A preliminary study of in-house Monte Carlo simulations: an integrated Monte Carlo verification system

An automated Monte Carlo QC system for volumetric modulated arc therapy: Possibilities and challenges

PURPOSE

To develop and implement an automated Monte Carlo (MC) system for patient specific VMAT quality control in a patient geometry that generates treatment planning system (TPS) compliant DICOM objects and includes a module for 3D analysis of dose deviations. Also, the aims were to recommend diagnose specific tolerance criteria and an evaluation procedure.

METHODS

The EGSnrc code package formed the basis for development of the MC system. The workflow consists of a number of modules connected to a TPS by means of manual DICOM exports and imports which were executed sequentially without user interaction. DVH comparison was performed in the TPS. In addition, MC- and TPS dose distributions were analysed by applying the normalized dose difference (NDD) formalism. NDD failure maps and a pass rate for a certain threshold were obtained. 170 clinical plans (prostate, thorax, head-and-neck and gynecological) were selected for analysis.

RESULTS

Agreement within 1.5% was found between clinical- and MC data for the mean dose to the target volumes and within 3% for parameters more sensitive to the shape of the DVH e.g. D_98% PTV. Regarding the NDD analysis, tolerance criteria 2%/3 mm were established for prostate plans and 3%/3 mm for the rest of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

An automated MC system was developed and implemented. Evaluation procedure is recommended with NDD-analysis as a first step. For pass rate < 95%, the evaluation continues with comparison of DVH parameters. For deviations larger than 2%, a visual inspection of the clinical- and MC dose distributions is performed.

Monte Carlo systems used for treatment planning and dose verification

General-purpose radiation transport Monte Carlo codes have been used for estimation of the absorbed dose distribution in external photon and electron beam radiotherapy patients since several decades. Results obtained with these codes are usually more accurate than those provided by treatment planning systems based on non-stochastic methods. Traditionally, absorbed dose computations based on general-purpose Monte Carlo codes have been used only for research, owing to the difficulties associated with setting up a simulation and the long computation time required. To take advantage of radiation transport Monte Carlo codes applied to routine clinical practice, researchers and private companies have developed treatment planning and dose verification systems that are partly or fully based on fast Monte Carlo algorithms. This review presents a comprehensive list of the currently existing Monte Carlo systems that can be used to calculate or verify an external photon and electron beam radiotherapy treatment plan. Particular attention is given to those systems that are distributed, either freely or commercially, and that do not require programming tasks from the end user. These systems are compared in terms of features and the simulation time required to compute a set of benchmark calculations.

Development of a dose verification system for Vero4DRT using Monte Carlo method

Vero4DRT is an innovative image-guided radiotherapy system employing a C-band X-ray head with gimbal mechanics. The purposes of this study were to propose specific MC models of the linac head and multileaf collimator (MLC) for the Vero4DRT and to verify their accuracy. For a 6 MV photon beam delivered by the Vero4DRT, a simulation code was implemented using EGSnrc. The linac head model and the MLC model were simulated based on its specification. Next, the percent depth dose (PDD) and beam profiles at depths of 15, 100, and 200 mm were simulated under source-to-surface distance of 900 and 1000 mm. Field size was set to 150 × 150 mm2 at a depth of 100 mm. Each of the simulated dosimetric metrics was then compared with the corresponding measurements by a 0.125 cc ionization chamber. After that, intra- and interleaf leakage, tongue-and-groove, and rounded-leaf profiles were simulated for the static MLC model. Meanwhile, film measurements were performed using EDR2 films under similar conditions to simulation. The measurement for the rounded-leaf profile was performed using the water phantom and the ionization chamber. The leaf physical density and abutting leaf gap were adjusted to obtain good agreement between the simulated intra- and interleaf leakage profiles and measurements. For the MLC model in step-and-shoot cases, a pyramid and a prostate IMRT field were simulated, while film measurements were performed using EDR2. For the linac head, exclusive of MLC, the difference in PDD was &lt; 1.0% after the buildup region. The simulated beam profiles agreed to within 1.3% at each depth. The MLC model has been shown to reproduce dose measurements within 2.5% for static tests. The MLC is made of tungsten alloy with a purity of 95%. The leaf gap of 0.015 cm and the MLC physical density of 18.0 g/ cm3, which provided the best agreement between the simulated and measured leaf leakage, were assigned to our MC model. As a result, the simulated step-and-shoot IMRT dose distributions agreed with the film measurements to within 3.3%, with exception of the penumbra region. We have developed specific MC models of the linac head and the MLC in the Vero4DRT system. The results have demonstrated that our MC models have high accuracy. 

