Planning System Dose Calculations Research Articles

Superficial Dosimetry Study of the Frequency of Bolus Using in Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy after Modified Radical Mastectomy.

To investigate the effect of various frequencies of bolus use on the superficial dose of volumetric modulated arc therapy after modified radical mastectomy for breast cancer. Based on the computed tomography images of a female anthropomorphic breast phantom, a 0.5 cm silicone-based 3D-printed bolus was created. Nine points evenly distributed on the breast skin were selected for assessing the skin dose, and a volume of subcutaneous lymphatic drainage of the breast (noted as ROI2-3) was delineated for assessing the chest wall dose. The treatment plans with and without bolus (plan_wb and plan_nb) were separately designed using the prescription of 50 Gy in 25 fractions following the standard dose constraints of the adjacent organ at risk. To characterize the accuracy of treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculations, the doses of the nine points were measured five times by thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLDs) and then were compared with the TPS calculated dose. Compared with Plan_nb (144.46 ± 10.32 cGy), the breast skin dose for plan_wb (208.75 ± 4.55 cGy) was significantly increased (t = -18.56, P < 0.001). The deviation of skin dose was smaller for Plan_wb, and the uniformity was significantly improved. The calculated value of TPS was in good agreement with the measured value of TLD, and the maximum deviation was within 5%. Skin and ROI2-3 doses were significantly increased with increasing frequencies of bolus applications. The mean dose of the breast skin and ROI2-3 for 15 and 23 times bolus applications were 45.33 Gy, 50.88 Gy and 50.36 Gy, 52.39 Gy, respectively. 3D printing bolus can improve the radiation dose and the accuracy of the planned dose. Setting Plan_wb to 15 times for T1-3N+ breast cancer patients and 23 times for T4N+ breast cancer patients can meet the clinical need. Quantitative analysis of the bolus application frequency for different tumor stages can provide a reference for clinical practice.

Impact through versatility: Patterns of in vivo dosimetry utilization with TLD across a large multi-site radiotherapy department.

The complexity of modern radiotherapy treatment pathways necessitate input from different professions to ensure treatment is delivered safely and as planned. In vivo dosimetry is one method of treatment verification providing the opportunity for both in-field verification or out-of-field measurements. It was the aim of this work to review the impact of an in vivo dosimetry programme with t.he view to justify resources and assist in developing a plan for equipment acquisition. Results of 310 (approximately 2 per 1000 treatment fractions) in vivo measurements were reviewed over a two-year time span. The in vivo dosimetry programme using thermoluminescence (TLD) chips was able to detect three significant treatment errors, amongst some 13 000 patients treated. These errors would likely to have been undetected through other quality assurance measures. Increasing demands in workload were found to be associated with commissioning of new equipment and techniques. A skilled operator with knowledge of TLD physics, treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculation algorithms and radiation transport proved to be essential for appropriate interpretation of TLD results particularly in complex radiation delivery scenarios. TLD continues to play a large role in patient safety and quality assurance at our institution.

Dosimetric considerations for moldable silicone composites used in radiotherapy applications.

Due to their many favorable characteristics, moldable silicone (MS) composites have gained popularity in medicine and recently, in radiotherapy applications. We investigate the dosimetric properties of silicones in radiotherapy beams and determine their suitability as water substitutes for constructing boluses and phantoms. Two types of silicones were assessed (ρ= 1.04 g/cm3 and ρ= 1.07 g/cm3). Various dosimetric properties were characterized, including the relative electron density, the relative mean mass energy‐absorption coefficient, and the relative mean mass restricted stopping power. Silicone slabs with thickness of 1.5 cm and 5.0 cm were molded to mimic a bolus setup and a phantom setup, respectively. Measurements were conducted for Co‐60 and 6 MV photon beams, and 6 MeV electron beams. The doses at 1.5 cm and 5.0 cm depths in MS were measured with solid water (SW) backscatter material (D MS–SW), and with a full MS setup (D MS–MS), then compared with doses at the same depths in a full SW setup (D SW–SW). Relative doses were reported as D MS–SW/D MS–SW and D MS–MS/D SW–SW. Experimental results were verified using Monaco treatment planning system dose calculations and Monte Carlo EGSnrc simulations. Film measurements showed varying dose ratios according to MS and beam types. For photon beams, the bolus setup D MS–SW/D SW–SW exhibited a 5% relative dose reduction. The dose for 6 MV beams was reduced by nearly 2% in a full MS setup. Up to 2% dose increase in both scenarios was observed for electron beams. Compared with dose in SW, an interface of MS–SW can cause relatively high differences. We conclude that it is important to characterize a particular silicone's properties in a given beam quality prior to clinical use. Because silicone compositions vary between manufacturers and differ from water/SW, accurate dosimetry using these materials requires consideration of the reported differences.

