Comparison of measured and Monte Carlo calculated dose distributions in inhomogeneous phantoms in clinical electron beams

Calculations of dose distributions in heterogeneous phantoms in clinical electron beams, carried out using the fast voxel Monte Carlo (MC) system XVMC and the conventional MC code EGSnrc, were compared with measurements. Irradiations were performed using the 9 MeV and 15 MeV beams from a Varian Clinac-18 accelerator with a 10 x 10 cm2 applicator and an SSD of 100 cm. Depth doses were measured with thermoluminescent dosimetry techniques (TLD 700) in phantoms consisting of slabs of Solid Water (SW) and bone and slabs of SW and lung tissue-equivalent materials. Lateral profiles in water were measured using an electron diode at different depths behind one and two immersed aluminium rods. The accelerator was modelled using the EGS4/BEAM system and optimized phase-space files were used as input to the EGSnrc and the XVMC calculations. Also, for the XVMC, an experiment-based beam model was used. All measurements were corrected by the EGSnrc-calculated stopping power ratios. Overall, there is excellent agreement between the corrected experimental and the two MC dose distributions. Small remaining discrepancies may be due to the non-equivalence between physical and simulated tissue-equivalent materials and to detector fluence perturbation effect correction factors that were calculated for the 9 MeV beam at selected depths in the heterogeneous phantoms.     

Dosimetric verification of a Monte Carlo electron beam model for an add-on eMLC

Dosimetric verification of a new Monte Carlo beam model for multi-leaf collimated electrons was performed using experimental data from an add-on electron multi-leaf collimator (eMLC) prototype. The measurements were compared against calculations using an electron phase space sampled from a parameterized electron beam model and the voxel Monte Carlo++ (VMC++) code for in-phantom energy deposition. Verification of the calculations was performed in a water phantom with the developed eMLC attached to a Varian 2100 C/D radiotherapy accelerator with nominal energies 6 MeV, 9 MeV, 12 MeV, 16 MeV and 20 MeV. The eMLC prototype consisting of 2 cm thick and 5 mm wide steel leaves is fixed under the 20 x 20 cm(2) electron applicator with a source-to-leaf distance 97.2 cm. The eMLC prototype has non-motorized leaves with straight leaf edges and a maximum field size of 20 x 20 cm(2) at SSD 100 cm. The beam model is a coupled multi-source model with parameters derived from detailed beam characterization measurements and a kernel model for the indirect leaf-scattered electrons. Typical calculation times with a 2% mean statistical uncertainty was under 5 min. In extensive set of in-water measurements 88% of the voxels were within 2% /2 mm acceptance criterion. Although at SSD 100 cm the dose near the phantom surface is slightly pronounced due to the short collimator-to-surface distance, the new beam model was suitable for dose calculation of the add-on type eMLC.     

Characterization of megavoltage electron beams delivered through a photon multi-leaf collimator (pMLC)

A study is presented that characterizes megavoltage electron beams delivered through an existing double-focused photon multi-leaf collimator (pMLC) using film measurements in a solid water phantom. Machine output stability and linearity were evaluated as well as the effect of source-to-surface distance (SSD) and field size on the penumbra for electron energies between 6 and 18 MeV over an SSD range of 60-100 cm. Penumbra variations as a function of field size, depth of measurement and the influence of the jaws were also studied. Field abutment, field flatness and target coverage for segmented beams were also addressed. The measured field size for electrons transported through the pMLC was the same as that for an x-ray beam up to SSDs of 70 cm. At larger SSD, the lower energy electron fields deviated from the projected field. Penumbra data indicated that 60 cm SSD was the most favourable treatment distance. Backprojection of P(20-80) penumbra data yielded a virtual source position located at 98.9 cm from the surface for 18 MeV electrons. For 6 MeV electrons, the virtual source position was at a distance of 82.6 cm. Penumbra values were smaller for small beam slits and reached a near-constant value for field widths larger than 5 cm. The influence of the jaws had a small effect on the penumbra. The R90 values ranged from 1.4 to 4.8 cm between 6 and 21 MeV as measured at 60 cm SSD for a 9 x 9 cm2 field. Uniformity and penumbra improvement could be demonstrated using weighted abutted fields especially useful for small segments. No detectable electron leakage through the pMLC was observed. Bremsstrahlung measurements taken at 60 cm SSD for a 9 x 9 cm2 field as shaped by the pMLC compared within 1% to bremsstrahlung measurements taken at 100 cm SSD for a 10 x 10 cm2 electron applicator field at 100 cm SSD.     

