Nuclear halo measurements for accurate prediction of field size factor in a Varian ProBeam proton PBS system

Evaluation of monte carlo to support commissioning of the treatment planning system of new pencil beam scanning proton therapy facilities

Objective. To demonstrate the potential of Monte Carlo (MC) to support the resource-intensive measurements that comprise the commissioning of the treatment planning system (TPS) of new proton therapy facilities.Approach. Beam models of a pencil beam scanning system (Varian ProBeam) were developed in GATE (v8.2), Eclipse proton convolution superposition algorithm (v16.1, Varian Medical Systems) and RayStation MC (v12.0.100.0, RaySearch Laboratories), using the beam commissioning data. All models were first benchmarked against the same commissioning data and validated on seven spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) plans. Then, we explored the use of MC to optimise dose calculation parameters, fully understand the performance and limitations of TPS in homogeneous fields and support the development of patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) processes. We compared the dose calculations of the TPSs against measurements (DDTPSvs.Meas.) or GATE (DDTPSvs.GATE) for an extensive set of plans of varying complexity. This included homogeneous plans with varying field-size, range, width, and range-shifters (RSs) (n= 46) and PSQA plans for different anatomical sites (n= 11).Main results. The three beam models showed good agreement against the commissioning data, and dose differences of 3.5% and 5% were found for SOBP plans without and with RSs, respectively. DDTPSvs.Meas.and DDTPSvs.GATEwere correlated in most scenarios. In homogeneous fields the Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.92 and 0.68 for Eclipse and RayStation, respectively. The standard deviation of the differences between GATE and measurements (±0.5% for homogeneous and ±0.8% for PSQA plans) was applied as tolerance when comparing TPSs with GATE. 72% and 60% of the plans were within the GATE predicted dose difference for both TPSs, for homogeneous and PSQA cases, respectively.Significance. Developing and validating a MC beam model early on into the commissioning of new proton therapy facilities can support the validation of the TPS and facilitate comprehensive investigation of its capabilities and limitations.

Treatment planning of scanned proton beams in RayStation

The use of scanned proton beams in external beam radiation therapy has seen a rapid development over the past decade. This technique places new demands on treatment planning, as compared to conventional photon-based radiation therapy. In this article, several proton specific functions as implemented in the treatment planning system RayStation are presented. We will cover algorithms for energy layer and spot selection, basic optimization including the handling of spot weight limits, optimization of the linear energy transfer (LET) distribution, robust optimization including the special case of 4D optimization, proton arc planning, and automatic planning using deep learning. We will further present the Monte Carlo (MC) proton dose engine in RayStation to some detail, from the material interpretation of the CT data, through the beam model parameterization, to the actual MC transport mechanism. Useful tools for plan evaluation, including robustness evaluation, and the versatile scripting interface are also described. The overall aim of the paper is to give an overview of some of the key proton planning functions in RayStation, with example usages, and at the same time provide the details about the underlying algorithms that previously have not been fully publicly available.

Validating a double Gaussian source model for small proton fields in a commercial Monte-Carlo dose calculation engine

PURPOSE

The primary fluence of a proton pencil beam exiting the accelerator is enveloped by a region of secondaries, commonly called "spray". Although small in magnitude, this spray may affect dose distributions in pencil beam scanning mode e.g., in the calculation of the small field output, if not modelled properly in a treatment planning system (TPS). The purpose of this study was to dosimetrically benchmark the Monte Carlo (MC) dose engine of the RayStation TPS (v.10A) in small proton fields and systematically compare single Gaussian (SG) and double Gaussian (DG) modeling of initial proton fluence providing a more accurate representation of the nozzle spray.

METHODS

The initial proton fluence distribution for SG/DG beam modeling was deduced from two-dimensional measurements in air with a scintillation screen with electronic readout. The DG model was either based on direct fits of the two Gaussians to the measured profiles, or by an iterative optimization procedure, which uses the measured profiles to mimic in-air scan-field factor (SF) measurements. To validate the DG beam models SFs, i.e. relative doses to a 10 × 10 cm2 field, were measured in water for three different initial proton energies (100MeV, 160MeV, 226.7MeV) and square field sizes from 1×1cm2 to 10×10cm2 using a small field ionization chamber (IBA CC01) and an IBA ProteusPlus system (universal nozzle). Furthermore, the dose to the center of spherical target volumes (diameters: 1cm to 10cm) was determined using the same small volume ionization chamber (IC). A comprehensive uncertainty analysis was performed, including estimates of influence factors typical for small field dosimetry deduced from a simple two-dimensional analytical model of the relative fluence distribution. Measurements were compared to the predictions of the RayStation TPS.

