Validation of the dosimetry of total skin irradiation techniques by Monte Carlo simulation

An automation of Monte Carlo workflow for dosimetry study of an Elekta LINAC delivery system in radiotherapy

Purpose

This study aims to automate the Monte Carlo (MC) workflow utilized for radiotherapy dosimetry, focusing on an Elekta LINAC delivery system. It addresses the challenge of integrating MC simulations into routine clinical practice, making this accurate yet complex method more accessible and efficient for radiotherapy dosimetry.

Methods and Materials

We developed a user-friendly software featuring a graphical user interface (GUI) that integrates EGSnrc for MC simulations. The software streamlines the process from retrieving Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data to executing dose calculations and comparing dose distributions. To validate our proposed tool, we compared its computed doses for IMRT and VMAT plans from the Pinnacle TPS for an Elekta Versa HD linear accelerator against MC simulation results. This comparison utilized our in-house software and GUI as the tool, covering various treatment sites and prescriptions.

Results

The automated MC workflow demonstrated high accuracy in dose calculations and streamlined integration with clinical workflows. The comparison between the MC-simulated and TPS-calculated doses revealed excellent agreement, highlighting the reliability of MC for independent dose verification in complex treatment scenarios.

Conclusions

The automated MC workflow developed represents a substantial improvement in the practicality and efficiency of MC simulations in radiotherapy. This advancement not only simplifies the dosimetry process but also ensures high accuracy, establishing it as a valuable tool for routine patient-specific quality assurance and the development of specialized treatment procedures.

Skin dose distributions between Stanford and rotational techniques in total skin electron therapy (TSET)

PURPOSE

Total skin electron therapy (TSET) has proven to be one of the most effective treatments for advanced-stage cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. Two most used techniques are the Stanford six-field and rotational techniques. This study compares patient skin dose distributions as a function of depth between these two techniques.

METHODS

The EGSnrc system was used to simulate electron beams and calculate patient dose distributions. The calculations assumed the same patient standing on a platform and the patient's different postures were ignored for the Stanford technique in the comparison of dose distributions. The skin doses were analyzed as a function of skin depth-dose coverage and evaluated using dose-volume-histograms (DVH). The comparisons were performed in three realistic clinical settings in which dual-field were used for patients treated at extended distances of 316 cm and 500 cm, and a single field was used at 700 cm. In all cases the realistic patient treatment beam delivery geometry was simulated.

RESULTS

Although small dose differences were observed in some local areas, no clinically significant differences were found in the patient 3D dose distributions between the Stanford and rotational techniques. Virtually the same DVH curves between two the techniques were observed for mean dose to skin depth of 0-5 mm, 5-10 mm and 10-15 mm from the skin surface, respectively. It is found that the skin depth dose coverage is 2 mm shallower for patient treatment at 500 cm compared to at 316 cm due to the additional air attenuation. However, very similar dose coverage and uniformity can be achieved at these two different extended treatment distances by adjusting the thickness of acrylic scatter plate. Adequate thickness of a scattering plate improves the skin dose uniformity.

CONCLUSION

Both the Stanford and rotational techniques deliver very similar skin dose coverage in DVH plots and only small differences are seen in local areas. It is worth to emphasize that the dose-volume histogram (DVH) is a graphical representation of the distribution of dose within a structure and it does not contain spatial information. Therefore, comparison of entire skin dose using DVH may mask some variations at different locations of the surface area. In addition, the comparison did not consider different patient postures of the Stanford technique. Including the different patient postures in the calculation may affect the result of doses to the limbs. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Technical Note: Bremsstrahlung dose in the electron beam at extended distances in total skin electron therapy

PURPOSE

Electron beam from a linear accelerator is commonly used in total skin electron Therapy (TSET) at extended distances. Since Das et al (Med Phys 21, p.1733, 1994) reported 5% bremsstrahlung dose for a 6 MeV electron beam at extended distance of 500 cm it has been accepted as common knowledge. However, measurements by Chen et al (Int J. Rad Onc Biol Phys 59 p.872, 2004) and Monte Carlo simulations by Ding et al (Phys. Med. Biol. 66, 075010, 2021) were unable to reproduce such high bremsstrahlung dose. As bremsstrahlung dose contributes to whole-body dose which could produce bone marrow toxicity with serious complications for the outcome of the TSET, it is important to re-evaluate the magnitude of bremsstrahlung dose accurately.