Monte Carlo techniques for scattering foil design and dosimetry in total skin electron irradiations

Total skin electron irradiation (TSEI) with single fields requires large electron beams having good dose uniformity, dmax at the skin surface, and low bremsstrahlung contamination. To satisfy these requirements, energy degraders and scattering foils have to be specially designed for the given accelerator and treatment room. We used Monte Carlo (MC) techniques based on EGS4 user codes (BEAM, DOSXYZ, and DOSRZ) as a guide in the beam modifier design of our TSEI system. The dosimetric characteristics at the treatment distance of 382 cm source-to-surface distance (SSD) were verified experimentally using a linear array of 47 ion chambers, a parallel plate chamber, and radiochromic film. By matching MC simulations to standard beam measurements at 100 cm SSD, the parameters of the electron beam incident on the vacuum window were determined. Best match was achieved assuming that electrons were monoenergetic at 6.72 MeV, parallel, and distributed in a circular pattern having a Gaussian radial distribution with full width at half maximum = 0.13 cm. These parameters were then used to simulate our TSEI unit with various scattering foils. Two of the foils were fabricated and experimentally evaluated by measuring off-axis dose uniformity and depth doses. A scattering foil, consisting of a 12 x 12 cm2 aluminum plate of 0.6 cm thickness and placed at isocenter perpendicular to the beam direction, was considered optimal. It produced a beam that was flat within +/-3% up to 60 cm off-axis distance, dropped by not more than 8% at a distance of 90 cm, and had an x-ray contamination of <3%. For stationary beams, MC-computed dmax, Rp, and R50 agreed with measurements within 0.5 mm. The MC-predicted surface dose of the rotating phantom was 41% of the dose rate at dmax of the stationary phantom, whereas our calculations based on a semiempirical formula in the literature yielded a drop to 42%. The MC simulations provided the guideline of beam modifier design for TSEI and estimated the dosimetric performance for stationary and rotational irradiations.     

The use of an extra-focal electron source to model collimator-scattered electrons using the pencil-beam redefinition algorithm

Currently, the pencil-beam redefinition algorithm (PBRA) utilizes a single electron source to model clinical electron beams. In the single-source model, the electrons appear to originate from a virtual source located near the scattering foils. Although this approach may be acceptable for most treatment machines, previous studies have shown dose differences as high as 8% relative to the given dose for small fields for some machines such as the Varian Clinac 1800. In such machines collimation-scattered electrons originating from the photon jaws and the applicator give rise to extra-focal electron sources. In this study, we examined the impact of modeling an additional electron source to better account for the collimator-scattered electrons. The desired dose calculation accuracy in water throughout the dose distribution is 3% or better relative to the given dose. We present here a methodology for determining the electron-source parameters for the dual-source model using a minimal set of data, that is, two central-axis depth-dose curves and two off-axis profiles. A Varian Clinac 1800 accelerator was modeled for beam energies of 20 and 9 MeV and applicator sizes of 15 x 15 and 6 x 6 cm2. The improvement in the accuracy of PBRA-calculated dose, evaluated using measured two-dimensional dose distributions in water, was characterized using the figure of merit, FA3%, which represents the fractional area containing dose differences greater than 3%. For the 15 x 15 cm2 field the evaluation was restricted to the penumbral region, and for the 6 x 6 cm2 field the central region of the beam was included as it was impacted by the penumbra. The greatest improvement in dose accuracy was for the 6 x 6 cm2 applicator. At 9 MeV, FA3% decreased from 15% to 0% at 100 cm SSD and from 34% to 4% at 110 cm SSD. At 20 MeV, FA3% decreased from 17% to 2% at 100 cm SSD and from 41% to 10% at 110 cm SSD. In the penumbra of the 15 x 15 cm2 applicator, the improvement was less, but still significant. At 9 MeV, FA3% changed from 11% to 1% at 100 cm SSD and from 10% to 12% at 110 cm SSD. At 20 MeV, FA3% decreased from 12% to 8% at 100 cm SSD and from 14% to 5% at 110 cm SSD. Results demonstrate that use of a dual-source beam model can provide significantly improved accuracy in the PBRA-calculated dose distribution that was not achievable with a single-source beam model when modeling the Varian Clinac 1800 electron beams. Time of PBRA dose calculation was approximately doubled; however, dual-source beam modeling of newer accelerators (e.g., the Varian Clinac 2100) may not be necessary because of less impact of collimator-scattered electrons on dosimetry.     

AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams.

A protocol is prescribed for clinical reference dosimetry of external beam radiation therapy using photon beams with nominal energies between 60Co and 50 MV and electron beams with nominal energies between 4 and 50 MeV. The protocol was written by Task Group 51 (TG-51) of the Radiation Therapy Committee of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) and has been formally approved by the AAPM for clinical use. The protocol uses ion chambers with absorbed-dose-to-water calibration factors, N(60Co)D,w which are traceable to national primary standards, and the equation D(Q)w = MkQN(60Co)D,w where Q is the beam quality of the clinical beam, D(Q)w is the absorbed dose to water at the point of measurement of the ion chamber placed under reference conditions, M is the fully corrected ion chamber reading, and kQ is the quality conversion factor which converts the calibration factor for a 60Co beam to that for a beam of quality Q. Values of kQ are presented as a function of Q for many ion chambers. The value of M is given by M = PionP(TP)PelecPpolMraw, where Mraw is the raw, uncorrected ion chamber reading and Pion corrects for ion recombination, P(TP) for temperature and pressure variations, Pelec for inaccuracy of the electrometer if calibrated separately, and Ppol for chamber polarity effects. Beam quality, Q, is specified (i) for photon beams, by %dd(10)x, the photon component of the percentage depth dose at 10 cm depth for a field size of 10x10 cm2 on the surface of a phantom at an SSD of 100 cm and (ii) for electron beams, by R50, the depth at which the absorbed-dose falls to 50% of the maximum dose in a beam with field size > or =10x10 cm2 on the surface of the phantom (> or =20x20 cm2 for R50>8.5 cm) at an SSD of 100 cm. R50 is determined directly from the measured value of I50, the depth at which the ionization falls to 50% of its maximum value. All clinical reference dosimetry is performed in a water phantom. The reference depth for calibration purposes is 10 cm for photon beams and 0.6R50-0.1 cm for electron beams. For photon beams clinical reference dosimetry is performed in either an SSD or SAD setup with a 10x10 cm2 field size defined on the phantom surface for an SSD setup or at the depth of the detector for an SAD setup. For electron beams clinical reference dosimetry is performed with a field size of > or =10x10 cm2 (> or =20x20 cm2 for R50>8.5 cm) at an SSD between 90 and 110 cm. This protocol represents a major simplification compared to the AAPM's TG-21 protocol in the sense that large tables of stopping-power ratios and mass-energy absorption coefficients are not needed and the user does not need to calculate any theoretical dosimetry factors. Worksheets for various situations are presented along with a list of equipment required.     

Monte Carlo-based treatment planning for a spoiler system with experimental validation using plane-parallel ionization chambers

A beam spoiler is often used to increase the build-up dose near the surface for treatment of superficial treatment areas. Photon-beam spoilers produce a large amount of contaminant electrons, conditions for which standard, commercial treatment-planning system dose-calculation algorithms are inadequate for producing accurate dose calculations. In this study, we implemented a Monte Carlo (MC) dose-calculation algorithm for this spoiler system. With and without a spoiler of 1 cm Lucite, depth doses and transverse profiles in the build-up region were measured for field sizes of 5 x 5 cm2 and 10 x 10 cm2 at the spoiler-to-surface distances (STSDs) of 6, 10 and 15 cm. An Attix chamber and a Markus chamber were used for depth doses, whereas a diode detector was used for transverse profiles. An MC simulation using BEAM/DOSXYZ was used to compare the calculated and the measured data. The MC calculations agreed with the Attix chamber measurements within 2% for all STSDs and field sizes, whereas the Markus data--even with corrections made-showed a discrepancy of about 3.5% with a maximum difference of 7.3% for a field size of 10 x 10 cm2 at an STSD of 6 cm. The MC treatment-planning system was successfully applied to a head-and-neck case using 6 MV photon beams with a beam spoiler.     

