Investigation of ionization chamber perturbation factors using proton beam and Fano cavity test for the Monte Carlo simulation code PHITS

The reference dose for clinical proton beam therapy is based on ionization chamber dosimetry. However, data on uncertainties in proton dosimetry are lacking, and multifaceted studies are required. Monte Carlo simulations are useful tools for calculating ionization chamber dosimetry in radiation fields and are sensitive to the transport algorithm parameters when particles are transported in a heterogeneous region. We aimed to evaluate the proton transport algorithm of the Particle and Heavy Ion Transport Code System (PHITS) using the Fano test. The response of the ionization chamber f Q and beam quality correction factors k Q were calculated using the same parameters as those in the Fano test and compared with those of other Monte Carlo codes for verification. The geometry of the Fano test consisted of a cylindrical gas-filled cavity sandwiched between two cylindrical walls. f Q was calculated as the ratio of the absorbed dose in water to the dose in the cavity in the chamber. We compared the f Q calculated using PHITS with that of a previous study, which was calculated using other Monte Carlo codes (Geant4, FULKA, and PENH) under similar conditions. The flight mesh, a parameter for charged particle transport, passed the Fano test within 0.15%. This was shown to be sufficiently accurate compared with that observed in previous studies. The f Q calculated using PHITS were 1.116 ± 0.002 and 1.124 ± 0.003 for NACP-02 and PTW-30013, respectively, and the k Q were 0.981 ± 0.008 and 1.027 ± 0.008, respectively, at 150 MeV. Our results indicate that PHITS can calculate the f Q and k Q with high precision.

The influence of different versions of FLUKA and GEANT4 on the calculation of response functions of ionization chambers in clinical proton beams

Objective.To investigate the influence of different versions of the Monte Carlo codesgeant4 andflukaon the calculation of overall response functionsfQof air-filled ionization chambers in clinical proton beams.Approach. fQfactors were calculated for six plane-parallel and four cylindrical ionization chambers withgeant4 andfluka. These factors were compared to already published values that were derived using older versions of these codes.Main results.Differences infQfactors calculated with different versions of the same Monte Carlo code can be up to ∼1%. Especially forgeant4, the updated version leads to a more pronounced dependence offQon proton energy and to smallerfQfactors for high energies.Significance.Different versions of the same Monte Carlo code can lead to differences in the calculation offQfactors of up to ∼1% without changing the simulation setup, transport parameters, ionization chamber geometry modeling, or employed physics lists. These findings support the statement that the dominant contributor to the overall uncertainty of Monte Carlo calculatedfQfactors are type-B uncertainties.

Monte Carlo calculated ionization chamber correction factors in clinical proton beams - deriving uncertainties from published data

For the update of the IAEA TRS-398 Code of Practice (CoP), global ionization chamber factors (fQ) and beam quality correction factors (kQ) for air-filled ionization chambers in clinical proton beams have been calculated with different Monte Carlo codes. In this study, average Monte Carlo calculated fQ and kQ factors are provided and the uncertainty of these factors is estimated. Average fQ factors in monoenergetic proton beams with energies between 60 MeV and 250 MeV were derived from Monte Carlo calculated fQ factors published in the literature. Altogether, 195 fQ factors for six plane-parallel and three cylindrical ionization chambers calculated with penh, fluka and geant4 were incorporated. Additionally, a weighted standard deviation of fQ factors was calculated, where the same weight was assigned to each Monte Carlo code. From average fQ factors, kQ factors were derived and compared to the values from the IAEA TRS-398 CoP published in 2000 as well as to the values of the upcoming version. Average Monte Carlo calculated fQ factors are constant within 0.6% over the energy range investigated. In general, the different Monte Carlo codes agree within 1% for low energies and show larger differences up to 2% for high energies. As a result, the standard deviation of fQ factors increases with energy and is ∼0.3% for low energies and ∼0.8% for high energies. kQ factors derived from average Monte Carlo calculated fQ factors differ from the values presented in the IAEA TRS-398 CoP by up to 2.4%. The overall estimated uncertainty of Monte Carlo calculated kQ factors is ∼0.5%-1% smaller than the uncertainties estimated in IAEA TRS-398 CoP since the individual ionization chamber characteristics (e.g. fluence perturbations) are considered in detail in Monte Carlo calculations. The agreement between Monte Carlo calculated kQ factors and the values of the upcoming version of IAEA TRS-398 CoP is better with deviations smaller than 1%.

