The rate of male breast cancer has increased in recent years, due to the deficiency of preventive examinations (male mammography). Besides, since male breasts are generally smaller than female breasts, it is essential...The rate of male breast cancer has increased in recent years, due to the deficiency of preventive examinations (male mammography). Besides, since male breasts are generally smaller than female breasts, it is essential to monitor the doses received by male breasts, as well as those received by close, healthy and critical organs in order to assess the plan used in this kind of treatment. To do this, the distribution of doses in male breasts was simulated and assessed, based on the procedures adopted in the treatment of female breasts, when submitted to a radiation beam from a linear accelerator. The Alderson Rando phantom was used and the relevant absorbed doses were measured by TLD-100 thermoluminescent dosimeters distributed throughout the volume of interest. The results of the treatment planning were compared with the results obtained by TLDs. A difference of up to 8.5%, in comparison with the planned dose, as well as a 6% relative standard deviation was found.展开更多
基金CAPES for the financial support that was crucial for the performance of this work
文摘The rate of male breast cancer has increased in recent years, due to the deficiency of preventive examinations (male mammography). Besides, since male breasts are generally smaller than female breasts, it is essential to monitor the doses received by male breasts, as well as those received by close, healthy and critical organs in order to assess the plan used in this kind of treatment. To do this, the distribution of doses in male breasts was simulated and assessed, based on the procedures adopted in the treatment of female breasts, when submitted to a radiation beam from a linear accelerator. The Alderson Rando phantom was used and the relevant absorbed doses were measured by TLD-100 thermoluminescent dosimeters distributed throughout the volume of interest. The results of the treatment planning were compared with the results obtained by TLDs. A difference of up to 8.5%, in comparison with the planned dose, as well as a 6% relative standard deviation was found.