Radiological properties of a wax-gypsum compensator material

In this paper the radiological properties of a compensator material consisting of wax and gypsum is presented. Effective attenuation coefficients (EACs) have been determined from transmission measurements with an ion chamber in a Perspex phantom. Measurements were made at 80 and 100 cm source-to-skin distance (SSD) for beam energies of 6, 8, and 15 MV, for field sizes ranging from narrow beam geometries up to 40 x 40 cm2, and at measurement depths of maximum dose build-up, 5 and 10 cm. A parametrization equation could be constructed to predict the EAC values within 4% uncertainty as a function of field size and depth of measurement. The EAC dependence on off-axis position was also quantified at each beam energy and SSD. It was found that the compensator material reduced the required thickness for compensation by 26% at 8 MV when compared to pure paraffin wax for a 10 x 10 cm2 field. Relative surface ionization (RSI) measurements have been made to quantify the effect of scattered electrons from the wax-gypsum compensator. Results indicated that for 80 cm SSD the RSI would exceed 50% for fields larger than 15 x 15 cm2. At 100 cm SSD the RSI values were below 50% for all field sizes used.     

Physical aspects of a rotational total skin electron irradiation

A technique for rotational total skin electron irradiation is presented in which the patient stands on a slowly rotating platform (SSD = 285 cm) in a large uniform linear accelerator electron field (Eo = 3.5 MeV). The beam is scattered by the transmission ionization chamber and by a special lead/aluminum scattering filter, and then degraded by a sheet of Lucite. A Farmer chamber is used as a patient dose monitor and a method for absolute dose calibration is presented. The field is uniform to within +/- 5% for dimensions of 180 X 40 cm2. The surface dose for rotational therapy is equal to 45% of the maximum dose in a stationary beam. The rotating beam exhibits a dose maximum on the surface, falls to 80% at 0.5 cm and has an x-ray contamination of approximately 4%. The surface dose rate is about 25 cGy/min for the rotating beam. The rotational beam percentage depth dose distributions, calculated using stationary beam information, agree well with measured data. The stationary beam exhibits a dose maximum at 4 mm in tissue, a surface dose of 93%, 80% dose at a depth of 1 cm, a practical range of 1.75 cm, and an x-ray contamination of 2.5%. The rotational total skin electron irradiation significantly reduces the patient treatment and setup time and solves the problem of beam matching, when compared to standard multiple-beam techniques.     

DPM蒙特卡罗剂量计算算法在均匀组织和非均匀组织剂量精确性的验证

验证DPM蒙特卡罗剂量计算算法预测均匀组织和非均匀组织剂量的精确性。DPM分别计算:①6 MeV单能光子3cm×3cm照射野和Varian 60℃加速器源水模体百分深度剂量曲线和10cm深度处离轴比;②6 MeV单能光子3cm×3cm、10cm×10cm照射野分别在水(6cm)/肺(6cm)/水(8cm)、水(6cm)/骨骼(2cm)/水(12cm)非均匀组织的百分深度剂量曲线;③6MeV单能光子6cm×6cm照射野人体头部和腹部组织在射野内和射野外的百分深度剂量曲线。比较DPM计算值与DOSXYZnrc/EGSnrc系统在相同条件下的计算值。结果显示二者计算值在水模中的误差在±3%以内,在非均匀组织中,除了个别点,误差都在±3%以内。DPM能够精确计算均匀组织和非均匀组织剂量。     

Characterization of an extendable multi-leaf collimator for clinical electron beams