Gel and thermoluminescence dosimetry for dose verifications of a real anatomy simulated prostate conformal radiation treatment in the presence of metallic femoral prosthesis.

This study aims to verify the dose delivery of prostate radiotherapy treatments in an adult pelvic phantom with two metallic hip and femur prosthesis using a four‐field box technique. The prostate planned target volume (PTV) tridimensional (3D) dose distribution was evaluated using gel dosimetry, and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) were used for point‐dose measurements outside it. Both results were compared to the treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculation without using heterogeneity corrections to evaluate the influence of the metal in the dose distribution. MAGIC‐f gel dosimeter (Methacrylic and Ascorbic acid in Gelatin Initiated by Copper with Formaldehyde) associated with magnetic resonance imaging was used. TLD were positioned at several points at the bone metal interface and the sacrum region. The comparison of the gel measured and the TPS calculated dose distributions were done using gamma analysis (3%/3 mm), and a pass rate of 93% was achieved. The TLD dose values at the bone‐metal interface showed variations from the planned dose. However, at the sacrum region, where the beams did not intercept the prosthesis, there was a good agreement between TPS planning and TLD measurements. Our results show how the combination of 3D dosimetry and measurements at specific points in the phantom allowed a comprehensive view of the dose distribution and identified that care must also be paid to regions outside the PTV.

Comparison of the RayStation photon Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm against measured data under homogeneous and heterogeneous irradiation geometries.

This work compares Monte Carlo dose calculations performed using the RayStation treatment planning system against data measured on a Varian Truebeam linear accelerator with 6 MV and 10 MV FFF photon beams. The dosimetric performance of the RayStation Monte Carlo calculations was evaluated in a variety of irradiation geometries employing homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms. Profile and depth dose comparisons against measurement were carried out in relative mode using the gamma index as a quantitative measure of similarity within the central high dose regions. The results demonstrate that the treatment planning system dose calculation engine agrees with measurement to within 2%/1 mm for more than 95% of the data points in the high dose regions for all test cases. A systematic underestimation was observed at the tail of the profile penumbra and out of field, with mean differences generally<0.5mm or 1% of curve dose maximum respectively. Out of field agreement varied between evaluated beam models. The RayStation implementation of photon Monte Carlo dose calculations show good agreement with measured data for the range of scenarios considered in this work and is deemed sufficiently accurate for introduction into clinical use.

Sensitivity of IROC phantom performance to radiotherapy treatment planning system beam modeling parameters based on community-driven data.

