Part II: Verification of the TrueBeam head shielding model in Varian VirtuaLinac via out-of-field doses

Simulating the head of a TrueBeam linear particle accelerator and calculating the photoneutron spectrum on the central axis of a 10-MV photon using particle and heavy-ion transport system code

Photon energy is higher than the (γ,n) threshold, allowing it to interact with the nuclei of materials with high z properties and liberate fast neutrons. This represents a potentially harmful source of radiation for humans and the environment. This study validated the Monte Carlo simulation, using the particle and heavy-ion transport code system (PHITS) on a TrueBeam 10-MV linear particle accelerator's head shielding model and then used this PHITS code to simulate a photo-neutron spectrum for the transport of the beam. The results showed that, when comparing the simulated to measured PDD and crosslines, 100% of the γ-indexes were <1 (γ3%/3mm) for both simulations, for both phase-space data source and a mono energy source. Neutron spectra were recorded in all parts of the TrueBeam's head, as well as photon neutron spectra at three points on the beamline.

Influence of Specific Treatment Parameters on Nontarget and Out-of-Field Doses in a Phantom Model of Prostate SBRT with CyberKnife and TrueBeam

The aim of the study was to determine the influence of a key treatment plan and beam parameters on overall dose distribution and on doses in organs laying in further distance from the target during prostate SBRT. Multiple representative treatment plans (n = 12) for TrueBeam and CyberKnife were prepared and evaluated. Nontarget doses were measured with anionization chamber, in a quasi-humanoid phantom at four sites corresponding to the intestines, right lung, thyroid, and head. The following parameters were modified: radiotherapy technique, presence or not of a flattening filter, degree of modulation, and use or not of jaw tracking function for TrueBeam and beam orientation set-up, optimization techniques, and number of MUs for CyberKnife. After usual optimization doses in intestines (near the target) were 0.73% and 0.76%, in head (farthest from target) 0.05% and 0.19% for TrueBeam and CyberKnife, respectively. For TrueBeam the highest peripheral (head, thyroid, lung) doses occurred for the VMAT with the flattening filter while the lowest for 3DCRT. For CyberKnife the highest doses were for gantry with caudal direction beams blocked (gantry close to OARs) while the lowest was the low modulated VOLO optimization technique. The easiest method to reduce peripheral doses was to combine FFF with jaw tracking and reducing monitor units at TrueBeam and to avoid gantry position close to OARs together with reduction of monitor units at CyberKnife, respectively. The presented strategies allowed to significantly reduce out-of-field and nontarget doses during prostate radiotherapy delivered with TrueBeam and CyberKnife. A different approach was required to reduce peripheral doses because of the difference in dose delivery techniques: non-coplanar using CyberKnife and coplanar using TrueBeam, respectively.

Out-of-field organ doses and associated risk of cancer development following radiation therapy with photons

Innovations in cancer treatment have contributed to the improved survival rate of these patients. Radiotherapy is one of the main options for cancer management nowadays. High doses of ionizing radiation are usually delivered to the tumor site with high energy photon beams. However, the therapeutic radiation exposure may lead to second cancer induction. Moreover, the introduction of intensity-modulated radiation therapy over the last decades has increased the radiation dose to out-of-field organs compared to that from conventional irradiation. The increased organ doses might result in elevated probabilities for developing secondary malignancies to critical organs outside the treatment volume. The organ-specific dosimetry is considered necessary for the theoretical second cancer risk assessment and the proper analysis of data derived from epidemiological reports. This study reviews the methods employed for the measurement and calculation of out-of-field organ doses from exposure to photons and/or neutrons. The strengths and weaknesses of these dosimetric approaches are described in detail. This is followed by a review of the epidemiological data associated with out-of-field cancer risks. Previously published theoretical cancer risk estimates for adult and pediatric patients undergoing radiotherapy with conventional and advanced techniques are presented. The methodology for the theoretical prediction of the probability of carcinogenesis to out-of-field sites and the limitations of this approach are discussed. The article also focuses on the factors affecting the magnitude of the probability for developing radiotherapy-induced malignancies. The restriction of out-of-field doses and risks through the use of different types of shielding equipment is presented.

Out-of-field mean photon energy and dose from 6 MV and 6 MV FFF beams measured with TLD-300 and TLD-100 dosimeters

PURPOSE

To measure the out-of-field mean photon energy and dose imparted by the secondary radiation field generated by 6 MV and 6 MV FFF beams using TLD-300 and TLD-100 dosimeters and to use the technique to quantify the contributions from the different sources that generate out-of-field radiation.

METHODS

The mean photon energy and the dose were measured using the TLD-300 glow curve properties and the TLD-100 response, respectively. The TLD-300 glow curve shape was energy-calibrated with gamma rays from ^99m Tc, ¹⁸ F, ¹³⁷ Cs, and ⁶⁰ Co sources, and its energy dependence was quantified by a parameter obtained from the curve deconvolution. The TLD-100 signal was calibrated in absorbed dose-to-water inside the primary field. Dosimeters were placed on the linac head, and on the surface and at 4.5 cm depth in PMMA at 1-15 cm lateral distances from a 10 × 10 cm² field edge at the isocenter plane. Three configurations of dosimeters around the linac were defined to identify and quantify the contributions from the different sources of out-of-field radiation.

