Evaluation of the eclipse electron Monte Carlo dose calculation for small fields

Curvature correction factors for the independent verification of monitor units of electron treatment plans calculated in Eclipse

Electron beam dosimetry is sensitive to the surface contour of the patient. Over 10% difference between Treatment Planning System (TPS) and independent monitor-unit (IMU) calculations have been reported in the literature. Similar results were observed in our clinic between Radformation ClearCalc IMU and Eclipse TPS electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithm (v.16.1). This paper presents data measured under 3D printed spherical and cylindrical phantoms to validate the eMC algorithm in the presence of curved geometries. Measurements were performed with multiple detectors and compared to calculations made in Eclipse for the 6, 9 and 12 MeV electron energies. This data is used to create curvature correction factors (CCFs), defined as the ratio of the detector reading with the curved-surface phantom to a flat phantom at the same depth. The mean difference between the TPS calculated and measured CCFs using the NACP, Diode E, microSilicon, and microDiamond detectors were 1.3, 0.9, 0.7 and 0.7% respectively, with maximum differences of 4.5, 2.3, 1.9, and 1.8% respectively. Applying CCFs to previous failing patient IMU calculations improved agreement to the TPS. CCFs were implemented in our clinic for patient-specific IMU calculations with the assistance of a ESAPI script.

Commissioning and initial validation of Eclipse eMC algorithm for the electron FLASH research extension (FLEX) system for pre-clinical studies

PURPOSE

To investigate the feasibility of commissioning the 16 MeV electron FLASH Extension (FLEX) in the commercial treatment planning system (TPS) for biomedical research with cell and mouse models, and in silico treatment planning studies.

METHODS

To commission the FLEX system with the electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithm in the commercial TPS, radiochromic film was used to measure the vendor-recommended beam data. Once the beam model was generated for the eMC algorithm, supplemental measurements were collected for validation purposes and compared against the TPS-calculated results. Additionally, the newly commissioned 16 MeV FLASH beam was compared to the corresponding 16 MeV conventional electron beam.

RESULTS

The eMC algorithm effectively modeled the FLEX system. The eMC-calculated PDDs and profiles for the 16 MeV electron FLASH beam agreed with measured values within 1%, on average, for 6 × 6 cm2 and 10 × 10 cm2 applicators. Flatness and symmetry deviated by less than 1%, while FWHM and penumbra agreed within 1 mm for both eMC-calculated and measured profiles. Additionally, the small field (i.e., 2-cm diameter cutout) that was measured for validation purposes agreed with TPS-calculated results within 1%, on average, for both the PDD and profiles. The FLASH and conventional dose rate 16 MeV electron beam were in agreement in regard to energy, but the profiles for larger field sizes began to deviate (>10 × 10 cm2) due to the forward-peaked nature of the FLASH beam. For cell irradiation experiments, the measured and eMC-calculated in-plane and cross-plane absolute dose profiles agreed within 1%, on average.

CONCLUSIONS

The FLEX system was successfully commissioned in the commercial TPS using the eMC algorithm, which accurately modeled the forward-peaked nature of the FLASH beam. A commissioned TPS for FLASH will be useful for pre-clinical cell and animal studies, as well as in silico FLASH treatment planning studies for future clinical implementation.

Flexible real-time skin dosimeter based on a thin-film copper indium gallium selenide solar cell for electron radiation therapy

PURPOSE

Various dosimeters have been proposed for skin dosimetry in electron radiotherapy. However, one main drawback of these skin dosimeters is their lack of flexibility, which could make accurate dose measurements challenging due to air gaps between a curved patient surface and dosimeter. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to suggest a novel flexible skin dosimeter based on a thin-film copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS) solar cell, and to evaluate its dosimetric characteristics.