PurposeTreatment planning system (TPS) dose calculations have previously been shown to be sensitive to modeling errors, especially when treating with complex strategies like intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). This work investigates the dosimetric impact of several dosimetric and nondosimetric beam modeling parameters, based on their distribution in the radiotherapy community, in two commercial TPSs in order to understand the realistic potential for dose deviations and their clinical effects.Methods and materialsBeam models representing standard 120‐leaf Varian Clinac‐type machines were developed in Eclipse 13.5 (AAA algorithm) and RayStation 9A (v8.99, collapsed‐cone algorithm) based upon median values of dosimetric measurements from Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) Houston site visit data and community beam modeling parameter survey data in order to represent a baseline linear accelerator. Five clinically acceptable treatment plans (three IMRT, two VMAT) were developed for the IROC head and neck phantom. Dose distributions for each plan were recalculated after individually modifying parameters of interest (e.g., MLC transmission, percent depth doses [PDDs], and output factors) according to the 2.5th to 97.5th percentiles of community survey and machine performance data to encompass the realistic extent of variance in the radiotherapy community. The resultant dose distributions were evaluated by examining relative changes in average dose for thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) locations across the two target volumes and organ at risk (OAR). Interplay was also examined for parameters generating changes in target dose greater than 1%.ResultsFor Eclipse, dose calculations were sensitive to changes in the dosimetric leaf gap (DLG), which resulted in differences from −5% to +3% to the targets relative to the baseline beam model. Modifying the MLC transmission factor introduced differences up to ± 1%. For RayStation, parameters determining MLC behaviors likewise contributed substantially; the MLC offset introduced changes in dose from −4% to +7%, and the MLC transmission caused changes of −4% to +2%. Among the dosimetric qualities examined, changes in PDD implementation resulted in the most substantial changes, but these were only up to ±1%. Other dosimetric factors had <1% impact on dose accuracy. Interplay between impactful parameters was found to be minimal.ConclusionFactors related to the modeling of the MLC, particularly relating to the leaf offset, can cause clinically significant changes in the calculated dose for IMRT and VMAT plans. This should be of concern to the radiotherapy community because the clinical effects of poor TPS commissioning were based on reported data from clinically implemented beam models. These results further reinforce that dose errors caused by poor TPS calculations are often involved in IROC phantom failures.

Automated Monte-Carlo re-calculation of proton therapy plans using Geant4/Gate: implementation and comparison to plan-specific quality assurance measurements.

Software re-calculation of proton pencil beam scanning plans provides a method of verifying treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculations prior to patient treatment. This study describes the implementation of AutoMC, a Geant4 v10.3.3/Gate v8.1 (Gate-RTion v1.0)-based Monte-Carlo (MC) system for automated plan re-calculation, and presents verification results for 153 patients (730 fields) planned within year one of the proton service at The Christie NHS Foundation Trust. A MC beam model for a Varian ProBeam delivery system with four range-shifter options (none, 2 cm, 3 cm, 5 cm) was derived from beam commissioning data and implemented in AutoMC. MC and TPS (Varian Eclipse v13.7) calculations of 730 fields in solid-water were compared to physical plan-specific quality assurance (PSQA) measurements acquired using a PTW Octavius 1500XDR array and PTW 31021 Semiflex 3D ion chamber. TPS and MC showed good agreement with array measurements, evaluated using γ analyses at 3%, 3 mm with a 10% lower dose threshold:>94% of fields calculated by the TPS and >99% of fields calculated by MC had γ ≤ 1 for>95% of measurement points within the plane. TPS and MC also showed good agreement with chamber measurements of absolute dose, with systematic differences of <1.5% for all range-shifter options. Reliable independent verification of the TPS dose calculation is a valuable complement to physical PSQA and may facilitate reduction of the physical PSQA workload alongside a thorough delivery system quality assurance programme. A Gate/Geant4-based MC system is thoroughly validated against an extensive physical PSQA dataset for 730 clinical fields, showing that clinical implementation of MC for PSQA is feasible.

Effects of a metallic implant on radiotherapy planning treatment-experience on a human cadaver.

Metallic implants (MIs) complicate radiotherapy planning. Several studies have worked on tissue-equivalent phantoms as experimental models to estimate dose distributions in this context. The application of these results to clinical practice remains disputable because the inhomogeneity of human tissue densities is a difficult factor to integrate into dose calculation software. In this work, we evaluate the impact of human tissue inhomogeneities by assessing the discrepancies between treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculations and measured delivered doses on a human cadaver with hip prostheses. A total of 143 alanine dosimeters were positioned in contact with the prostheses (bones group), soft tissues (soft tissues group), skin surfaces (skin group) and natural cavities (cavities group) of a human cadaver. The planning target volume (PTV) corresponded to a standard endometrial cancer treatment. The irradiation was performed with 6 MV X-ray tomotherapy at the one fraction-dose of 10 Gy. A total of 140 dosimeters were analyzed. After applying a temperature correction coefficient to the measured doses, the global analysis of all dosimeters showed a significant difference between the calculated doses and the measured doses (P<0.001). For dosimeters of the bones, soft tissues, skin and cavities groups, this difference was also significant (P<0.001 for each group). The mean measured doses were 21.9% lower than the mean calculated doses in the global analysis and 17.0%, 21.2%, 33.0% and 19.0% lower for the bones, soft tissues, skin and cavities groups, respectively. This study showed that the received doses were significantly lower than the calculated doses and suggested the need to improve the understanding of this discrepancy.