Development and reproducibility evaluation of a Monte Carlo-based standard LINAC model for quality assurance of multi-institutional clinical trials

Technical developments in radiotherapy (RT) have created a need for systematic quality assurance (QA) to ensure that clinical institutions deliver prescribed radiation doses consistent with the requirements of clinical protocols. For QA, an ideal dose verification system should be independent of the treatment-planning system (TPS). This paper describes the development and reproducibility evaluation of a Monte Carlo (MC)-based standard LINAC model as a preliminary requirement for independent verification of dose distributions. The BEAMnrc MC code is used for characterization of the 6-, 10- and 15-MV photon beams for a wide range of field sizes. The modeling of the LINAC head components is based on the specifications provided by the manufacturer. MC dose distributions are tuned to match Varian Golden Beam Data (GBD). For reproducibility evaluation, calculated beam data is compared with beam data measured at individual institutions. For all energies and field sizes, the MC and GBD agreed to within 1.0% for percentage depth doses (PDDs), 1.5% for beam profiles and 1.2% for total scatter factors (Scps.). Reproducibility evaluation showed that the maximum average local differences were 1.3% and 2.5% for PDDs and beam profiles, respectively. MC and institutions' mean Scps agreed to within 2.0%. An MC-based standard LINAC model developed to independently verify dose distributions for QA of multi-institutional clinical trials and routine clinical practice has proven to be highly accurate and reproducible and can thus help ensure that prescribed doses delivered are consistent with the requirements of clinical protocols.

Application of an independent dose calculation software for estimating the impact of inter-fractional setup shifts in Helical Tomotherapy treatments

The purpose of this study is to validate the capability of in-house independent point dose calculation software to be used as a second check for Helical Tomotherapy treatment plans. The software performed its calculations in homogenous conditions (using the Cheese phantom, which is a cylindrical phantom with radius 15 cm and length 18 cm) using a factor-based algorithm. Fifty patients, who were treated for pelvic (10), prostate (14), lung (10), head & neck (12) and brain (4) cancers, were used. Based on the individual patient kVCT images and the pretreatment MVCT images for each treatment fraction, the corresponding daily patient setup shifts in the IEC-X, IEC-Y, and IEC-Z directions were registered. For each patient, the registered fractional setup shifts were grouped into systematic and random shifts. The average systematic dosimetric variations showed small dose deviation for the different cancer types (1.0%-3.0%) compared to the planned dose. Of the fifty patients, only three had percent differences larger than 5%. The average random dosimetric variations showed relatively small dose deviations (0.2%-1.1%) compared to the planned dose. None of the patients had percent differences larger than 5%. By examining the individual fractions of each patient, it is observed that only in 31 out of 1358 fractions the percent differences exceeded the border of 5%. These results indicate that the overall dosimetric impact from systematic and random variations is small and that the software is a capable platform for independent point dose validation for the Helical Tomotherapy modality.

Performance of independent dose calculation in helical tomotherapy: implementation of the MCSIM code

Currently, a software-based second check dose calculation for helical tomotherapy (HT) is not available. The goal of this study is to evaluate the dose calculation accuracy of the in-house software using EGS4/MCSIM Monte Carlo environment against the treatment planning system calculations. In-house software was used to convert HT treatment plan information into a non-helical format. The MCSIM dose calculation code was evaluated by comparing point dose calculations and dose profiles against those from the HT treatment plan. Fifteen patients, representing five treatment sites, were used in this comparison. Point dose calculations between the HT treatment planning system and the EGS4/MCSIM Monte Carlo environment had percent difference values below 5 % for the majority of this study. Vertical and horizontal planar profiles also had percent difference values below 5 % for the majority of this study. Down sampling was seen to improve speed without much loss of accuracy. EGS4/MCSIM Monte Carlo environment showed good agreement with point dose measurements, compared to the HT treatment plans. Vertical and horizontal profiles also showed good agreement. Significant time saving may be obtained by down-sampling beam projections. The dose calculation accuracy of the in-house software using the MCSIM code against the treatment planning system calculations was evaluated. By comparing point doses and dose profiles, the EGS4/MCSIM Monte Carlo environment was seen to provide an accurate independent dose calculation.

Sensitivity study to evaluate the dosimetric impact of off-axis ratio profiles misalignment on TomoTherapy second dose validation

Accurate dose planning and delivery are very important in the intensity modulated radiation therapy. For helical TomoTherapy dose validation, a TomoTherapy second check software, called MU-Tomo, has been developed using archived patient documents, initial coordinates and planned dose of the point of calculation, and common dosimetric functions. Based on this software, sensitivity studies on 50 patient cases have been evaluated to show the impact of off-axis ratio profile misalignment on point dose calculation. Off-axis ratio is defined as the dose profile normalized to its maximum dose value. Sensitivity studies were done for three scenarios: oscillating the fluctuation regions of two off-axis profiles, shifting the profiles, and rotating the profiles. The result of the oscillation trial is linear along the change of longitudinal off-axis ratio (OARy), while oscillating the lateral off-axis ratio (OARx) has little influence on the dose calculation. For shifting, the variation in the percentage difference from the non-shifting value is about 15 times larger in OARy modification than in OARx modification. Rotating OARx by +/- 6' gave less than 1.5% +/- 0.20% difference compared to the non-rotating value. Rotating OARy by +/- 1' changes the result more than 5% +/- 2.69%. Therefore, for helical TomoTherapy dose validation, commissioned OARy profiles are more sensitive than OARx to oscillation, shifting and rotating. As a result, different tolerances for OARx and OARy may be required for annual quality assurance.