Dose accuracy check of the 3D electron beam algorithm in a treatment planning system

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.

Experimental Validation of Monte Carlo Simulations Based on a Virtual Source Model for TomoTherapy in a RANDO Phantom

A virtual source model for Monte Carlo simulations of helical TomoTherapy has been developed previously by the authors. The purpose of this work is to perform experiments in an anthropomorphic (RANDO) phantom with the same order of complexity as in clinical treatments to validate the virtual source model to be used for quality assurance secondary check on TomoTherapy patient planning dose. Helical TomoTherapy involves complex delivery pattern with irregular beam apertures and couch movement during irradiation. Monte Carlo simulation, as the most accurate dose algorithm, is desirable in radiation dosimetry. Current Monte Carlo simulations for helical TomoTherapy adopt the full Monte Carlo model, which includes detailed modeling of individual machine component, and thus, large phase space files are required at different scoring planes. As an alternative approach, we developed a virtual source model without using the large phase space files for the patient dose calculations previously. In this work, we apply the simulation system to recompute the patient doses, which were generated by the treatment planning system in an anthropomorphic phantom to mimic the real patient treatments. We performed thermoluminescence dosimeter point dose and film measurements to compare with Monte Carlo results. Thermoluminescence dosimeter measurements show that the relative difference in both Monte Carlo and treatment planning system is within 3%, with the largest difference less than 5% for both the test plans. The film measurements demonstrated 85.7% and 98.4% passing rate using the 3 mm/3% acceptance criterion for the head and neck and lung cases, respectively. Over 95% passing rate is achieved if 4 mm/4% criterion is applied. For the dose–volume histograms, very good agreement is obtained between the Monte Carlo and treatment planning system method for both cases. The experimental results demonstrate that the virtual source model Monte Carlo system can be a viable option for the accurate dose calculation of helical TomoTherapy.

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.

[Comparison of RTPS and Monte Carlo dose distributions in heterogeneous phantoms for photon beams]

The purpose of this study was to compare dose distributions from three different RTPS with those from Monte Carlo (MC) calculations and measurements, in heterogeneous phantoms for photon beams. This study used four algorithms for RTPS: AAA (analytical anisotropic algorithm) implemented in the Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems) treatment planning system, CC (collapsed cone) superposition from the Pinnacle (Philips), and MGS (multigrid superposition) and FFT (fast Fourier transform) convolution from XiO (CMS). The dose distributions from these algorithms were compared with those from MC and measurements in a set of heterogeneous phantoms. Eclipse/AAA underestimated the dose inside the lung region for low energies of 4 and 6 MV. This is because Eclipse/AAA do not adequately account for a scaling of the spread of the pencil (lateral electron transport) based on changes in the electron density at low photon energies. The dose distributions from Pinnacle/CC and XiO/MGS almost agree with those of MC and measurements at low photon energies, but increase errors at high energy of 15 MV, especially for a small field of 3x3 cm(2). The FFT convolution extremely overestimated the dose inside the lung slab compared to MC. The dose distributions from the superposition algorithms almost agree with those from MC as well as measured values at 4 and 6 MV. The dose errors for Eclipse/AAA are lager in lung model phantoms for 4 and 6 MV. It is necessary to use the algorithms comparable to superposition for accuracy of dose calculations in heterogeneous regions.

A virtual-accelerator-based verification of a Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm for electron beam treatment planning in clinical situations

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The introduction of Monte Carlo (MC) techniques for treatment planning and also for verification purposes will have considerable impact on the radiation therapy planning process. The aim of this work was to use a virtual accelerator to study the performance of a MC-based electron dose calculation algorithm, implemented in a commercial treatment planning system.

METHODS

The performance in phantoms containing air and bone as well as in patient-specific geometries (thorax wall, nose, parotid gland and spinal cord) has been studied.

RESULTS

The agreement between the virtual accelerator and the MC dose calculation algorithm is generally very good. A gamma-evaluation with criteria of 0.03 Gy/3 mm (per Gy at the depth of maximum dose) shows that, even for the worst cases, only a small volume of about 1.5% has gamma>1.0. In the worst case, with the 0.02 Gy/2 mm criteria, about 92% of the volume receiving more than 0.85 Gy per 100 monitor units (MU) has gamma-values <1.0. The corresponding value for the volume receiving more than 0.10 Gy/100 MU is about 98%. For the 18 MeV spinal-cord case, where a 6 x 20 cm2 insert is used, the TPS underestimates the dose outside the primary field due to inadequate modelling of the insert.