An extendable x-ray multi-leaf collimator (eMLC) is investigated for collimation of electron beams on a linear accelerator. The conventional method of collimation using an electron applicator is impractical for conformal, modulated and mixed beam therapy techniques. An eMLC would allow faster, more complex treatments with potential for reduction in dose to organs-at-risk and critical structures. The add-on eMLC was modelled using the EGSnrc Monte Carlo code and validated against dose measurements at 6-21 MeV with the eMLC mounted on a Siemens Oncor linear accelerator at 71.6 and 81.6 cm source-to-collimator distances. Measurements and simulations at 8.4-18.4 cm airgaps showed agreement of 2%/2 mm. The eMLC dose profiles and percentage depth dose curves were compared with standard electron applicator parameters. The primary differences were a wider penumbra and up to 4.2% reduction in the build-up dose at 0.5 cm depth, with dose normalized on the central axis. At 90 cm source-to-surface distance (SSD)--relevant to isocentric delivery--the applicator and eMLC penumbrae agreed to 0.3 cm. The eMLC leaves, which were 7 cm thick, contributed up to 6.3% scattered electron dose at the depth of maximum dose for a 10 × 10 cm2 field, with the thick leaves effectively eliminating bremsstrahlung leakage. A Monte Carlo calculated wedge shaped dose distribution generated with all six beam energies matched across the maximum available eMLC field width demonstrated a therapeutic (80% of maximum dose) depth range of 2.1-6.8 cm. Field matching was particularly challenging at lower beam energies (6-12 MeV) due to the wider penumbrae and angular distribution of electron scattering. An eMLC isocentric electron breast boost was planned and compared with the conventional applicator fixed SSD plan, showing similar target coverage and dose to critical structures. The mean dose to the target differed by less than 2%. The low bremsstrahlung dose from the 7 cm thick MLC leaves had the added advantage of reducing the mean dose to the whole heart. Isocentric delivery using an extendable eMLC means that treatment room re-entry and repositioning the patient for SSD set-up is unnecessary. Monte Carlo simulation can accurately calculate the fluence below the eMLC and subsequent patient dose distributions. The eMLC generates similar dose distributions to the standard electron applicator but provides a practical method for more complex electron beam delivery.     

Application of the electron pencil beam redefinition algorithm to electron arc therapy

This project investigated the potential of summing fixed-beam dose distributions calculated using the pencil-beam redefinition algorithm (PBRA) at small angular steps (1 degree) to model an electron arc therapy beam. The PRBA, previously modified to model skin collimation, was modified further by incorporating two correction factors. One correction factor that is energy, SSD (source-to-surface distance), and field-width dependent constrained the calculated dose output to be the same as the measured dose output for fixed-beam geometries within the range of field widths and SSDs encountered in arc therapy. Another correction factor (single field-width correction factor for each energy) compensated for large-angle scattering not being modeled, allowing a more accurate calculation of dose output at mid arc. The PBRA was commissioned to accurately calculate dose in a water phantom for fixed-beam geometries typical of electron arc therapy. Calculated central-axis depth doses agreed with measured doses to within 2% in the low-dose gradient regions and within 1-mm in the high-dose gradient regions. Off-axis doses agreed to within 2 mm in the high-dose gradient regions and within 3% in the low-dose gradient regions. Arced-beam calculations of dose output and depth dose at mid arc were evaluated by comparing to data measured using two cylindrical water phantoms with radii of 12 and 15 cm at 10 and 15 MeV. Dose output was measured for all combinations of phantom radii of curvature, collimator widths (4, 5, and 6 cm), and arc angles (0 degrees, 20 degrees, 40 degrees, 60 degrees, 80 degrees, and 90 degrees) for both beam energies. Results showed the calculated mid-arc dose output to agree within 2% of measurement for all combinations. For a 90 degree arc angle and 5 x 20 cm2 field size, the calculated mid-arc depth dose in the low-dose gradient region agreed to within 2% of measurement for all depths at 10 MeV and for depths greater than depth of dose maximum R100 at 15 MeV. For depths in the buildup region at 15 MeV the calculations overestimated the measured dose by as much as 3.4%. Mid-arc depth dose in the high-dose gradient region agreed to within 2.2 mm of measured dose. Calculated two-dimensional relative dose distributions in the plane of rotation were compared to dose measurements using film in a cylindrical polystyrene phantom for a 90 degree arc angle and field widths of 4, 5, and 6 cm at 10 and 15 MeV. Results showed that off-axis dose at the ends of arc (without skin collimation) agreed to within 2% in the low-dose gradient region and to within 1.2 mm in the high-dose gradient region. This work showed that the accuracy of the PBRA arced-beam dose model met the criteria specified by Van Dyk et al. [Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 26, 261-273 (1993)] with the exception of the buildup region of the 15 MeV beam. Based on the present results, results of a previous study showing acceptable accuracy in the presence of skin collimation, and results of a previous study showing acceptable accuracy in the presence of internal heterogeneities, it is concluded that the PBRA arced-beam dose model should be adequate for planning electron arc therapy.     