AAPM Task Group 329: Reference dose specification for dose calculations: Dose-to-water or dose-to-muscle?

Linac calibration is done in water, but patients are comprised primarily of soft tissue. Conceptually, and specified in NRG/RTOG trials, dose should be reported as dose-to-muscle to describe the dose to the patient. Historically, the dose-to-water of the linac calibration was often converted to dose-to-muscle for patient calculations through manual application of a 0.99 dose-to-water to dose-to-muscle correction factor, applied during the linac clinical reference calibration. However, many current treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculation algorithms approximately provide dose-to-muscle (tissue), making application of a manual scaling unnecessary. There is little guidance on when application of a scaling factor is appropriate, resulting in highly inconsistent application of this scaling by the community. In this report we provide guidance on the steps necessary to go from the linac absorbed dose-to-water calibration to dose-to-muscle in patient, for various commercial TPS algorithms. If the TPS does not account for the difference between dose-to-water and dose-to-muscle, then TPS reference dose scaling is warranted. We have tabulated the major vendors' TPS in terms of whether they approximate dose-to-muscle or calculate dose-to-water and recommend the correction factor required to report dose-to-muscle directly from the TPS algorithm. Physicists should use this report to determine the applicable correction required for specifying the reference dose in their TPS to achieve this goal and should remain attentive to possible changes to their dose calculation algorithm in the future.

Impact of the MLC leaf‐tip model in a commercial TPS: Dose calculation limitations and IROC‐H phantom failures

PurposeTreatment planning system (TPS) dose calculation is sensitive to multileaf collimator (MLC) modeling, especially when treating with intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or VMAT. This study investigates the dosimetric impact of the MLC leaf‐tip model in a commercial TPS (RayStation v.6.1). The detectability of modeling errors was assessed through both measurements with an anthropomorphic head‐and‐neck phantom and patient‐specific IMRT QA using a 3D diode array.Methods and MaterialsAn Agility MLC (Elekta Inc.) was commissioned in RayStation. Nine IMRT and VMAT plans were optimized to treat the head‐and‐neck phantom from the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Houston branch (IROC‐H). Dose distributions for each plan were re‐calculated on 27 beam models, varying leaf‐tip width (2.0, 4.5, and 6.5 mm) and leaf‐tip offset (−2.0 to +2.0 mm) values. Doses were compared to phantom TLD measurements. Patient‐specific IMRT QA was performed, and receiver‐operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to determine the detectability of modeling errors.ResultsDose calculations were very sensitive to leaf‐tip offset values. Offsets of ±1.0 mm resulted in dose differences up to 10% and 15% in the PTV and spinal cord TLDs respectively. Offsets of ±2.0 mm caused dose deviations up to 50% in the spinal cord TLD. Patient‐specific IMRT QA could not reliably detect these deviations, with an ROC area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.537 for a ±1.0 mm change in leaf‐tip offset, corresponding to >7% dose deviation. Leaf‐tip width had a modest dosimetric impact with <2% and 5.6% differences in the PTV and spinal cord TLDs respectively.ConclusionsSmall changes in the MLC leaf‐tip offset in this TPS model can cause large changes in the calculated dose for IMRT and VMAT plans that are difficult to identify through either dose curves or standard patient‐specific IMRT QA. These results may, in part, explain the reported high failure rate of IROC‐H phantom tests.