On the perturbation effect and LET dependence of beam quality correction factors in carbon ion beams

BACKGROUND

In a recent study, we reported beam quality correction factors, f_Q , in carbon ion beams using Monte Carlo (MC) methods for a cylindrical and a parallel-plate ionization chamber (IC). A non-negligible perturbation effect was observed; however, the magnitude of the perturbation correction due to the specific IC subcomponents was not included. Furthermore, the stopping power data presented in the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) report 73 were used, whereas the latest stopping power data have been reported in the ICRU report 90.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to extend our previous work by computing f_Q correction factors using the ICRU 90 stopping power data and by reporting IC-specific perturbation correction factors. Possible energy or linear energy transfer (LET) dependence of the f_Q correction factor was investigated by simulating both pristine beams and spread-out Bragg peaks (SOBPs).

METHODS

The TOol for PArticle Simulation (TOPAS)/GEANT4 MC code was used in this study. A 30 × 30 × 50 cm³ water phantom was simulated with a uniform 10 × 10 cm² parallel beam incident on the surface. A Farmer-type cylindrical IC (Exradin A12) and two parallel-plate ICs (Exradin P11 and A11) were simulated in TOPAS using the manufacturer-provided geometrical drawings. The f_Q correction factor was calculated in pristine carbon ion beams in the 150-450 MeV/u energy range at 2 cm depth and in the middle of the flat region of four SOBPs. The k_Q correction factor was calculated by simulating the f_Qo correction factor in a ⁶⁰ Co beam at 5 cm depth. The perturbation correction factors due to the presence of the individual IC subcomponents, such as the displacement effect in the air cavity, collecting electrode, chamber wall, and chamber stem, were calculated at 2 cm depth for monoenergetic beams only. Additionally, the mean dose-averaged and track-averaged LET was calculated at the depths at which the f_Q was calculated.

RESULTS

The ICRU 90 f_Q correction factors were reported. The p_dis correction factor was found to be significant for the cylindrical IC with magnitudes up to 1.70%. The individual perturbation corrections for the parallel-plate ICs were <1.0% except for the A11 p_cel correction at the lowest energy. The f_Q correction for the P11 IC exhibited an energy dependence of >1.00% and displayed differences up to 0.87% between pristine beams and SOBPs. Conversely, the f_Q for A11 and A12 displayed a minimal energy dependence of <0.50%. The energy dependence was found to manifest in the LET dependence for the P11 IC. A statistically significant LET dependence was found only for the P11 IC in pristine beams only with a magnitude of <1.10%.

CONCLUSIONS

The perturbation and k_Q correction factor should be calculated for the specific IC to be used in carbon ion beam reference dosimetry as a function of beam quality.

Current best estimates of beam quality correction factors for reference dosimetry of clinical proton beams

Objective. To review the currently available data on beam quality correction factors, k Q , for ionization chambers in clinical proton beams and derive their current best estimates for the updated recommendations of the IAEA TRS-398 Code of Practice. Approach. The reviewed data come from 20 publications from which k Q values can be derived either directly from calorimeter measurements, indirectly from comparison with other chambers or from Monte Carlo calculated overall chamber factors, f Q . For cylindrical ionization chambers, a distinction is made between data obtained in the centre of a spread-out Bragg peak and those obtained in the plateau region of single-energy fields. For the latter, the effect of depth dose gradients has to be considered. To this end an empirical model for previously published displacement correction factors for single-layer scanned beams was established, while for unmodulated scattered beams experimental data were used. From all the data, chamber factors, f Q , and chamber perturbation correction factors, p Q , were then derived and analysed. Main results. The analysis showed that except for the beam quality dependence of the water-to-air mass stopping power ratio and, for cylindrical ionization chambers in unmodulated beams, of the displacement correction factor, there is no remaining beam quality dependence of the chamber perturbation correction factors p Q . Based on this approach, average values of the beam quality independent part of the perturbation factors were derived to calculate k Q values consistent with the data in the literature. Significance. The resulting data from this analysis are current best estimates of k Q values for modulated scattered beams and single-layer scanned beams used in proton therapy. Based on this, a single set of harmonized values is derived to be recommended in the update of IAEA TRS-398.

Determination of beam quality correction factors for the Roos plane-parallel ionisation chamber exposed to very high energy electron (VHEE) beams using Geant4

Detailed characterisation of the Roos secondary standard plane-parallel ionisation chamber has been conducted in a novel 200 MeV Very High Energy Electron (VHEE) beam with reference to the standard 12 MeV electron calibration beam used in our experimental work. Stopping-power-ratios and perturbation factors have been determined for both beams and used to calculated the beam quality correction factor using the Geant4 general purpose MC code. These factors have been calculated for a variety of charged particle transport parameters available in Geant4 which were found to pass the Fano cavity test. Stopping-power-ratios for the 12 MeV electron calibration beam quality were found to agree within uncertainties to that quoted by current dosimetry protocols. Perturbation factors were found to vary by up-to 4% for the calibration beam depending on the parameter configuration, compared with only 0.8% for the VHEE beam. Beam quality correction factors were found to describe an approximately 10% lower dose than would be originally calculated if a beam quality correction were not accounted for. Moreover, results presented here largely resolve unphysical chamber measurements, such as collection efficiencies greater than 100%, and assist in the accurate determination of absorbed dose and ion recombination in secondary standard ionisation chambers.

