PurposeThe treatment of brain tumours using permanently implanted 131Cs has become more frequent since GammaTile brachytherapy platform was cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Current treatment planning systems (TPS) (BrachyVision v11.0.47, Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA) used clinically do not account for anatomical heterogeneities. GAMOS Monte Carlo simulation was validated for the dose deposited by 131Cs in water and used to accurately determine the dose deposited in simulated human tissues, including bone and brain tissue, as well as in Solid Water (SW) phantom material. MethodGAMOS was validated and benchmarked for dose deposited by 131Cs (CS-1 Rev2) in water. The evaluation performed included air-kerma strength, radial dose function, anisotropy function, and dose rate constant based on the recommendation of TG-43U1S2 protocol. Dosimetric simulation of the 131Cs brachytherapy source was also performed in SW, bone, and brain tissue using GAMOS. Conversion factors were calculated by the ratio of the dose rate constant from water to SW, bone, and brain tissue, respectively. ResultResults for dose in water were benchmarked with MCNP simulation and experiential data published in the TG-43U1S2. The dose rate constant in water was 1.039 ± 0.017 cGy h−1 U−1 which is consistent with the results used to determine the TG-43U1S2 consensus data. The conversion factor of water to SW, water to the bone, and water to brain tissue were 0.936, 1.15, and 0.964, respectively. ConclusionOther Monte Carlo (MC) simulation codes, such as MCNP, have been previously used in the literature to determine the dose deposited by 131Cs. In this work, doses deposited by 131Cs radioactive sources were successfully simulated using GAMOS MC simulation. To our knowledge, this is the first time that GAMOS was used to simulate the dose deposited by 131Cs seed. MC simulation of dose for brachytherapy sources is especially important to accurately estimate the dose deposited in high Z materials such as skull bone, which may be widely different than the dose calculated by the TG-43U1S2 formalism.
Read full abstract