RESULTS

SFs deviated by more than 2% from TPS predictions in all fields <4×4cm2 with a maximum deviation of 5.8% for SG modeling. In contrast, deviations were smaller than 2% for all field-sizes and proton energies when using the directly fitted DG model. The optimized DG model performed similarly except for slightly larger deviations in the 1×1cm2 scan-fields. The uncertainty estimates showed a significant impact of pencil beam size variations (±5%) resulting in up to 5.0% standard uncertainty. The point doses within spherical irradiation volumes deviated from calculations by up to 3.3% for the SG model and 2.0% for the DG model.

CONCLUSION

Properly representing nozzle spray in RayStation's MC-based dose engine using a DG beam model was found to reduce the deviation to measurements in small spherical targets to below 2%. A thorough uncertainty analysis shows a similar magnitude for the combined standard uncertainty of such measurements.

Dose and robustness comparison of nominal, daily and accumulated doses for photon and proton treatment of sinonasal cancer

INTRODUCTION

The aim was to evaluate and compare the dosimetric effect and robustness towards day-to-day anatomical and setup variations in the delivered dose for photon and proton treatments of sinonasal cancer (SNC) patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Photon (VMAT) and proton (IMPT) plans were optimized retrospectively for 24 SNC patients. Synthetic CTs (synCT) were obtained by deforming the planning CT (pCT) to the anatomy of every daily cone-beam CT. Both VMAT and IMPT plans were recalculated on the synCTs. The recalculated daily dose was accumulated over the whole treatment on the pCT. Target coverage and dose to organs and risk (OARs) were evaluated for all patients for the nominal, daily and accumulated dose distribution.

RESULTS

In general, dose to OARs farther away from the target, including brain, chiasm and contralateral optic nerve, was lower for proton plans than photon plans. Whereas, OARs in proximity of the target received a lower dose for photon plans. For proton plans, the target coverage (volume of CTV receiving 95% of prescribed dose), V95%, fell below 99% for 9/24 patients in one or more fractions. For photon plans, 4/24 patients had one or more fractions where V95% fell below 99%. For accumulated doses, V95% was below 99% only in two cases, but above 98% for all patients.

CONCLUSION

Photon and proton treatment have different strengths regarding OAR sparing. The robustness was high for both treatment modalities. Patient selection for either proton or photon radiation therapy of SNC patients should be based on a case-by-case comparison.

Development and validation of an automatic commissioning tool for the Monte Carlo dose engine in myQA iON

Independent dose verification with Monte Carlo (MC) simulations is an important feature of proton therapy quality assurance (QA). However, clinical integration of such tools often generates an additional and complex workload for medical physicists. The preparation of the necessary clinical inputs, such as the machine beam model, should therefore be automated. In this work, a methodology for automatic MC commissioning has been devised, validated, and developed into a MATLAB tool for the users of myQA iON, the recent QA platform of IBA Dosimetry. With this workflow, all necessary parameters can easily be tuned using dedicated optimization methods. For the geometrical beam parameters (phase space), the assumption of a single or double Gaussian is made. To model the energy spectrum, a Gaussian function is assumed and parameters are optimized using either MC simulations or a library of pre-computed Bragg peaks. For the absolute dose calibration, commissioning fields can be reproduced with the dose engine to retrieve the necessary parameters. We discuss in a first time the tool efficiency and show that one can optimize all parameters in less than 4 min per energy with excellent accuracy. We then validate a beam model obtained with the tool by simulating homogeneous spread-out Bragg peaks (SOBPs) and patient QA plans previously measured in water. An average range agreement of 0.29 ± 0.34 mm is achieved for the SOBPs while 3%/3 mm local gamma passing rates reach 99.3% on average over all 62 measured patient QA planes, which is well within clinical tolerances.

Development of a storage phosphor imaging system for proton pencil beam spot profile determination

PURPOSE

Accurate two-dimensional (2D) profile measurements at submillimeter precision are necessary for proton beam commissioning and periodic quality assurance (QA) purposes and are currently performed at our institution with a commercial scintillation detector (Lynx PT) with limited means for independent checks. The purpose of this work was to create an independent dosimetry system consisting of an in-house optical scanner and a BaFBrI:Eu²⁺ storage phosphor dosimeter by: (a) determining the optimal settings for the optical scanner, (b) measuring 2D proton spot profiles with the storage phosphors, and (c) comparing them to similar measurements using a commercial scintillation detector.

