein, J. Hanley, J. Bayouth, F.-F. Yin, W. Simon, S. Dresser, C. Serago, F. Aguirre, L. Ma, B. Arjomandy, C. Liu, C. Sandin, and T. Holmes, "Task Group 142 report: Quality assurance of medical accelerators" Medical Physics, 36, 9, (2009)
  11. . E. B. Podgorsak, "Radiation Oncology Physics: A Handbook for Teachers and Students" International Atomic Energy Agency, (2005)
  12. . P. R. Almond, P. J. Biggs, B. M. Coursey, W. F. Hanson, M. S. Huq, R. Nath, and D. W. Rogers, "Task Group 51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams" Medical Physics, 26, 9, (1999)

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.