Investigation of Estimation Accuracy of Phantom Scatter Factor by Clarkson Method Considering Depth in MLC Irregular Field

Abstract

In monitor unit (MU) independent verification by calculation for irregular field (MLC field) using multileaf collimator in X-ray therapy, it has become common to use collimator scatter factor (Sc) and phantom scatter factor (Sp) instead of total scatter factor (Sc, p). It is usually expressed as Sc, p (A)=Sc (A)×Sp (A), and the field size A is considered but the depth d is not. Sc is data of in-air output, and measure with a mini-phantom at constant depth to remove electron contamination. On the other hand, Sp is obtained from measurement data of Sc, p and Sc, and can be expressed as Sc, p (d, A)=Sc (constant depth, A)×Sp (d, A) at an arbitrary depth d, thus Sp depends on the depth of Sc, p. Therefore, Sp needs to consider depth. In addition, a linear accelerator equipped with the tertiary MLC has two field sizes, that are collimator field by upper and lower collimators and MLC field by tertiary MLC below them. In MU independent verification by calculation, it is often used that the estimated value of Sp obtained by converting MLC field to equivalent square field and referring to data of Sp in square field. To convert the MLC field to equivalent square field, a conversion formula from sector radius r to equivalent square field L by Clarkson's sector integration (Clarkson method) is used. In this study, using 24 types of MLC fields to evaluate estimation accuracy due to the difference of conversion formula in Clarkson method, we estimated value of Sp using r=0.5611L of B-Clarkson method and using r=0.5580L of A-Clarkson method. And the difference with the measured value of Sp obtained by measuring Sc, p and Sc in the same MLC fields was compared. While, to evaluate estimation accuracy due to the different depths using these Clarkson methods, the difference between estimated value and measured value of Sp similarly obtained at depth of 5, 10 and 15 cm was compared. As results, estimated value of Sp using A-Clarkson method than using B-Clarkson method was close to measured value, and it was the same trend at depth of 5, 10 and 15 cm. Therefore, it was suggested that estimation accuracy of Sp by A-Clarkson method is higher than B-Clarkson method when verifying beams with different depths in MU independent verification by calculation for MLC field.