Abstract
Protons and carbon ions have been extensively used for radiotherapy treatments, and in comparison to conventional radiotherapy, they allow a more conformal dose to the target tumor, especially in case of deep-seated tumors. However, the accuracy of hadron therapy treatments is affected by uncertainties in the particle range calculations. Several techniques are under development for in-vivo range verification, one of which consists on measuring the activity distributions of positron emitters, such as 10C, 11C and 15O, which are produced in the patient body during proton and carbon ion treatments. A comparison between measured and expected positron emitter activity distributions can provide information on the quality of the delivered treatment and accuracy of the particle range calculations. In this work the FLUKA production cross sections for 10C, 11C and 15O originated from proton and carbon ion beams in carbon and oxygen targets were compared with experimental data, at low and therapeutic energies.
Highlights
Unlike photons, the depth-dose profile of light ions is characterized by an initial low plateau and a so called Bragg peak at the end of the particle range
Valuable comparisons between FLUKA predictions and β+ activity depth profiles produced by protons in PMMA targets at therapeutic energies were carried out in [4, 15]; FLUKA was shown to be a valid tool for calculation of the activity distributions for offline positron emission tomography (PET) measurements for proton therapy
Benchmarking of FLUKA against cross section data is crucial for the development of the physics models embedded in the code
Summary
The depth-dose profile of light ions is characterized by an initial low plateau and a so called Bragg peak at the end of the particle range. Heavier ions possess a higher biological effectiveness; this makes carbon ions suitable for treating radio-resistant tumors [1]. To assure a full coverage of the target with the prescribed dose, safety margins are considered around the tumor, to take into account, among other factors, uncertainties on the patient positioning and particle range calculations [2]. Uncertainties in the calibration of the CT scan, physics models, patient positioning, organ motion and heterogeneities (e.g. in the nasal cavity or in the bladder) reduce the accuracy of the particle range estimation. Secondary fragments are produced as a consequence of non-elastic reactions in the patient tissues’ nuclei. These fragments represent in general an issue, as they can be damaging for the
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