Monte Carlo-derived ionization chamber correction factors in therapeutic carbon ion beams

The accuracy of electromagnetic transport in the GEANT4 Monte Carlo (MC) code was investigated for carbon ion beams and ionization chamber (IC)-specific beam quality correction factors were calculated. This work implemented a Fano cavity test for carbon ion beams in the 100-450 MeV/u energy range to assess the accuracy of the default electromagnetic physics parameters. TheUrbanand theWentzel-VImultiple Coulomb scattering models were evaluated and the impact ofmaxStep,dRover,andfinal rangeparameters on the accuracy of the transport algorithm was investigated. The optimal production thresholds for an accurate calculation offQvalues, which is the product of the water-to-air stopping power ratio and the IC-specific perturbation correction factor, were also studied. ThefQcorrection factors were calculated for a cylindrical and a parallel-plate IC using carbon ions in the 150-450 MeV/u energy range. Modifying the default electromagnetic physics parameters resulted in a maximum deviation from theory of 0.3%. Therefore, the default EM parameters were used for the remainder of this work. ThefQfactors were found to converge for both ICs with decreasing production threshold distance below 5μm. ThefQvalues obtained in this work agreed with the TRS-398 stopping power ratios and other previously reported results within uncertainty. This study highlights an accurate MC-based technique to calculate the combined stopping power ratio and the perturbation correction factor for any IC in carbon ion beams.

Monte Carlo calculation of beam quality correction factors in proton beams using FLUKA

Purpose.To provide Monte Carlo calculated beam quality correction factors (k_Q) for monoenergetic proton beams using the Monte Carlo codefluka.Materials and methods.The Monte Carlo codeflukawas used to calculate the dose absorbed in a water-filled reference volume and the air-filled cavities of six plane-parallel and four cylindrical ionization chambers. The chambers were positioned at the entrance region of monoenergetic proton beams with energies between 60 and 250 MeV. Based on these dose values,f_Qas well ask_Qfactors were calculated whilefQ0factors were taken from Andreoet al(2020Phys. Med. Biol.65095011).Results. k_Qfactors calculated in this work were found to agree with experimentally determinedk_Qfactors on the 1%-level, with only two exceptions with deviations of 1.4% and 1.9%. The comparison off_Qfactors calculated usingflukawithf_Qfactors calculated using the Monte Carlo codesgeant4 andpenhshowed a general good agreement for low energies, while differences for higher energies were pronounced. For high energies, in most cases the Monte Carlo codesflukaandgeant4 lead to comparable results while thef_Qfactors calculated withpenhare larger.Conclusion.flukacan be used to calculatek_Qfactors in clinical proton beams. The divergence of Monte Carlo calculatedk_Qfactors for high energies suggests that the role of nuclear interaction models implemented in the different Monte Carlo codes needs to be investigated in more detail.

Evaluation of the GEANT4 transport algorithm and radioactive decay data for alpha particle dosimetry

A Fano cavity test was implemented in GEANT4 Monte Carlo code to evaluate the alpha particle transport algorithm. GEANT4 alpha emission data for ²¹²Pb, ²²³Ra, ²²⁷Th, and ²²⁵Ac was compared with the MIRD and RADAR decay databases. Optimal electromagnetic transport parameters (dRover of 0.1 and final range of 1 μm) were recommended since the calculated results with the default parameters differed up to 4.7% from the theoretical results. Good agreement was found between the three decay databases besides a few discrepancies.

Monte Carlo calculation of perturbation correction factors for air-filled ionization chambers in clinical proton beams using TOPAS/GEANT

INTRODUCTION

Current dosimetry protocols for clinical protons using air-filled ionization chambers assume that the perturbation correction factor is equal to unity for all ionization chambers and proton energies. Since previous Monte Carlo based studies suggest that perturbation correction factors might be significantly different from unity this study aims to determine perturbation correction factors for six plane-parallel and four cylindrical ionization chambers in proton beams at clinical energies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The dose deposited in the air cavity of the ionization chambers was calculated with the help of the Monte Carlo code TOPAS/Geant4 while specific constructive details of the chambers were removed step by step. By comparing these dose values the individual perturbation correction factors p_cel, p_stem, p_sleeve, p_wall, p_cav⋅p_dis as well as the total perturbation correction factor p_Q were derived for typical clinical proton energies between 80 and 250MeV.

