Radiological Protection in Ion Beam Radiotherapy

Draft document: Radiological Protection in Ion Beam Radiotherapy
Submitted by David Dommett, Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Commenting as an individual

I would suggest rewording the following paragraph as it is a little confusing:

An ion beam delivery system generally consists of an accelerator, a high energy beam transporter and an irradiation system, where dose is delivered to the patient with either a narrow beam extracted from the accelerator (pencil beam scanning method) or a broadened beam (broad beam method). When ion beams pass through or hit these beam line structures, secondary radiations including neutrons are produced, and some of the particles in the structures can become radioactive and form an autoradioactive component of the beam.

My proposal is as follows:

"An ion beam delivery system is composed of an accelerator, a transport beam line and an irradiation system; where dose is delivered to the patient with either a narrow beam (pencil beam scanning method) or a broadened beam (broad beam method). When ion beams traverse beam line components, secondary radiations such as neutrons are generated, so that these structures become radioactive and may pose a radiological risk to staff and members of the public in terms of radiation protection."

line 181 should read 'treatment planning systems used' not 'used treatment planning systems'

187 Radiotherapy spelt incorrectly

191 ions has also a peak should read also has

240 care takers should be one word - caretakers

257 The equation was not displaying correctly - though old IE browser being used

291 Should read a computed tomography not 'an' computed tomography

292 Reads as poor English and I would suggest re-writing / re-wording

371 rapidly glowing tumour should read growing

371 X-Ray should read X-rays

373 should read hypoxic tumours - s is missing

512 Cardiovascular is spelt incorrectly

517 localise should read localised

452 should read 'have the additional advantage'

590 in the entire procedure of rather than procedures

620 cares should read care

622 reads poorly and I'd consider re-writing

690 a space is needed between 'ofbroad' to read 'of broad'

814 almost requires a capital A

823 This allows the use a mechanical shifting system along - requires 'of' after use

860 should read annihilation pair

886 peaky should be peak

899 not clear which mass increases

1002 of late effects

1109 quotes around tolerance- the first quote is the wrong way round

1113 No explanation has been given of parallel or serial organs. Though understood by professionals - this document has taken care to explain concepts that would also be known so perhaps should be included

1172 A dose around 100 mGy, produces - this sentence does not require the comma after mGy

1261 radiological is spelt incorrectly

1294 producing is spelt incorrectly

1333 compared is spelt incorrectly

1353 - Is there any data about comparisons with Volume Therapy such as VMAT as well as just IMRT?

1869 Information is spelt incorrectly 

1873 The risk assessment includes a large uncertainties of dose assessments. - the a is not required

1998 read as 30cm- the - is not required

2401 - No explanation of mb (milli barns)

2441 I am a little confused by this paragraph. It says that the dose (as given in 5.2.3) is much lower than 5mSv, and lower than the 1mSv/year limit. The values given in 5.2.3 and in micro sieverts, and of course 5mSv is actually greater than 1mSv, though 5mSv is within the 6mSv annual limit. Is there a mistype for the 5mSv? Either way - a little confusing.