METHODS

The EGSnrc Monte Carlo system is used to investigate bremsstrahlung doses from 6 MeV high dose rate total skin electron (HDTSe) beams from Varian TrueBeam and Clinac Accelerators. The measurements were carried out at depth of d_max and 5 cm in solid water and Acrylic phantoms at extended distances using a parallel-plate chamber and a cylindrical ion chamber.

RESULTS

We were able to reproduce previously reported high bremsstrahlung dose at extended distances by using a parallel plate ionization chamber. However, both the measurements by using a cylindrical chamber and Monte Carlo simulations showed an insignificant bremsstrahlung dose (∼1%) even at SSD = 500 cm.

CONCLUSION

The bremsstrahlung doses of a 6 MeV electron beam are 0.5% to 1% for SSD from 100 to 700 cm, although it increases with the increasing extended distance. The common belief of up to 5% bremsstrahlung dose at large extended distances is incorrect. Previously reported high bremsstrahlung doses might be due to poor signal-to-noise ratio of using parallel plate chamber for measuring very low dose or particular set-up. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Recumbent Total Skin Electron Beam Therapy

Purpose

Our purpose was to describe preliminary dosimetric and clinical results of a recumbent total skin electron beam therapy (TSEBT) technique and compare this to a conventional standing TSEBT technique.

Methods and Materials

A customized treatment platform with recessed side wheels was constructed and commissioned for patients to be treated in a recumbent position. Dosimetric and clinical information was collected for patients treated with this new recumbent technique in addition to that of a cohort of patients treated contemporaneously using the conventional standing method. Dose delivery and clinical outcomes were compared for patients treated with the recumbent and standing techniques.

Results

Between 2017 and 2019, 27 patients were treated with TSEBT with the recumbent (n = 13) or conventional standing technique (n = 14) at our institution. Measured dose at 15 body sites could be directly compared. Of these, 10 showed no significant difference between the two techniques while five sites showed significant differences in median measured dose, including the top of left shoulder, right biceps, bend of left elbow, upper back, and medial right thigh (P < .003). Measured dose was significantly higher with the standing technique at these sites with the exception of the upper back. Rates of complete response (25% vs 23%), partial response (50% vs 69%), and stable disease (17% vs 8%) were similar between the standing and recumbent cohorts, respectively (P = .78).

Conclusions

We have developed, commissioned, and implemented a floor-based, recumbent technique that allows for treatment of patients who would otherwise not be eligible for TSEBT. Dosimetric and clinical measurements suggest that this technique is a viable alternative to the standing method.

Stopping-power ratios for electron beams used in total skin electron therapy

PURPOSE

The electron beams for total skin electron therapy (TSET) are often degraded by a scatter plate in addition to extended distances. For electron dosimetry, both the AAPM TG-51 and IAEA TRS-398 recommend the use of two formulas developed by Burns et al [Med. Phys. 23, 489-501 (1996)] to estimate the water-to-air stopping-power ratios (SPRs). Both formulas are based on a fit to SPRs calculated for standard electron beams. This study aims to find: (1) if the formulas are applicable to beams used in TSET and (2) the impact of the ICRU report 90 recommendations on the SPRs for these beams.

METHODS

The EGSnrc Monte Carlo code system is used to generate 6 MeV high dose rate total skin electron (HDTSe) beams used in TSET. The simulated beams are used to calculate dose distributions and SPRs as a function of depth in a water phantom. The fitted SPRs using the empirical formulas are compared with MC-calculated SPRs.

RESULTS

The electron beam quality specifier, the depth in water at which the absorbed dose falls to 50% of its maximum value, R₅₀ , decreases approximately 1 mm for each additional 100-cm extended distance ranging from 2.24 cm at SSD = 100 to 1.72 cm at SSD = 700 cm. For beams passing through a scatter plate, R₅₀ is 1.76 cm (1.14) at SSD = 300 and 1.48 cm (0.85 cm) at SSD = 600 cm with an Acrylic plate thickness of 3 mm (9 mm), respectively. The discrepancy between fitted and MC-calculated SPRs at d_ref as a function of R₅₀ is <0.8%, and in many cases <0.4%. The difference between fitted and MC-calculated SPRs as a function of depth and R₅₀ is within 1% at depths <0.8R₅₀ for beams with R₅₀  ≥ 1.14 cm. The ICRU-90 recommendations decrease SPRs by 0.3%-0.4% compared to the use of data recommended in ICRU-37.