Technical note: on cerrobend shielding for 18-22 MeV electron beams

The purpose of this study is to investigate (1) the depth at which the measurement of the block transmission factor should be made, and (2) the level of the transmission of 18 and 22 MeV electron beams through conventional Cerrobend. We measured the block transmission in water phantom as ionization profiles across the beam and as ionization distributions along the central axis of the beam for 18 and 22 MeV electron beams, for cone sizes ranging from 6 x 10 cm2 to 25 x 25 cm2. In our analysis, we separated the bremsstrahlung component produced in the Cerrobend block from the component originating in the head in the transmitted dose under the standard Cerrobend block. The block transmission for both beam energies and cone sizes was maximum on the central axis of the beam at depths between 0.4 and 0.7 cm. For the 18 MeV beam, the maximum transmission was 6.2% for the 6 x 10 cm2 cone, and 7.4% for the 25 x 25 cm2 cone. For the 22 MeV beam, it was 9.5% for the 6 x 10 cm2 cone, and 11.3% for the 25 x 25 cm2 cone. For the 22 MeV beam and 15 x 15 cm2 cone, it takes 2.95 and 1.4 cm of Cerrobend to reduce the maximum block transmission to 5% and 10%, respectively. The maximum dose under a blocked electron beam occurs on the central axis closer to the surface than it does for the open beam, and the block transmission factor should be defined at this shallower depth. To decrease the block transmission factor to the level of 5% on the central axis, electron beams with energy 18 MeV and greater require additional shielding.     

Modified sector-integration method for predicting the output factors of electron beams including extended source to surface distance

A modified sector-integration method is presented that can predict the output factors of irregular shaped electron fields even in the case of extended source to surface distance (SSD). The model takes as input measured output factors for circular inserts of various radii. These circular fields were measured at SSDs of 100, 105 and 110 cm to determine the effective source distance as a function of radius (ESD(r)). For an arbitrary electron field at any SSD, the shape is divided into small sectors, and the contribution calculated from the radius and ESD(r). The calculated output factors were verified by direct measurements of various types of electron fields mainly based on clinical use. The energies modelled were 8, 10 and 12 MeV for applicator sizes of 10 cm x 10 cm and 14 cm x 14 cm (defined at 95 cm). The calculated values agreed with the measured data within 1% for the various rectangular cutouts including extended source to surface distance. We retrospectively modelled 97 patient inserts of irregular shape, and found agreement within 2% of measured values.     

Experimental verification and clinical implementation of a commercial Monte Carlo electron beam dose calculation algorithm

This study describes the modeling and the experimental verification and clinical implementation of the alpha release of Pinnacle3 Monte Carlo (MC) electron beam dose calculation algorithm for patient-specific treatment planning. The MC electron beam modeling was performed for beam energies ranging from 6 to 18 MeV from a Siemens (Primus) linear accelerator using standard-shaped electron applicators and 100 cm source-to-surface distance (SSD). The agreement between MC calculations and measurements was, on average, within 2% and 2 mm for all applicator sizes. However, differences of the order of 3%-4% were noted in the off-axis dose profiles for the largest applicator modeled and for all energies. Output factors were calculated for standard electron cones and square cutouts inserted in the 10 x 10 cm2 applicator for different SSDs and were found to be within 4% of measured data. Experimental verification of the MC electron beam model was carried out using an ionization chamber and film in solid-water slab and anthropomorphic phantoms containing bone and lung materials. Agreement between calculated and measured dose distributions was within +/-3%. Clinical comparison was performed in four patient treatment plans with lesions in highly irregular anatomies, such as the ear, face, and breast, where custom-designed bolus and field shaping blocks were used in the patient treatments. For comparison purposes, treatment planning was also performed using the conventional pencil beam (PB) algorithm with the Pinnacle3 treatment planning system. Differences between MC and PB dose calculations for the patient treatment plans were significant, particularly in anatomies where the target was in close proximity to low density tissues, such as lung and air cavities. Concerning monitor unit calculations, the largest differences obtained between MC and PB algorithms were between 4.0% and 5.0% for two patients treated with oblique beams and involving highly irregular surfaces, i.e., breast and cheek. Clinical results are reported for overall uncertainty values (averaged over voxels with doses >50% dosemax) ranging from 2% to 0.3% and calculations were performed using cubic voxels with side 0.3 cm. Timing values ranged from 2 min to 24.5 h, depending on the field size, beam energy, number, and thickness of computed tomography slices used to define the patient's anatomy for the overall uncertainty values mentioned above.     