Secondary monitor unit calculations for VMAT using parallelized Monte Carlo simulations

We have developed a fast and accurate in‐house Monte Carlo (MC) secondary monitor unit (MU) check method, based on the EGSnrc system, for independent verification of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment planning system dose calculations, in accordance with TG‐114 recommendations. For a VMAT treatment plan created for a Varian Trilogy linac, DICOM information was exported from Eclipse. An open‐source platform was used to generate input files for dose calculations using the EGSnrc framework. The full VMAT plan simulation employed 107 histories, and was parallelized to run on a computer cluster. The resulting 3ddose matrices were converted to the DICOM format using CERR and imported into Eclipse. The method was evaluated using 35 clinical VMAT plans of various treatment sites. For each plan, the doses calculated with the MC approach at four three‐dimensional reference points were compared to the corresponding Eclipse calculations, as well as calculations performed using the clinical software package, MUCheck. Each MC arc simulation of 107 particles required 13–25 min of total time, including processing and calculation. The average discrepancies in calculated dose values between the MC method and Eclipse were 2.03% (compared to 3.43% for MUCheck) for prostate cases, 2.45% (3.22% for MUCheck) for head and neck cases, 1.7% (5.51% for MUCheck) for brain cases, and 2.84% (5.64% for MUCheck) for miscellaneous cases. Of 276 comparisons, 201 showed greater agreement between the treatment planning system and MC vs MUCheck. The largest discrepancies between MC and MUCheck were found in regions of high dose gradients and heterogeneous densities. By parallelizing the calculations, point‐dose accuracies of 2‐7%, sufficient for clinical secondary checks, can be achieved in a reasonable amount of time. As computer clusters and/or cloud computing become more widespread, this method will be useful in most clinical setups.

Dosimetric effects of a repositioning head frame system and treatment planning system dose calculation accuracy.

This work aims to study the effect on surface dose and dose distribution caused by the Elekta Fraxion cranial immobilization system. The effect of Fraxion inclusion in Elekta Monaco treatment planning system and its calculation accuracy is also checked. To study the dose attenuation, a cylindrical phantom was located over the Elekta Fraxion with an IBA CC13 ionization chamber placed in the central insert at the linac isocenter. Dose measurements at multiple gantry angles were performed for three open fields, 10 × 10 cm, 5 × 5 cm and other smaller 2 × 2 cm. Measured doses were compared with the ones calculated by Monaco. Surface dose and dose distribution in the buildup region were measured placing several Gafchromic Films EBT3 at linac CAX between the slabs of a RW3 phantom located over Fraxion and read using FilmQA Pro software. Measures were performed for two open field sizes and results were compared with Monaco calculations. Measurements show a 1% attenuation for 180° gantry angle but it can be as high as 3.4% (5 × 5 open field) for 150°/210° gantry angle, as with these angles the beam goes through the Fraxion's headrest twice. If Fraxion is not included in the calculation Monaco calculation can result in a 3% difference between measured and calculated doses, while with Fraxion in the calculation, the maximum difference is 0.9%. Fraxion increases 3.7 times the surface dose, which can be calculated by Monaco with a difference lower than 2%. Monaco also calculated correctly the PDD for both open fields (2%) when Fraxion is included in the calculation. This work shows that the attenuation varies with gantry angle. The inclusion of Fraxion in Monaco improves the calculation from 3% difference to 1% in the worst case. Furthermore, the surface dose increment and the dose in the buildup region are correctly calculated.

The dosimetric effect of electron density overrides in 3DCRT Lung SBRT for a range of lung tumor dimensions.