METHODS

The CIGS solar cell dosimeter consisted of (a) a customized thin-film CIGS solar cell and (b) a data acquisition (DAQ) system. The CIGS solar cell with a thickness of 0.33 mm was customized to a size of 10 × 10 mm² . This customized solar cell plays a role in converting therapeutic electron radiation into electrical signals. The DAQ system was composed of a voltage amplifier with a gain of 1000, a voltage input module, a DAQ chassis, and an in-house software. This system converted the electrical analog signals (from solar cell) to digital signals with a sampling rate of ≤50 kHz and then quantified/visualized the digital signals in real time. We quantified the linearity/ sampling rate effect/dose rate dependence/energy dependence/field size output factor/reproducibility/curvature/bending recoverability/angular dependence of the CIGS solar cell dosimeter in therapeutic electron beams. To evaluate clinical feasibility, we measured the skin point doses by attaching the CIGS solar cell to an anthropomorphic phantom surface (for forehead, mouth, and thorax). The CIGS-measured doses were compared with calculated doses (by treatment planning system) and measured doses (by optically stimulated luminescent dosimeter).

RESULTS

The normalized signals of the solar cell dosimeter increased linearly as the delivered dose increased. The gradient of the linearly fitted line was 1.00 with an R-square of 0.9999. The sampling rates (2, 10, and 50 kHz) of the solar cell dosimeter showed good performance even at low doses (<50 cGy). The solar cell dosimeter exhibited dose rate independence within 1% and energy independence within 3% error margins. The signals of the solar cell dosimeter were similar (<1%) when penetrating the same side of the CIGS cell regardless of the rotation angle of the solar cell. The field size output factor measured by the solar cell dosimeter was comparable to that measured by the ion chamber. The solar cell signals were similar between the baseline (week 1) and the last time point (week 4). Our detector showed curvature independence within 1.8% (curvatures of <0.10 mm^- ) and bending recovery (curvature of 0.10 mm^-1 ). The differences between measured doses (CIGS solar cell dosimeter vs. optically stimulated luminescent dosimeter) were 7.1%, 9.6%, and 1.0% for forehead, mouth, and thorax, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We present the construction of a flexible skin dosimeter based on a CIGS solar cell. Our findings demonstrate that the CIGS solar cell has a potential to be a novel flexible skin dosimeter for electron radiotherapy. Moreover, this dosimeter is manufactured with low cost and can be easily customized to various size/shape, which represents advantages over other dosimeters.

Quantitative evaluation of dosimetric uncertainties associated with small electron fields

INTRODUCTION

Although many studies have investigated small electron fields, there are several dosimetric issues that are not well understood. This includes lack of charged particle equilibrium, lateral scatter, source occlusion and volume averaging of the detectors used in the measurement of the commissioning data. High energy electron beams are also associated with bremsstrahlung production that contributes to dose deposition, which is not well investigated, particularly for small electron fields. The goal of this work has been to investigate dosimetric uncertainties associated with small electron fields using dose measurements with different detectors as well as calculations with eMC dose calculation algorithm.

METHODS

Different dosimetric parameters including output factors, depth dose curves and dose profiles from small electron field cutouts were investigated quantitatively. These dosimetric parameters were measured using different detectors that included small ion chambers and diodes for small electron cutouts with diameters ranging from 15-50mm mounted on a 6 × 6cm² cone with beam energies from 6-20MeV.

RESULTS

Large deviations existed between the output factors calculated with the eMC algorithm and measured with small detectors for small electron fields up to 55% for 6MeV. The discrepancy between the calculated and measured doses increased 10%-55% with decreasing electron beam energy from 20 MeV to 6 MeV for 15mm circular field. For electron fields with cutouts 20mm and larger, the measured and calculated doses agreed within 5% for all electron energies from 6-20MeV. For small electron fields, the maximal depth dose shifted upstream and becomes more superficial as the electron beam energy increases from 6-20MeV as measured with small detectors.

DISCUSSION

Large dose discrepancies were found between the measured and calculated doses for small electron fields where the eMC underestimated output factors by 55% for small circular electron fields with a diameter of 15 mm, particularly for low energy electron beams. The measured entrance doses and d_max of the depth dose curves did not agree with the corresponding values calculated by eMC. Furthermore, the measured dose profiles showed enhanced dose deposition in the umbra region and outside the small fields, which mostly resulted from dose deposition from the bremsstrahlung produced by high energy electrons that was not accounted for by the eMC algorithm due to inaccurate modeling of the lateral dose deposition from bremsstrahlung.

CONCLUSION

Electron small field dosimetry require more consideration of variations in beam quality, lack of charged particle equilibrium, lateral scatter loss and dose deposition from bremsstrahlung produced by energetic electron beams in a comprehensive approach similar to photon small field dosimetry. Furthermore, most of the commercially available electron dose calculation algorithms are commissioned with large electron fields; therefore, vendors should provide tools for the modeling of electron dose calculation algorithms for small electron fields.