Energy spectra, angular spread, fluence profiles and dose distributions of 6 and 18 MV photon beams: results of monte carlo simulations for a varian 2100EX accelerator

The purpose of this study is to provide detailed characteristics of incident photon beams for different field sizes and beam energies. This information is critical to the future development of accurate treatment planning systems. It also enhances our knowledge of radiotherapy photon beams. The EGS4 Monte Carlo code, BEAM, has been used to simulate 6 and 18 MV photon beams from a Varian Clinac-2100EX accelerator. A simulated realistic beam is stored in a phase space data file, which contains details of each particle's complete history including where it has been and where it has interacted. The phase space files are analysed to obtain energy spectra, angular distribution, fluence profile and mean energy profiles at the phantom surface for particles separated according to their charge and history. The accuracy of a simulated beam is validated by the excellent agreement between the Monte Carlo calculated and measured dose distributions. Measured depth-dose curves are obtained from depth-ionization curves by accounting for newly introduced chamber fluence corrections and the stopping-power ratios for realistic beams. The study presents calculated depth-dose components from different particles as well as calculated surface dose and contribution from different particles to surface dose across the field. It is shown that the increase of surface dose with the increase of the field size is mainly due to the increase of incident contaminant charged particles. At 6 MV, the incident charged particles contribute 7% to 21% of maximum dose at the surface when the field size increases from 10 x 10 to 40 x 40 cm2. At 18 MV, their contributions are up to 11% and 29% of maximum dose at the surface for 10 x 10 cm2 and 40 x 40 cm2 fields respectively. However, the fluence of these incident charged particles is less than 1% of incident photon fluence in all cases.     

Correcting for electron contamination at dose maximum in photon beams

Data are presented to allow the photon beam quality specifier being used in the new AAPM TG-51 protocol, %dd(10)x, to be extracted from depth-dose data measured with a 1 mm lead foil either 50 cm or 30 cm from the phantom surface. %dd(10)x is the photon component of the percentage depth dose at 10 cm depth for a 10x10 cm2 field on the surface of a phantom at an SSD of 100 cm. The purpose of the foil is to remove the unknown electron contamination from the accelerator head. Monte Carlo calculations are done: (a) to show these electrons are reduced to a negligible level; (b) to calculate the amount of electron contamination from the lead foil at the depth of dose maximum; and (c) to calculate the effect of beam hardening on %dd(10). The analysis extends the earlier work of Li and Rogers [Med. Phys. 21, 791-798 (1994)] which only provided data for the foil at 50 cm. An error in the earlier Monte Carlo simulations is reported and a more convenient method of analyzing and using the data is presented. It is shown that 20% variations in the foil thickness have a negligible effect on the calculated corrections.     

On the initial angular variances of clinical electron beams

Electron beam radiotherapy treatment planning systems need to be fed with the characteristics of the high-energy electron beams (4-50 MeV) from the specifically applied accelerator. Beams can be characterized by their mean initial energy, effective initial angular variance, virtual source position and the resulting central axis depth dose distribution in water. This information is the only input to pencil beam dose calculation models. Newer calculation models like macro Monte Carlo, voxel Monte Carlo and phase space evolution require as input the full initial phase space or a parametrization of that initial phase space, generally consisting of a primary beam component and one or more scatter components. This primary beam component is often characterized by initial energy, primary beam initial angular variance and virtual source distance. The purpose of the present investigation was to investigate to what extent standard values can be used both for the effective initial angular variance as input to pencil beam models and for the primary beam initial angular variance. Comprehensive benchmark data were obtained on the initial angular variance of various types of accelerator, for various energies and field sizes. The initial angular variance sigma2theta(x) has been derived from penumbra measurements in air by means of film dosimetry at various distances from the lower collimator. For the types of accelerator used in radiotherapy nowadays the measurements show values for sigma2theta(x)/T(E) of around 13 cm where T(E) is the ICRU-35 linear angular scattering power in air. This value can be chosen as standard value for the primary beam initial angular variance, only slightly compromising the dose calculation accuracy. As input to pencil beam models, an effective sigma2theta(x)/T(E) should be used incorporating the scatter from the lower collimator. For the case that the air gaps between lower collimator and patient are small (5-10 cm) an effective sigma2theata(x)/T(E) of 20 cm has been found and is recommended as the standard input for pencil beam models. Of the accelerators investigated, a different value was found only for the Elekta SL15, i.e. 50% higher for the effective sigma2theta(x)/T(E).     