RESULTS

Typical energies of head leakage were about 500 keV for both beams. The mean energy of collimator-scattered radiation was equal to or larger than 1250 keV and, for phantom-scattered radiation, mean photon energies were 400 keV for the 6 MV and 300 keV for the 6 MV FFF beam. Relative uncertainties to determine mean photon energy were better than 15% for energies below 700 keV, and 40% above 1000 keV. The technique lost its sensitivity to the incident photon energy above 1250 keV. On the phantom surface and at 1-15 cm from the field edge, 80%-90% of out-of-field dose came from scattering in the secondary collimator. At 4.5 cm deep in the phantom and 1-5 cm from the field edge, 50%-60% of the out-of-field dose originated in the phantom. At the points of measurement, the head leakage imparted less than 0.1% of the dose at the isocenter. The 6 MV FFF beam imparted 8-36% less out-of-field dose than the 6 MV beam. These energy results are consistent with general Monte Carlo simulation predictions and show excellent agreement with simulations for a similar linac. The measured out-of-field doses showed good agreement with independent evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

The out-of-field mean photon energy and dose imparted by the secondary radiation field were quantified by the applied TLD-300/TLD-100 method. The main sources of out-of-field dose were identified and quantified using three configurations of dosimeters around the linac. This technique could be of value to validate Monte Carlo simulations where the linac head design, configuration, or material composition are unavailable.

Effect of protective glasses on radiation dose to eye lenses during whole breast irradiation

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy of radiotherapy for breast cancer has greatly improved owing to better irradiation methods. Radiotherapy aims to deliver therapeutic doses to predetermined target volumes while sparing surrounding healthy tissues. However, there are few reports on radiation exposure to eye lenses, and the recommended exposure limits to ocular lens have been substantially reduced in recent years. This study aimed to investigate the amount of radiation exposure to eye lenses using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLDs) and determine whether wearing special protective devices to protect the eyes, as an organ at risk, during whole breast irradiation, is necessary.

METHODS

This experiment used OSLDs on water-equivalent phantom to measure the change in scattered radiation dose due to the difference of irradiation field while using 4- and 6-MV photons of TrueBeam linear accelerator. Using a total treatment dose of 50 Gy, a target was positioned to approximate the breast, and a plan was formulated to deliver 2 Gy per treatment by tangential irradiation. The mean (SD) irradiation dose at the lens position outside the irradiation field was reported.

RESULTS

The scattered radiation dose outside the irradiation field was more affected by the irradiation field size than by the radiation energy. The out-of-field irradiation dose with a larger field of view was higher than that with a smaller field of view. The use of 0.07- and 0.83-mm-thick lead shield protective glasses reduced the radiation dose by 56.1% (P < .001) and 55.6% (P < .001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this experimental model, the amount of radiation the eye was exposed to during whole breast irradiation was determined by the distance of the eye from the radiation field edge and by wearing protective glasses. In clinical practice, the protection offered by eyeglasses may reduce the risk of long-term side effects and allow the use of higher intensive radiotherapy.

Validation of a Monte Carlo model for multi leaf collimator based electron delivery

PURPOSE

To develop and validate a Monte Carlo model of the Varian TrueBeam to study electron collimation using the existing photon multi-leaf collimators (pMLC), instead of conventional electron applicators and apertures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A complete Monte Carlo model of the Varian TrueBeam was developed using Tool for particle simulation (TOPAS) (version 3.1.p3). Vendor-supplied information was used to model the treatment head components and the source parameters. A phase space plane was setup above the collimating jaws and captured particles were reused until a statistical uncertainty of 1% was achieved in the central axis. Electron energies 6, 9, 12, 16, and 20 MeV with a jaw-defined field of 20 × 20 cm² at iso-center, pMLC-defined fields of 6.8 × 6.8 cm² and 11.4 × 11.4 cm² at 80 cm source-to-surface distance (SSD) and an applicator-defined field of 10 × 10 cm² at iso-center were evaluated. All the measurements except the applicator-defined fields were measured using an ionization chamber in a water tank using 80 cm SSD. The dose difference, distance-to-agreement and gamma index were used to evaluate the agreement between the Monte Carlo calculations and measurements. Contributions of electron scattering off pMLC leaves and inter-leaf leakage on dose profiles were evaluated and compared with Monte Carlo calculations. Electron transport through a heterogeneous phantom was simulated and the resulting dose distributions were compared with film measurements. The validated Monte Carlo model was used to simulate several clinically motivated cases to demonstrate the benefit of pMLC-based electron delivery compared to applicator-based electron delivery.

RESULTS

Calculated and measured percentage depth-dose (PDD) curves agree within 2% after normalization. The agreement between normalized percentage depth dose curves were evaluated using one-dimensional gamma analysis with a local tolerance of 2%/1 mm and the %points passing gamma criteria was 100% for all energies. For jaw-defined fields, calculated profiles agree with measurements with pass rates of >97% for 2%/2 mm gamma criteria. Calculated FWHM and penumbra width agree with measurements within 0.4 cm. For fields with tertiary collimation using an pMLC or applicator, the average gamma pass rate of compared profiles was 98% with 2%/2 mm gamma criteria. The profiles measured to evaluate the pMLC leaf scattering agreed with Monte Carlo calculations with an average gamma pass rate of 96.5% with 3%/2 mm gamma criteria. Measured dose profiles below the heterogenous phantom agreed well with calculated profiles and matched within 2.5% for most points. The calculated clinically applicable cases using TOPAS MC and Eclipse TPS for single enface electron beam, electron-photon mixed beam and a matched electron-electron beam exhibited a reasonable agreement in PDDs, profiles and dose volume histograms.

CONCLUSION

We present a validation of a Monte Carlo model of Varian TrueBeam for pMLC-based electron delivery. Monte Carlo calculations agreed with measurements satisfying gamma criterion of 1%/1 mm for depth dose curves and 2%/1 mm for dose profiles. The simulation of clinically applicable cases demonstrated the clinical utility of pMLC-based electrons and the use of MC simulations for development of advanced radiation therapy techniques.