Electron Beam Measurements Employing Electron Montecarlo Algorithm on TrueBeam STx® and Clinac iX® Linear Accelerators

Electron beam measurement comparison between TrueBeam STx® and Clinac iX® established. Data evaluation of eMC-calculated and measured for TrueBeam STx® performed. Dosimetric parameters measured including depth dose curves for each applicator, percentage depth dose (PDDs) curves without applicator, the profile in-air for a large field size 40×40 cm2, and the Absolute Dose (cGy/MU) for each applicator using a large water phantom (PTW, Freiburg, Germany), employing Roos and Markus plane-parallel ionization chambers. The data were examined for five electron beams of Varian’s TrueBeam STx® and Clinac iX® machines. A comparison between measurement PDDs and calculated by the Eclipse electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithm was performed to validate Truebeam STx® commissioning. The measured data indicated that electron beam PDDs from the TrueBeam STx® machine are well matched to those from Clinac iX® machine. The quality index R50 for applicator 15×15 cm2 was in the tolerance intervals. However, Surface dose (Ds) increases with increasing energy for both accelerators. Comparisons between the measured and eMC-calculated values revealed that the R100, R90, R80, and R50 values mostly agree within 5 mm. Measured and calculated bremsstrahlung tail Rp correlates well statistically. Ds agrees mostly within 2%. Electron beams were successfully validated for TrueBeam STx®, a good agreement between modeled and measured data was observed.

[Dose Distribution Combinations of Different Electron Beam Energy for Treatment Region Expansion in High-energy Electron Beam Radiation Therapy: A Feasibility Study]

INTRODUCTION

External electron beams have excellent distributions in treatment for superficial tumors while suppressing influence deeper normal tissue. However, the skin surface cannot be given a sufficient dose due to the build-up effect. In this study, we have investigated the combination of electron beams to expand the treatment region by keeping the dose gradient beyond d_max.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The percentage depth doses of different electron beams were superimposed on a spreadsheet to determine the combinations of electron beams so that the treatment range was maximized. Based on the obtained weight for electron beams, dose distributions were calculated using a treatment planning system and examined for potential clinical application.

RESULTS

With the combination of 4 MeV and 9 MeV electron beams, the 90% treatment range in the depth direction increased by 8.0 mm, and with 4 MeV and 12 MeV beams, it increased by 4.0 mm, with the same maximum dose depth and halfdose depth of the absorbed dose. The dose calculations were performed using the treatment planning system yielded similar results with a matching degree of ±1.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the influences of low monitor unit values and daily output differences remain to be considered, the results suggest that the proposed approach can be clinically applied to expand treatment regions easily.

Comprehensive evaluation of electron radiation dose using beryllium oxide dosimeters at breast radiotherapy

Introduction:

In this study, the differences between calculated and measured dose values were then analysed to assess the performance, in terms of accuracy, of the tested treatment planning system (TPS) algorithms applied to calculate electron beam dose targeted and non-targeted the breast region.

Materials and methods:

The beryllium oxide (BeO) dosimeters placed on the female RANDO phantom were irradiated 12 MeV electron energy with medical linear accelerator and repeatedly read in the Risø thermoluminescence (TL)/optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) system via OSL method at least three times.

Results:

For electron treatment, one made quantitative comparisons of the dose distributions calculated by TPSs with those from the measurements by OSL at various points in the RANDO phantom.

The mean dose measured from the dosimeters placed on the female RANDO phantom target left breast region was 160 cGy and non-target right breast region was 1·2 cGy. Analysis of Generalised Gaussian Pencil Beam (GGPB) and Electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithms for determined region mean point dose values, respectively, 174 and 164 cGy. Two algorithms for non-targeted region calculated same point dose values of 0·2 cGy.

Conclusions:

The results of this study showed that BeO dosimeters can be used with OSL method in radiotherapy applications and it is a very important tool for the determination of targeted/non-targeted absorbed dose.