The combined effects of lung tumor motion and limitations of treatment planning system dose calculations in lung regions increases uncertainty in dose delivered to the tumor and surrounding normal tissues in lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). This study investigated the effect on plan quality and accuracy when overriding treatment volume electron density values. The QUASAR phantom with modified cork cylindrical inserts, each containing a simulated spherical tumor of 15‐mm, 22‐mm, or 30‐mm diameter, was used to simulate lung tumor motion. Using Monaco 5.1 treatment planning software, two standard plans (50% central phase (50%) and average intensity projection (AIP)) were compared to eight electron density overridden plans that focused on different target volumes (internal target volume (ITV), planning target volume (PTV), and a hybrid plan (HPTV)). The target volumes were set to a variety of electron densities between lung and water equivalence. Minimal differences were seen in the 30‐mm tumor in terms of target coverage, plan conformity, and improved dosimetric accuracy. For the smaller tumors, a PTV override showed improved target coverage as well as better plan conformity compared to the baseline plans. The ITV plans showed the highest gamma pass rate agreement between treatment planning system (TPS) and measured dose (P < 0.040). However, the low electron density PTV and HPTV plans also showed improved gamma pass rates (P < 0.035, P < 0.011). Low‐density PTV overrides improved the plan quality and accuracy for tumor diameters less than 22 mm only. Although an ITV override generated the most significant increase in accuracy, the low‐density PTV plans had the additional benefit of plan quality improvement. Although this study and others agreed that density overrides improve the treatment of SBRT, the optimal density override and the conditions under which it should be applied were found to be department specific, due to variations in commissioning and calculation methods.

Validation and clinical implementation of an accurate Monte Carlo code for pencil beam scanning proton therapy.

Monte Carlo (MC)‐based dose calculations are generally superior to analytical dose calculations (ADC) in modeling the dose distribution for proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) treatments. The purpose of this paper is to present a methodology for commissioning and validating an accurate MC code for PBS utilizing a parameterized source model, including an implementation of a range shifter, that can independently check the ADC in commercial treatment planning system (TPS) and fast Monte Carlo dose calculation in opensource platform (MCsquare). The source model parameters (including beam size, angular divergence and energy spread) and protons per MU were extracted and tuned at the nozzle exit by comparing Tool for Particle Simulation (TOPAS) simulations with a series of commissioning measurements using scintillation screen/CCD camera detector and ionization chambers. The range shifter was simulated as an independent object with geometric and material information. The MC calculation platform was validated through comprehensive measurements of single spots, field size factors (FSF) and three‐dimensional dose distributions of spread‐out Bragg peaks (SOBPs), both without and with the range shifter. Differences in field size factors and absolute output at various depths of SOBPs between measurement and simulation were within 2.2%, with and without a range shifter, indicating an accurate source model. TOPAS was also validated against anthropomorphic lung phantom measurements. Comparison of dose distributions and DVHs for representative liver and lung cases between independent MC and analytical dose calculations from a commercial TPS further highlights the limitations of the ADC in situations of highly heterogeneous geometries. The fast MC platform has been implemented within our clinical practice to provide additional independent dose validation/QA of the commercial ADC for patient plans. Using the independent MC, we can more efficiently commission ADC by reducing the amount of measured data required for low dose “halo” modeling, especially when a range shifter is employed.

On the determination of planning target margins due to motion for mice lung tumours using a four-dimensional MOBY phantom.

This work aims to analyse the effect of respiratory motion on optimal irradiation margins for murine lung tumour models. Four-dimensional mathematical phantoms with different lung tumour locations affected by respiratory motion were created. Two extreme breathing curves were adopted and divided into time-points. Each time-point was loaded in a treatment planning system and Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculations were performed for a 360° arc plan. A time-resolved dose was derived, considering the gantry rotation and the breathing motion. Radiotherapy metrics were derived to assess the final treatment plans. An interpolation function was investigated to reduce calculation cost. The effect of respiratory motion on the treatment plan quality is strongly dependent on the breathing pattern and the tumour position. Tumours located closer to the diaphragm required a compromise between tumour conformity and healthy tissue damage. A recipe, which considers collimator size, was proposed to derive tumour margins and spare the organs at risk (OARs) by respecting constraints on user-defined metrics. It is recommended to add a target margin, especially on sites where movement is substantial. A simple recipe to derive tumour margins was developed. This work is a first step towards a standard planning target volume concept in pre-clinical radiotherapy.

Development of a flattening filter free multiple source model for use as an independent, Monte Carlo, dose calculation, quality assurance tool for clinical trials.

The Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core-Houston (IROC-H) Quality Assurance Center (formerly the Radiological Physics Center) has reported varying levels of compliance from their anthropomorphic phantom auditing program. IROC-H studies have suggested that one source of disagreement between institution submitted calculated doses and measurement is the accuracy of the institution's treatment planning system dose calculations and heterogeneity corrections used. In order to audit this step of the radiation therapy treatment process, an independent dose calculation tool is needed. Monte Carlo multiple source models for Varian flattening filter free (FFF) 6 MV and FFF 10 MV therapeutic x-ray beams were commissioned based on central axis depth dose data from a 10 × 10 cm2 field size and dose profiles for a 40 × 40 cm2 field size. The models were validated against open-field measurements in a water tank for field sizes ranging from 3 × 3 cm2 to 40 × 40 cm2 . The models were then benchmarked against IROC-H's anthropomorphic head and neck phantom and lung phantom measurements. Validation results, assessed with a ±2%/2 mm gamma criterion, showed average agreement of 99.9% and 99.0% for central axis depth dose data for FFF 6 MV and FFF 10 MV models, respectively. Dose profile agreement using the same evaluation technique averaged 97.8% and 97.9% for the respective models. Phantom benchmarking comparisons were evaluated with a ±3%/2 mm gamma criterion, and agreement averaged 90.1% and 90.8% for the respective models. Multiple source models for Varian FFF 6 MV and FFF 10 MV beams have been developed, validated, and benchmarked for inclusion in an independent dose calculation quality assurance tool for use in clinical trial audits.

Out-of-field in vivo dosimetry using TLD in SABR for primary kidney cancer involving mixed photon fields

PurposeTo assess out-of-field dose using three different variants of LiF thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLD) for ten patients who underwent stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) for primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and compare with treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculations. Methods and materialsThermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) measurements were conducted at 20, 30, 40 and 50cm from isocentre on ten patients undergoing SABR for primary RCC. Three types of high-sensitivity LiF:Mg,Cu,P TLD material with different 6Li/7Li isotope ratios were used. Patient plans were calculated using Eclipse Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) for clinical evaluation and recalculated using Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) algorithm for comparison. ResultsBoth AAA and PBC showed diminished accuracy for photon doses at increasing distance out-of-field. At 50cm, measured photon dose was 0.3cGy normalised to a 10Gy prescription on average with only small variation across all patients. This is likely due to the leakage component of the out-of-field dose. The 6Li-enriched TLD materials showed increased signal attributable to additional neutron contribution. ConclusionLiF:Mg,Cu,P TLD containing 6Li is sensitive enough to measure out-of-field dose 50cm from isocentre however will over-estimate the photon component of out-of-field dose in high energy treatments due to the presence of thermal neutrons. 7Li enriched materials which are insensitive to neutrons are therefore required for accurate photon dosimetry. Neutron signal has been shown here to increase with MUs and is higher for patients treated using certain non coplanar beam arrangements. Further work is required to convert this additional neutron signal to dose.

TU‐D‐201‐06: HDR Plan Prechecks Using Eclipse Scripting API

Purpose:Automate brachytherapy treatment plan quality check using Eclipse v13.6 scripting API based on pre‐configured rules to minimize human error and maximize efficiency.Methods:The HDR Precheck system is developed based on a rules‐driven approach using Eclipse scripting API. This system checks for critical plan parameters like channel length, first source position, source step size and channel mapping. The planned treatment time is verified independently based on analytical methods. For interstitial or SAVI APBI treatment plans, a Patterson‐Parker system calculation is performed to verify the planned treatment time. For endobronchial treatments, an analytical formula from TG‐59 is used. Acceptable tolerances were defined based on clinical experiences in our department. The system was designed to show PASS/FAIL status levels. Additional information, if necessary, is indicated appropriately in a separate comments field in the user interface.Results:The HDR Precheck system has been developed and tested to verify the treatment plan parameters that are routinely checked by the clinical physicist. The report also serves as a reminder or checklist for the planner to perform any additional critical checks such as applicator digitization or scenarios where the channel mapping was intentionally changed. It is expected to reduce the current manual plan check time from 15 minutes to &lt;1 minute.Conclusion:Automating brachytherapy plan prechecks significantly reduces treatment plan precheck time and reduces human errors. When fully developed, this system will be able to perform TG‐43 based second check of the treatment planning system's dose calculation using random points in the target and critical structures. A histogram will be generated along with tabulated mean and standard deviation values for each structure. A knowledge database will also be developed for Brachyvision plans which will then be used for knowledge‐based plan quality checks to further reduce treatment planning errors and increase confidence in the planned treatment.