METHODS

An in-house 2D laboratory optical scanner was constructed and spatially calibrated for accurate 2D photostimulated luminescence (PSL) dosimetry. Square 5 × 5 cm² BaFBrI:Eu²⁺ dosimeter samples were uniformly irradiated with line scans performed to determine the physical and electronic scanner settings resulting in the highest signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) at a sub-millimeter spatial resolution. The resultant spatial resolution of the scanner was then quantitatively assessed by measuring (a) line pairs on a standard X-ray lead bar phantom and (b) modulation transfer functions. Following this, 2D proton spot profiles from a Mevion S250i Hyperscan proton unit were obtained at 1, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 monitor unit (MU) settings at maximum energy (E₀  = 227.1 MeV) and compared to baseline profiles from a commercial scintillation detector, where 1 MU is calibrated to deliver 1 Gy absolute proton dose-to-water under reference conditions, that is, 41 × 41 proton spots uniformly spaced by 0.25 cm within a 10 × 10 cm² square field size at maximum energy (227.1 MeV) in water at depth of 5 cm at isocenter. The dosimetric system's sensitivities to (a) ±1 mm positional shifts and (b) ±0.3 mm beam lateral spread changes were quantitatively evaluated through a Gaussian fitting of the crossline and inline plots of the respective artificially shifted beam profiles.

RESULTS

The physical scanner settings of (a) Δτ = 27 ms time interval between data samples, (b) v_x  = 1.235 cm/s scanning speed, (c) 1% laser transmission (0.02 mW power) and (d) (Δx, Δy) = (0.33, 0.50 mm) pixel sizes with electronic settings of (a) 300 microseconds time constant, (b) normal dynamic reserve, (c) 24 dB/oct low pass filter slope, and (d) 160 Hz chopping frequency resulted in the highest SNR while maintaining sub-millimeter spatial resolution. The BaFBr_0.85 I_0.15 :Eu²⁺ storage phosphor dosimeters were linear from 1 to 50 MU and their profiles did not saturate up to 150 MU. The scanner was able to detect lateral displacements of ±1 mm in both the crossline and inline directions and ±0.3 mm beam spread changes that were artificially introduced by varying the incident proton energy. Specific to our proton unit, proton energy changes of ±1 MeV can also be detected indirectly via beam spread measurements.

CONCLUSION

Our combined dosimetric system including an in-house laboratory optical scanner and reusable BaFBr_0.85 I_0.15 :Eu²⁺ storage phosphors demonstrated a sufficient spatial resolution and dosimetric accuracy to support its use as an independent proton spot measurement dosimeter system. Its wide dynamic range allows for other versatile applications such as proton halo measurements.

A standardized commissioning framework of Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithms for proton pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems

PURPOSE

Treatment planning systems (TPSs) from different vendors can involve different implementations of Monte Carlo dose calculation (MCDC) algorithms for pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy. There are currently no guidelines for validating non-water materials in TPSs. Furthermore, PBS-specific parameters can vary by 1-2 orders of magnitude among different treatment delivery systems (TDSs). This paper proposes a standardized framework on the use of commissioning data and steps to validate TDS-specific parameters and TPS-specific heterogeneity modeling to potentially reduce these uncertainties.

METHODS

A standardized commissioning framework was developed to commission the MCDC algorithms of RayStation 8A and Eclipse AcurosPT v13.7.20 using water and non-water materials. Measurements included Bragg peak depth-dose and lateral spot profiles and scanning field outputs for Varian ProBeam. The phase-space parameters were obtained from in-air measurements and the number of protons per MU from output measurements of 10 × 10 cm² square fields at a 2 cm depth. Spot profiles and various PBS field measurements at additional depths were used to validate TPS. Human tissues in TPS, Gammex phantom materials, and artificial materials were used for the TPS benchmark and validation.

RESULTS

The maximum differences of phase parameters, spot sigma, and divergence between MCDC algorithms are below 4.5 µm and 0.26 mrad in air, respectively. Comparing TPS to measurements at depths, both MC algorithms predict the spot sigma within 0.5 mm uncertainty intervals, the resolution of the measurement device. Beam Configuration in AcurosPT is found to underestimate number of protons per MU by ~2.5% and requires user adjustment to match measured data, while RayStation is within 1% of measurements using Auto model. A solid water phantom was used to validate the range accuracy of non-water materials within 1% in AcurosPT.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed standardized commissioning framework can detect potential issues during PBS TPS MCDC commissioning processes, and potentially can shorten commissioning time and improve dosimetric accuracies. Secondary MCDC can be used to identify the root sources of disagreement between primary MCDC and measurement.