[Comparison of Monitor Unit between Electron Monte Carlo Algorithm by Different Dose Normalization Methods and Conventional Manual Calculation]

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the discrepancy between the monitor unit (MU) calculated by different dose normalization methods in the electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithm and the conventional manual MU. In the water phantom condition, the manual MU obtained from the measured output factor was compared with the calculated MU by the eMC algorithm, using 24 different irradiation field shapes and several different energies of electron beam. In the breast boost condition, calculated MUs by both calculation methods were evaluated for 45 cases. As a result, the MUs computed by the eMC algorithm in the water phantom varied according to the dose normalization methods, and the mean±standard deviation of the difference between the manual and calculated MU were 1.1±1.4%, 0.0±1.0% and 0.4±1.2% in peak depth normalization (PN), no plan normalization (NPN) and 100% at body maximum (100%BM), respectively. In breast-boost cases, the MU difference between the manual and the calculated MU were 6.1±3.7%, 3.4±2.8% and 1.1±2.9% in PN, NPN and 100%BM, respectively. We revealed that the resultant MU calculated by eMC algorithm was dependent on the dose normalization method and the averaged differences exceeded 6% in PN, especially in breast boost condition. When using the eMC in the breast boost condition, it is desirable to select an appropriate dose normalization method according to dose prescription policies at each facility.

Experimental validatıon of peripheral dose distribution of electron beams for eclipse electron Monte Carlo algorithm

Aim

The accuracy of two calculation algorithms of the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS), the electron Monte Carlo algorithm (eMC) and general Gaussian pencil beam algorithm (GGPB) for calculating peripheral dose distribution of electron beams was investigated.

Methods

Peripheral dose measurements were carried out for 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 and 22 MeV electron beams using parallel plate ionisation chamber and EBT3 film in the slab phantom. Measurements were performed for 6×6, 10×10 and 25×25 cm2 cone sizes at dmax of each energy up to 20 cm beyond the field edges. The measured and TPS calculated data were compared.

Results

The TPS underestimated the out-of-field doses. The difference between measured and calculated doses increase with the cone size. For ionisation chamber measurement, the largest deviation between calculated and measured doses is <4·29% using the eMC, but can increase up to 8·72% of the distribution using GGPB. For film measurement, the minimum gamma analysis passing rates between measured and calculated dose distributions for all field sizes and energies used in this study were 91·2 and 74·7% for eMC and GGPB, respectively.

Findings

The use of GGPB for planning large field treatments with 6 MeV could lead to inaccuracies of clinical significance.

Practical lookup tables for ensuring target coverage in a clinical setup for skin cancer electron therapy

Aim

To create practical lookup tables containing percent depth dose (PDD) and profile parameters of electron beams and to demonstrate clinical application of the lookup tables to skin cancer treatment to ensure target coverage in a clinical setup.

Materials and methods

For 6 and 9 MeV electron energies, PDDs and profiles at clinically relevant depths [i.e., R95 (distal depth of 95% maximum dose), R90, R85 and R80] were measured in water at 100 cm source-to-surface distance for an 10×10 cm2 open field and circular cutouts with diameters of 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 cm. Then PDD parameters along with profile parameters such as width of isodose lines and penumbra at the clinically relevant depths were determined. Output factors for the cutouts were measured at dmax in water and solid water.

Results

With PDD and profile parameters, dosimetry lookup tables were generated. Based upon the lookup tables, target coverage at prescribed depths was retrospectively reviewed for three skin cancer cases. The lookup tables suggested larger cutouts for adequate target coverage.

Findings

Dosimetry lookup tables for electron beam therapy should include profile parameters at clinically relevant depths and be provided to clinicians to ensure target coverage in a clinical setup.

Convolution-based modified Clarkson integration (CMCI) for electron cutout factor calculation