Phantom materials for boron neutron capture therapy

The aim of this work was to establish which reference phantom material is most suited for dosimetry under reference conditions of neutron beams for boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT). For this purpose, phantoms of dimensions 15 x 15 x 15 cm3 and 30 x 30 x 30 cm3, composed of water, tissue-equivalent (TE) liquid, polyethylene (PE), polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and water containing 10 microg g(-1) and 30 microg g(-1) 10B were irradiated using the Petten BNCT beam. Activation foils and a diode detector were used for the determination of the thermal neutron fluence rate. The gamma-ray dose rate and the fast neutron dose rate were determined using paired ionization chambers. In water, PMMA and TE liquid the absolute dose and fluence values agreed within 3% at a reference depth of 2 cm, with the exception of the gamma-ray dose rate in PMMA, which was 12% lower than in water. Due to a higher hydrogen concentration in PE compared with water, the dose and fluence values in PE differed more than 30% from those in water. Only minor differences were observed between the percentage depth dose curves for the various dose components in water, PMMA and TE liquid. The addition of 10 microg g(-1) and 30 microg g(-1) 10B to water resulted in a decrease in the absolute thermal neutron fluence at 2 cm depth of about 2% and 8%, respectively, and a decreased penetration of thermal neutrons at depth for the 30 microg g(-1) 10B concentration. For reference dosimetry of an epithermal neutron beam for BNCT, both water and TE liquid are suitable phantom materials. For practical reasons, water is therefore proposed as reference phantom material. For measurements requiring a solid phantom, PMMA is proposed. The lower gamma-ray dose in PMMA compared to water, however, needs to be taken into account.     

Dual scattering foil design for poly-energetic electron beams

The laser wakefield acceleration (LWFA) mechanism can accelerate electrons to energies within the 6-20 MeV range desired for therapy application. However, the energy spectrum of LWFA-generated electrons is broad, on the order of tens of MeV. Using existing laser technology, the therapeutic beam might require a significant energy spread to achieve clinically acceptable dose rates. The purpose of this work was to test the assumption that a scattering foil system designed for a mono-energetic beam would be suitable for a poly-energetic beam with a significant energy spread. Dual scattering foil systems were designed for mono-energetic beams using an existing analytical formalism based on Gaussian multiple-Coulomb scattering theory. The design criterion was to create a flat beam that would be suitable for fields up to 25 x 25 cm2 at 100 cm from the primary scattering foil. Radial planar fluence profiles for poly-energetic beams with energy spreads ranging from 0.5 MeV to 6.5 MeV were calculated using two methods: (a) analytically by summing beam profiles for a range of mono-energetic beams through the scattering foil system, and (b) by Monte Carlo using the EGS/BEAM code. The analytic calculations facilitated fine adjustments to the foil design, and the Monte Carlo calculations enabled us to verify the results of the analytic calculation and to determine the phase-space characteristics of the broadened beam. Results showed that the flatness of the scattered beam is fairly insensitive to the width of the input energy spectrum. Also, results showed that dose calculated by the analytical and Monte Carlo methods agreed very well in the central portion of the beam. Outside the useable field area, the differences between the analytical and Monte Carlo results were small but significant, possibly due to the small angle approximation. However, these did not affect the conclusion that a scattering foil system designed for a mono-energetic beam will be suitable for a poly-energetic beam with the same central energy. Further studies of the dosimetric properties of LWFA-generated electron beams will be done using Monte Carlo methods.