CONCLUSION

The possibility of dose calculations in typical patient cases makes the virtual accelerator a powerful tool for validation and evaluation of dose calculation algorithms present in treatment planning systems.

Review of electron beam therapy physics

For over 50 years, electron beams have been an important modality for providing an accurate dose of radiation to superficial cancers and disease and for limiting the dose to underlying normal tissues and structures. This review looks at many of the important contributions of physics and dosimetry to the development and utilization of electron beam therapy, including electron treatment machines, dose specification and calibration, dose measurement, electron transport calculations, treatment and treatment-planning tools, and clinical utilization, including special procedures. Also, future changes in the practice of electron therapy resulting from challenges to its utilization and from potential future technology are discussed.

A TL-based anthropomorphic benchmark for verifying 3-D dose distributions from external electron beams calculated by radiotherapy treatment planning systems

Initial results are reported of a Polish-Finnish project to verify electron dose distributions calculated by treatment planning systems (TPSs), CadPlan v.6.3.2 and Theraplan v.3.5, which use different electron beam dose distribution algorithms. Treatment of gross tumour volumes representing lung and parotid cancer was simulated in an Alderson anthropomorphic phantom with thermoluminescent detectors (TLDs) (Li(2)B(4)O(7):Mn,Si) placed at selected measurement points inside its volume. The observed discrepancy between relative values of dose calculated and measured by TLDs at each of the measurement points and those calculated by the different TPSs at the same points is discussed.

A comparison of electron beam dose calculation accuracy between treatment planning systems using either a pencil beam or a Monte Carlo algorithm

PURPOSE

To present a comparison of the accuracy of two commercial electron beam treatment planning systems: one uses a Monte Carlo algorithm and the other uses a pencil beam model for dose calculations.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

For the same inhomogeneous phantoms and incident beams, measured dose distributions are compared with those predicted by the commercial treatment planning systems at different source-to-surface distances (SSDs). The accuracy of the pencil beam system for monitor unit calculations is also tested at various SSDs. Beam energies of 6-20 MeV are used.

RESULTS

The pencil beam model shows some serious limitations in predicting hot and cold spots in inhomogeneous phantoms for small low- or high-density inhomogeneities, especially for low-energy electron beams, such as 9 MeV. Errors (>10%) are seen in predicting high- and low-dose variations for three-dimensional inhomogeneous phantoms. The Monte Carlo calculated results generally agree much better with measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of the pencil beam calculations is difficult to predict because it depends on both the inhomogeneity geometry and location. The pencil beam calculations using CADPLAN result in large errors in phantoms containing three-dimensional type inhomogeneities. The Monte Carlo method in Theraplan Plus dose calculation module is shown to be more robust in accurately predicting dose distributions and monitor units under the tested conditions.

Electron dose calculations: a comparison of two commercial treatment planning computers

The accuracy of electron dose calculations performed by two commercially available treatment planning systems, Varian Cadplan and MDS Nordion Helax-TMS, were assessed. Three tests designed to reproduce clinical treatments likely to result in dose nonuniformity have been carried out. The tests examined oblique incidence of the electron beam; incidence on a surface containing a step shape; and incidence on a phantom containing a small air cavity. Dose calculations performed by the planning systems were compared with thermoluminescence dosimetry (TLD) measurements in a WTe electron solid water phantom. A Varian 2100C linear accelerator was used. In most situations, the discrepancy between calculated and measured dose was within the tolerance specified by the ICRU; however, some exceptions were noted. Helax-TMS produced errors of 5 mm in the position of the 10% isodose line in the penumbra of the obliquely incident beam. Both Cadplan and Helax-TMS overestimated the surface dose adjacent to a step in the beam entry surface by approximately 15%. An overestimation of 10% in dose was calculated by both systems downstream of the small air cavity. Discrepancies between the measured and calculated monitor units lay within the uncertainty limits of the measurements. In conclusion, calculations of absorbed dose from electron beams performed by Varian Cadplan and MDS Nordion Helax-TMS result in significant errors at shallow depths near surface irregularities and downstream of small air cavities.