Electron therapy is widely used to treat shallow tumors because of its characteristic sharp dose fall‐off beyond a certain range. A customized cutout is typically applied to block radiation to normal tissues. Determining the final monitor unit (MU) for electron treatment requires an output factor for the cutout, which is usually generated by measurement, especially for highly irregular cutouts. However, manual measurement requires a lengthy quality assurance process with possible errors. This work presents an accurate and efficient cutout output factor prediction model, convolution‐based modified Clarkson integration (CMCI), to replace patient‐specific output factor measurement. Like the Clarkson method, we decompose the field into basic sectors. Unlike the Clarkson integration method, we use annular sectors for output factor estimation. This decomposition method allows calculation via convolution. A 2D distribution of fluence is generated, and the output factor at any given point can be obtained. We applied our method to 10 irregularly shaped cutouts for breast patients for 6E, 9E, and 15E beams and compared the results with measurements and the electron Monte Carlo (eMC) calculation using the Eclipse planning system. While both the CMCI and eMC methods showed good agreement with chamber measurements and film measurements in relative distributions at the nominal source to surface distance (SSD) of 100 cm, eMC generated larger errors than the CMCI method at extended SSDs, with up to −9.28% deviations from the measurement for 6E beam. At extended SSD, the mean absolute errors of our method relative to measurements were 0.92 and 1.14, while the errors of eMC were 1.42 and 1.79 for SSD 105 cm and 110 cm, respectively. These results indicate that our method is more accurate than eMC, especially for low‐energy beams, and can be used for MU calculation and as a QA tool for electron therapy.

Evaluation of the usefulness of the electron Monte Carlo algorithm for planning radiotherapy with the use of electron beams

The aim of the study was to verify the accuracy of calculations of dose distributions for electron beams performed using the electron Monte Carlo (eMC) v.10.0.28 algorithm implemented in the Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems). Implementation of the objective of the study was carried out in two stages. In the first stage the influence of several parameters defined by the user on the calculation accuracy was assessed. After selecting a set of parameters for which the best results were obtained a series of tests were carried. The tests were carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Polish Society of Medical Physics (PSMP). The calculation and measurement of dose rate under reference conditions for semi quadratic and shaped fields were compared by individual cut-outs. We compared the calculated and measured percent depth doses, profiles and output factors for beams with an energy of 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18 MeV, for semi quadratic fields and for three different SSDs 100, 110, and 120 cm. All tests were carried out for beams generated in the Varian 2300CD Clinac linear accelerator. The results obtained during the first stage of the study demonstrated that the highest compliance between the calculations and measurements were obtained for the mean statistical uncertainty equal to 1, and the parameter responsible for smoothing the statistical noise defined as medium. Comparisons were made showing similar compliance calculations and measurements for the calculation grid of 0.1 cm and 0.25 cm and therefore the remaining part of the study was carried out for these two grids. In stage 2 it was demonstrated that the use of calculation grid of 0.1 cm allows for greater compliance of calculations and measurements. For energy 12, 15 and 18 MeV discrepancies between calculations and measurements, in most cases, did not exceed the PSMP action levels. The biggest differences between measurements and calculations were obtained for 6 MeV energy, for smallest fields and large SSD distances. Despite these discrepancies between calculations the model was adopted for clinical use.

Verification measurements of an eMC algorithm using a 2D ion chamber array

The aim of this study was to assess the suitability of the Im'RT MatriXX 2D ion chamber array for performing verification measurements on the Varian Eclipse electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithm for a range of clinical energies (6, 12, and 20 MeV) on a Varian 2100iX linear accelerator. Firstly, the suitability of the MatriXX for measuring percentage depth doses (PDD) in water was assessed, including characterization of the inherent buildup found in the MatriXX. Secondly the suitability of the MatriXX for measuring dose distributions in homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms was assessed using gamma analysis at 3%/3 mm. It was found that after adjusting the PDD curves for the inherent buildup, that the position of R50,D measured using the MatriXX agreed to within 1 mm to the PDDs generated using the eMC algorithm for all energies used in this study. Gamma analysis at 3%/3 mm showed very good agreement (>95%) for all cases in both homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms. It was concluded that the Im'RT MatriXX is a suitable device for performing eMC verification and could potentially be used for routine energy checks of electron beams.

PACS number(s): 87.55.km, 87.55.Qr

Full Monte Carlo and measurement-based overall performance assessment of improved clinical implementation of eMC algorithm with emphasis on lower energy range