RESULTS

The total perturbation correction factor p_Q was smaller than unity for almost every ionization chamber and proton energy and in some cases significantly different from unity (deviation larger than 1%). The maximum deviation from unity was 2.0% for cylindrical and 1.5% for plane-parallel ionization chambers. Especially the factor p_wall was found to differ significantly from unity. It was shown that this is due to the fact that secondary particles, especially alpha particles and fragments, are scattered from the chamber wall into the air cavity resulting in an overresponse of the chamber.

CONCLUSION

Perturbation correction factors for ionization chambers in proton beams were calculated using Monte Carlo simulations. In contrast to the assumption of current dosimetry protocols the total perturbation correction factor p_Q can be significantly different from unity. Hence, beam quality correction factors [Formula: see text] that are calculated with the help of perturbation correction factors that are assumed to be unity come with a corresponding additional uncertainty.

Beam monitor calibration of a synchrotron-based scanned light-ion beam delivery system

PURPOSE

This paper presents the implementation and comparison of two independent methods of beam monitor calibration in terms of number of particles for scanned proton and carbon ion beams.

METHODS

In the first method, called the single-layer method, dose-area-product to water (DAP_w) is derived from the absorbed dose to water determined using a Roos-type plane-parallel ionization chamber in single-energy scanned beams. This is considered the reference method for the beam monitor calibration in the clinically relevant proton and carbon energy ranges. In the second method, called the single-spot method, DAP_w of a single central spot is determined using a Bragg-peak (BP) type large-area plane-parallel ionization chamber. Emphasis is given to the detailed characterization of the ionization chambers used for the beam monitor calibration. For both methods a detailed uncertainty budget on the DAP_w determination is provided as well as on the derivation of the number of particles.

RESULTS

Both calibration methods agreed on average within 1.1% for protons and within 2.6% for carbon ions. The uncertainty on DAP_w using single-layer beams is 2.1% for protons and 3.1% for carbon ions with major contributions from the available values of k_Q and the average spot spacing in both lateral directions. The uncertainty using the single-spot method is 2.2% for protons and 3.2% for carbon ions with major contributions from the available values of k_Q and the non-uniformity of the BP chamber response, which can lead to a correction of up-to 3.2%. For the number of particles, an additional dominant uncertainty component for the mean stopping power per incident proton (or the CEMA) needs to be added.

CONCLUSION

The agreement between both methods enhances confidence in the beam monitor calibration and the estimated uncertainty. The single-layer method can be used as a reference and the single-spot method is an alternative that, when more accumulated knowledge and data on the method becomes available, can be used as a redundant dose monitor calibration method. This work, together with the overview of information from the literature provided here, is a first step towards comprehensive information on the single-spot method.

Comparison of penh, fluka, and Geant4/topas for absorbed dose calculations in air cavities representing ionization chambers in high-energy photon and proton beams

PURPOSE

The purpose of this work is to analyze whether the Monte Carlo codes penh, fluka, and geant4/topas are suitable to calculate absorbed doses andf Q / f Q 0 ratios in therapeutic high-energy photon and proton beams.

METHODS

We used penh, fluka, geant4/topas, and egsnrc to calculate the absorbed dose to water in a reference water cavity and the absorbed dose to air in two air cavities representative of a plane-parallel and a cylindrical ionization chamber in a 1.25 MeV photon beam and a 150 MeV proton beam - egsnrc was only used for the photon beam calculations. The physics and transport settings in each code were adjusted to simulate the particle transport as detailed as reasonably possible. From these absorbed doses, f Q 0 factors, f Q factors, andf Q / f Q 0 ratios (which are the basis of Monte Carlo calculated beam quality correction factors k Q , Q 0 ) were calculated and compared between the codes. Additionally, we calculated the spectra of primary particles and secondary electrons in the reference water cavity, as well as the integrated depth-dose curve of 150 MeV protons in water.

RESULTS

The absorbed doses agreed within 1.4% or better between the individual codes for both the photon and proton simulations. The f Q 0 and f Q factors agreed within 0.5% or better for the individual codes for both beam qualities. The resultingf Q / f Q 0 ratios for 150 MeV protons agreed within 0.7% or better. For the 1.25 MeV photon beam, the spectra of photons and secondary electrons agreed almost perfectly. For the 150 MeV proton simulation, we observed differences in the spectra of secondary protons whereas the spectra of primary protons and low-energy delta electrons also agreed almost perfectly. The first 2 mm of the entrance channel of the 150 MeV proton Bragg curve agreed almost perfectly while for greater depths, the differences in the integrated dose were up to 1.5%.

CONCLUSION

penh, fluka, and geant4/topas are capable of calculating beam quality correction factors in proton beams. The differences in the f Q 0 and f Q factors between the codes are 0.5% at maximum. The differences in thef Q / f Q 0 ratios are 0.7% at maximum.