A Monte Carlo model for independent dose verification in IMRT and VMAT for the Varian Novalis TX with high definition MLC

Purpose: With intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), the physician can prescribe, design and deliver optimized treatment plans that target the tumor and spare adjacent critical structures. The increased conformity of such plans often comes at the expenses of adding significant complexity to the delivery of the treatment. With volumetrically modulated arc therapy (VMAT), in addition to the modulation of the intensity of the radiation beam, other mechanical parameters such as gantry speed and dose rate are varied during treatment delivery. It is therefore imperative that we develop comprehensive and accurate methods to validate such complex delivery techniques prior to the commencement of the patient’s treatment. Methods : In this study, a Monte Carlo simulation was performed for the high definition multileaf collimator (HD-MLC) of a Varian Novalis TX linac. Our simulation is based on the MCSIM code and provides a comprehensive model of the linac head. After validating the model in reference geometries, treatment plans for different anatomical sites were simulated and compared against the treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculations. All simulations were performed in a cylindrical water phantom as opposed to the patient anatomy, to remove any complexities associated with density effects. Finally, a comparison through gamma analysis of dose plane between the simulation, the TPS and the measurements from the Matrixx array (IBA) was conducted to verify the accuracy of our model against both the measurements and the TPS. Results : Gamma analysis of ten IMRT and ten VMAT cases for different anatomical sites was performed, using a 3%/3 mm passing criterion. The average passing rates were 97.5% and 94.3% for the IMRT and the VMAT plans respectively when comparing the MCSIM and TPS dose calculations. Conclusion : In the present work a Monte Carlo model of a Novalis TX linac which has been tested and benchmarked to produce phase-space files for the treatment head of the linac was used to produce a input phase-space to calculated dose deposition phenomena in different geometries for IMRT and VMAT treatment modalities. The control points defined for the MLC were replaced by blocks with the same characteristics and materials of the linac MLC to speed up the simulation time. With this technique a simulation of a typical IMRT case can be performed with a 10 computer cluster in about 1.02 hours in average. If the number of computer used is increased the computing time can be reduced even more which make our model suitable for clinical use as a second check method to compare the TPS dose calculated. Our results showed that for IMRT and VMAT deliveries with a HD-MLC, there is an average of 95.9% of the points have a gamma index less than 1 with our chosen criterion between our Monte Carlo simulations and the corresponding measurements and TPS calculations in a cylindrical water equivalent phantom. This Monte Carlo code can be used as pre-treatment, independent dose calculation verification for IMRT and VMAT deliveries.

Effects of the difference in tube voltage of the CT scanner on dose calculation

Computed tomography (CT) measures the attenuation coefficient of an object and converts the value assigned to each voxel into a CT number. In radiation therapy, the CT number, which is directly proportional to the linear attenuation coefficient, must be converted to an electron density for radiation dose calculations for cancer treatment. However, if various tube voltages are applied to take the patient’s CT image without applying the specific CT number to the electron density conversion curve, the accuracy of the dose calculation is not assured. In this study, changes in CT numbers for different materials due to changes in the tube voltage were demonstrated, and the dose calculation errors in the percentage depth dose (PDD), along with a clinical case were analyzed. The maximum dose difference in the PDD from the treatment planning system (TPS) dose calculation and from the Monte Carlo simulation were 1.3% and 1.1%, respectively, when applying the same CT number to the electron density conversion curve for the 80-kVp and 140-kVp images. In the clinical case, different CT number to electron density conversion curves at tube voltage of 80 kVp and 140 kVp were applied to the same image and the maximum differences in the mean, maximum, and minimum doses were 1.1%, 1.2%, and 1.0%, respectively, at the central region of the phantom and 0.6%, 0.9%, and 0.8%, respectively, at the peripheral region of the phantom.