Comparison between PRIMO and EGSnrc Monte Carlo models of the Varian True Beam linear accelerator

Generalisation of radiotherapy dose calculation for Monte Carlo algorithm combined with 3D Swin-Unet: a multi-institutional IMRT evaluation

Objective.Accurate dose calculations are essential prerequisites for precise radiotherapy. The integration of deep learning into dosimetry could consider computational accuracy and efficiency and has potential applicability to clinical dose calculation. The generalisation of a deep learning dose calculation method (hereinafter referred to as TERMA-Monte Carlo network, T-MC net) was evaluated in clinical practice using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans for various human body regions and multiple institutions, with the Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm serving as a benchmark.Approach. Sixty IMRT plans were selected from four institutions for testing the head and neck, chest and abdomen, and pelvis regions. Using the MC results as the benchmark, the T-MC net calculation results were used to perform three-dimensional dose distribution and dose-volume histogram (DVH) comparisons of the entire body, planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs), respectively, and calculate the mean ±95% confidence interval of gamma pass rate (GPR), percentage of agreement (PA) and dose difference ratio (DDR) of dose indices D95, D50, and D5.Main results. For the entire body, the GPRs of 3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, 2%/1 mm, and the PA were 99.62 ± 0.32%, 98.50 ± 1.09%, 95.60 ± 2.90% and 97.80 ± 1.12%, respectively. For the PTV, the GPRs of 3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, 2%/1 mm and the PA were 98.90 ± 1.00%, 95.78 ± 2.83%, 92.23 ± 4.74% and 98.93 ± 0.62%, respectively. The absolute value of average DDR was less than 1.4%.Significance. We proposed a general dose calculation framework based on deep learning, using the MC algorithm as a benchmark, performing a generalisation test for IMRT treatment plans across multiple institutions. The framework provides high computational speed while maintaining the accuracy of MC and may become an effective dose algorithm engine in treatment planning, adaptive radiotherapy, and dose verification.

Monte-Carlo techniques for radiotherapy applications I: introduction and overview of the different Monte-Carlo codes

Introduction:

The dose calculation plays a crucial role in many aspects of contemporary clinical radiotherapy treatment planning process. It therefore goes without saying that the accuracy of the dose calculation is of very high importance. The gold standard for absorbed dose calculation is the Monte-Carlo algorithm.

Methods:

This first of two papers gives an overview of the main openly available and supported codes that have been widely used for radiotherapy simulations.

Results:

The paper aims to provide an overview of Monte-Carlo in the field of radiotherapy and point the reader in the right direction of work that could help them get started or develop their existing understanding and use of Monte-Carlo algorithms in their practice.

Conclusions:

It also serves as a useful companion to a curated collection of papers on Monte-Carlo that have been published in this journal.

Monte Carlo simulation of linac using PRIMO

Background

Monte Carlo simulation is considered as the most accurate method for dose calculation in radiotherapy. PRIMO is a Monte-Carlo program with a user-friendly graphical interface.

Material and method

A VitalBeam with 6MV and 6MV flattening filter free (FFF), equipped with the 120 Millennium multileaf collimator was simulated by PRIMO. We adjusted initial energy, energy full width at half maximum (FWHM), focal spot FWHM, and beam divergence to match the measurements. The water tank and ion-chamber were used in the measurement. Percentage depth dose (PDD) and off axis ratio (OAR) were evaluated with gamma passing rates (GPRs) implemented in PRIMO. PDDs were matched at different widths of standard square fields. OARs were matched at five depths. Transmission factor and dose leaf gap (DLG) were simulated. DLG was measured by electronic portal imaging device using a sweeping gap method.

Result

For the criterion of 2%/2 mm, 1%/2 mm and 1%/1 mm, the GPRs of 6MV PDD were 99.33–100%, 99–100%, and 99–100%, respectively; the GPRs of 6MV FFF PDD were 99.33–100%, 98.99–99.66%, and 97.64–98.99%, respectively; the GPRs of 6MV OAR were 96.4–100%, 90.99–100%, and 85.12–98.62%, respectively; the GPRs of 6MV FFF OAR were 95.15–100%, 89.32–100%, and 87.02–99.74%, respectively. The calculated DLG matched well with the measurement (6MV: 1.36 mm vs. 1.41 mm; 6MV FFF: 1.07 mm vs. 1.03 mm, simulation vs measurement). The transmission factors were similar (6MV: 1.25% vs. 1.32%; 6MV FFF: 0.8% vs. 1.12%, simulation vs measurement).

Conclusion

The calculated PDD, OAR, DLG and transmission factor were all in good agreement with measurements. PRIMO is an independent (with respect to analytical dose calculation algorithm) and accurate Monte Carlo tool.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13014-022-02149-5.