New version 13.6.23 of the electron Monte Carlo (eMC) algorithm in Varian Eclipse™ treatment planning system has a model for 4MeV electron beam and some general improvements for dose calculation. This study provides the first overall accuracy assessment of this algorithm against full Monte Carlo (MC) simulations for electron beams from 4MeV to 16MeV with most emphasis on the lower energy range. Beams in a homogeneous water phantom and clinical treatment plans were investigated including measurements in the water phantom. Two different material sets were used with full MC: (1) the one applied in the eMC algorithm and (2) the one included in the Eclipse™ for other algorithms. The results of clinical treatment plans were also compared to those of the older eMC version 11.0.31. In the water phantom the dose differences against the full MC were mostly less than 3% with distance-to-agreement (DTA) values within 2mm. Larger discrepancies were obtained in build-up regions, at depths near the maximum electron ranges and with small apertures. For the clinical treatment plans the overall dose differences were mostly within 3% or 2mm with the first material set. Larger differences were observed for a large 4MeV beam entering curved patient surface with extended SSD and also in regions of large dose gradients. Still the DTA values were within 3mm. The discrepancies between the eMC and the full MC were generally larger for the second material set. The version 11.0.31 performed always inferiorly, when compared to the 13.6.23.

Assessment of Eclipse electron Monte Carlo output prediction for various topologies

Monte Carlo simulation is deemed to be the leading algorithm for accurate dose calculation with electron beams. Patient anatomy (contours and tissue densities) as well as irradiation geometry is accounted for. The accuracy of the Monitor Unit (MU) determination is one essential aspect of a treatment planning system. Patient‐specific quality assurance of a Monte Carlo plan usually involves verification of the MUs with an independent simpler calculation approach, in which flat geometry is to be assumed. The magnitude of the discrepancies between flat and varied surfaces for a few scenarios has been investigated in this study. The ability to predict MUs for various surface topologies by the commercial electron Monte Carlo implementation from Varian Eclipse system (Eclipse eMC) has been evaluated and compared to the Generalized Gaussian Pencil Beam (GGPB) algorithm. Ten phantoms with different topologies were constructed of water‐equivalent material. Measurements with a parallel plate ionization chamber were performed using these phantoms to gauge their relative impact on outputs for 6, 9, 12, 16, and 20 MeV electron beams from a Varian TrueBeam with cone sizes ranging from 6×6 cm2 to 25×25 cm2. The corresponding Monte Carlo simulations of the measured geometries were carried out using the CT scans of these phantoms. The results indicated that the Eclipse eMC algorithm can predict these output changes within 3% for most scenarios. However, at the lowest energy, the discrepancy was the greatest, up to 6%. In comparison, the Eclipse GGPB algorithm had much worse agreement, with discrepancies up to 17% at the lowest energies.

PACS numbers: 87.55.K‐, 87.55.km

Research of Dosimetry Parameters in Small Electron Beams

In this study, dose distributions and outputs of circular fields with dimensions of 5 cm and smaller, for 6 and 9 MeV nominal energies from the Siemens ONCOR Linac, were measured and compared with data from a treatment planning system using the pencil beam algorithm in electron beam calculations. All dose distribution measurements were performed using the GafChromic EBT film; these measurements were compared with data that were obtained from the Computerized Medical Systems (CMS) XiO treatment planning system (TPS). Output measurements were performed using GafChromic EBT film, an Advanced Markus ion chamber, and thermoluminescent dosimetry (TLD). Although it is used in many clinics, there is not a substantial amount of detailed information in the literature about use of the pencil beam algorithm to model electron beams. Output factors were consistent; differences from the values obtained from the TPS were at maximum. When the dose distributions from the TPS were compared with the measurements from the ion chamber and GafChromic EBT films, it was observed that the results were consistent with 2 cm diameter fields and larger, but the outputs for 1 cm diameter fields and smaller were not consistent.

Comprehensive evaluation and clinical implementation of commercially available Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm

A commercial electron Monte Carlo (eMC) dose calculation algorithm has become available in Eclipse treatment planning system. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the eMC algorithm and investigate the clinical implementation of this system. The beam modeling of the eMC algorithm was performed for beam energies of 6, 9, 12, 16, and 20 MeV for a Varian Trilogy and all available applicator sizes in the Eclipse treatment planning system. The accuracy of the eMC algorithm was evaluated in a homogeneous water phantom, solid water phantoms containing lung and bone materials, and an anthropomorphic phantom. In addition, dose calculation accuracy was compared between pencil beam (PB) and eMC algorithms in the same treatment planning system for heterogeneous phantoms. The overall agreement between eMC calculations and measurements was within 3%/2 mm, while the PB algorithm had large errors (up to 25%) in predicting dose distributions in the presence of inhomogeneities such as bone and lung. The clinical implementation of the eMC algorithm was investigated by performing treatment planning for 15 patients with lesions in the head and neck, breast, chest wall, and sternum. The dose distributions were calculated using PB and eMC algorithms with no smoothing and all three levels of 3D Gaussian smoothing for comparison. Based on a routine electron beam therapy prescription method, the number of eMC calculated monitor units (MUs) was found to increase with increased 3D Gaussian smoothing levels. 3D Gaussian smoothing greatly improved the visual usability of dose distributions and produced better target coverage. Differences of calculated MUs and dose distributions between eMC and PB algorithms could be significant when oblique beam incidence, surface irregularities, and heterogeneous tissues were present in the treatment plans. In our patient cases, monitor unit differences of up to 7% were observed between PB and eMC algorithms. Monitor unit calculations were also preformed based on point‐dose prescription. The eMC algorithm calculation was characterized by deeper penetration in the low‐density regions, such as lung and air cavities. As a result, the mean dose in the low‐density regions was underestimated using PB algorithm. The eMC computation time ranged from 5 min to 66 min on a single 2.66 GHz desktop, which is comparable with PB algorithm calculation time for the same resolution level.

PACS number: 87.55.K‐

Multiple-source models for electron beams of a medical linear accelerator using BEAMDP computer code

AIM

The aim of this work was to develop multiple-source models for electron beams of the NEPTUN 10PC medical linear accelerator using the BEAMDP computer code.

BACKGROUND

One of the most accurate techniques of radiotherapy dose calculation is the Monte Carlo (MC) simulation of radiation transport, which requires detailed information of the beam in the form of a phase-space file. The computing time required to simulate the beam data and obtain phase-space files from a clinical accelerator is significant. Calculation of dose distributions using multiple-source models is an alternative method to phase-space data as direct input to the dose calculation system.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Monte Carlo simulation of accelerator head was done in which a record was kept of the particle phase-space regarding the details of the particle history. Multiple-source models were built from the phase-space files of Monte Carlo simulations. These simplified beam models were used to generate Monte Carlo dose calculations and to compare those calculations with phase-space data for electron beams.

RESULTS

Comparison of the measured and calculated dose distributions using the phase-space files and multiple-source models for three electron beam energies showed that the measured and calculated values match well each other throughout the curves.

CONCLUSION

It was found that dose distributions calculated using both the multiple-source models and the phase-space data agree within 1.3%, demonstrating that the models can be used for dosimetry research purposes and dose calculations in radiotherapy.

Monte Carlo dose calculation improvements for low energy electron beams using eMC

The electron Monte Carlo (eMC) dose calculation algorithm in Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems) is based on the macro MC method and is able to predict dose distributions for high energy electron beams with high accuracy. However, there are limitations for low energy electron beams. This work aims to improve the accuracy of the dose calculation using eMC for 4 and 6 MeV electron beams of Varian linear accelerators. Improvements implemented into the eMC include (1) improved determination of the initial electron energy spectrum by increased resolution of mono-energetic depth dose curves used during beam configuration; (2) inclusion of all the scrapers of the applicator in the beam model; (3) reduction of the maximum size of the sphere to be selected within the macro MC transport when the energy of the incident electron is below certain thresholds. The impact of these changes in eMC is investigated by comparing calculated dose distributions for 4 and 6 MeV electron beams at source to surface distance (SSD) of 100 and 110 cm with applicators ranging from 6 x 6 to 25 x 25 cm(2) of a Varian Clinac 2300C/D with the corresponding measurements. Dose differences between calculated and measured absolute depth dose curves are reduced from 6% to less than 1.5% for both energies and all applicators considered at SSD of 100 cm. Using the original eMC implementation, absolute dose profiles at depths of 1 cm, d(max) and R50 in water lead to dose differences of up to 8% for applicators larger than 15 x 15 cm(2) at SSD 100 cm. Those differences are now reduced to less than 2% for all dose profiles investigated when the improved version of eMC is used. At SSD of 110 cm the dose difference for the original eMC version is even more pronounced and can be larger than 10%. Those differences are reduced to within 2% or 2 mm with the improved version of eMC. In this work several enhancements were made in the eMC algorithm leading to significant improvements in the accuracy of the dose calculation for 4 and 6 MeV electron beams of Varian linear accelerators.