CONCLUSION

The formulas used by the major protocols are accurate enough for clinical beams used in TSET and the error caused using the formulas is <1% to estimate SPRs as a function of depth and R₅₀ for depths <0.8R₅₀ for beams used in TSET with R₅₀  ≥ 1.14 cm. The impact of the ICRU-90 recommendations shows a decrease of SPRs by a fraction of a percent for beams used in TSET.

Monte Carlo study on dose distributions from total skin electron irradiation therapy (TSET)

Total skin electron therapy (TSET) has been used to treat mycosis fungoides since the 1950s. Practitioners of TSET rely on relatively crude, phantom-based point measurements for commissioning and treatment plan dosimetry. Using Monte Carlo simulation techniques, this study presents whole-body dosimetry for a patient receiving rotational, dual-field TSET. The Monte Carlo codes, BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc, were used to simulate 6 MeV electron beams to calculate skin dose from TSET. Simulations were validated with experimental measurements. The rotational dual-field technique uses extended source-to-surface distance with an acrylic beam degrader between the patient and incident beams. Simulations incorporated patient positioning: standing on a platform that rotates during radiation delivery. Resultant patient doses were analyzed as a function of skin depth-dose coverage and evaluated using dose-volume-histograms (DVH). Good agreement was obtained between simulations and measurements. For a cylinder with a 30 cm diameter, the depths that dose fell to 50% of the surface dose was 0.66 cm, 1.15 cm and 1.42 cm for thicknesses of 9 mm, 3 mm and without an acrylic scatter plate, respectively. The results are insensitive to cylinder diameter. Relatively uniform skin surface dose was obtained for skin in the torso area although large dose variations (>25%) were found in other areas resulting from partial beam shielding of the extremities. To achieve 95% mean dose to the first 5 mm of skin depth, the mean dose to skin depth of 5-10 mm and depth of 10-15 mm from the skin surface was 74% (57%) and 50% (25%) of the prescribed dose when using a 3mm (9 mm) thickness scatter plate, respectively. As a result of this investigation on patient skin dose distributions we changed our patient treatments to use a 3 mm instead of a 9 mm thickness Acrylic scatter plate for clinically preferred skin depth dose coverage.

Investigation of effect of filter on the stand-up technique for total skin irradiation by Monte Carlo simulation

Purpose

The aim of this study was to investigate dosimetric effects of scattering filter on the stand‐up technique for total skin irradiation (TSI) with a single electron field by Monte Carlo (MC) simulation.

Methods

MC simulations were performed with BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc packages under EGSnrc environment. Scattering filter of a metal disc was mounted in the accessory slot. The filter materials (Cu, Fe, Au, Zn, Ag) were investigated, with thickness ranging from 0.05 to 0.55 mm, depending on material. The extended source to skin distance (SSD) ranging from 250 to 350 cm was studied. The following dosimetric quantities were evaluated: percent depth dose (PDD), profiles and output factor at depth of maximum, and composite dose distribution on a 30‐cm diameter cylindrical phantom. They were compared with the standard dual beam technique used at our clinic. The effects on different patient sizes were also studied.

Results

No filter produced acceptable profile flatness (±10% within the central 160 cm) at 250 cm SSD. At 300 cm SSD, Au (0.1 mm), Ag (0.25 mm), Cu (0.5 mm) produced acceptable flatness while Zn (0.45 mm) required 325 cm SSD. For these four configurations, the d_max was 0.90–0.99 cm, similar to dual beam (0.97 cm); R₅₀ was 1.85–1.91 cm, compared with dual beam of 2.06 cm; the output factor ranged from 0.025 to 0.029, lower than the dual beam (0.080). With the composite fields for four configurations, the d_max was 0.10 cm, compared with dual beam (0.16 cm). The surface dose was 97%, similar to dual beam (96%). B‐factor was 3.3–3.4, compared with dual beam of 3.1. The maximum X‐ray contamination was 3%, higher than dual beam (1%).

Conclusions

The investigation suggests the TSI stand‐up technique can be implemented using a single electron beam if a customized filter is used. More dosimetric measurements are needed to validate the MC results and clinical implementation.