A measured data set for evaluating electron-beam dose algorithms

The purpose of this work was to develop an electron-beam dose algorithm verification data set of high precision and accuracy. Phantom geometries and treatment-beam configurations used in this study were similar to those in a subset of the verification data set produced by the Electron Collaborative Working Group (ECWG). Measurement techniques and quality-control measures were utilized in developing the data set to minimize systematic errors inherent in the ECWG data set. All measurements were made in water with p-type diode detectors and using a Wellhöfer dosimetry system. The 9 and 20 MeV, 15 x 15 cm2 beams from a single linear accelerator composed the treatment beams. Measurements were made in water at 100 and 110 cm source-to-surface distances. Irregular surface measurements included a "stepped surface" and a "nose-shaped surface." Internal heterogeneity measurements were made for bone and air cavities in differing orientations. Confidence in the accuracy of the measured data set was reinforced by a comparison with Monte Carlo (MC)-calculated dose distributions. The MC-calculated dose distributions were generated using the OMEGA/BEAM code to explicitly model the accelerator and phantom geometries of the measured data set. The precision of the measured data, estimated from multiple measurements, was better than 0.5% in regions of low-dose gradients. In general, the agreement between the measured data and the MC-calculated data was within 2%. The quality of the data set was superior to that of the ECWG data set, and should allow for a more accurate evaluation of an electron beam dose algorithm. The data set will be made publicly available from the Department of Radiation Physics at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center.

Quantifying effects of lead shielding in electron beams: a Monte Carlo study

Lead shielding in contact with the patient's skin is often encountered in radiotherapy with electron beams. The influence of the lead shielding on dose distributions in the patient cannot fully be assessed using modern treatment planning systems. In this work the problem of quantifying the effect of lead shielding on dose distributions is addressed. Monte Carlo dose calculations were performed in a half-blocked water phantom shielded by lead, using a realistic model for the fluence of an electron linear accelerator. Electron beam energies of 6-20 MeV and lead thicknesses of 1-7 mm are used for 10 x 10 cm2 and 5 x 5 cm2 fields. The perturbation of the particle fluence and dose distributions in water introduced by the lead shielding is quantified. The effect of oblique electron beams on the dose perturbation is shown. A fictitious clinical example, the shielding of an eye in electron beam treatment, is used to demonstrate the usefulness of Monte Carlo based treatment planning algorithms that can incorporate the effects of lead shielding.

Accuracy of the phase space evolution dose calculation model for clinical 25 MeV electron beams

The phase space evolution (PSE) model is a dose calculation model for electron beams in radiation oncology developed with the aim of a higher accuracy than the commonly used pencil beam (PB) models and with shorter calculation times than needed for Monte Carlo (MC) calculations. In this paper the accuracy of the PSE model has been investigated for 25 MeV electron beams of a MM50 racetrack microtron (Scanditronix Medical AB, Sweden) and compared with the results of a PB model. Measurements have been performed for tests like non-standard SSD, irregularly shaped fields, oblique incidence and in phantoms with heterogeneities of air, bone and lung. MC calculations have been performed as well, to reveal possible errors in the measurements and/or possible inaccuracies in the interaction data used for the bone and lung substitute materials. Results show a good agreement between PSE calculated dose distributions and measurements. For all points the differences--in absolute dose--were generally well within 3% and 3 mm. However, the PSE model was found to be less accurate in large regions of low-density material and errors of up to 6% were found for the lung phantom. Results of the PB model show larger deviations, with differences of up to 6% and 6 mm and of up to 10% for the lung phantom; at shortened SSDs the dose was overestimated by up to 6%. The agreement between MC calculations and measurement was good. For the bone and the lung phantom maximum deviations of 4% and 3% were found, caused by uncertainties about the actual interaction data. In conclusion, using the phase space evolution model, absolute 3D dose distributions of 25 MeV electron beams can be calculated with sufficient accuracy in most cases. The accuracy is significantly better than for a pencil beam model. In regions of lung tissue, a Monte Carlo model yields more accurate results than the current implementation of the PSE model.

Evaluation of a commercial three-dimensional electron beam treatment planning system

We evaluated a commercial three-dimensional (3D) electron beam treatment planning system (CADPLAN V.2.7.9) using both experimentally measured and Monte Carlo calculated dose distributions to compare with those predicted by CADPLAN calculations. Tests were carried out at various field sizes and electron beam energies from 6 to 20 MeV. For a homogeneous water phantom the agreement between measured and CADPLAN calculated dose distributions is very good except at the phantom surface. CADPLAN is able to predict hot and cold spots caused by a simple 3D inhomogeneity but unable to predict dose distributions for a more complex geometry where CADPLAN underestimates dose changes caused by inhomogeneity. We discussed possible causes for the inaccuracy in the CADPLAN dose calculations. In addition, we have tested CADPLAN treatment monitor unit and electron cut-out factor calculations and found that CADPLAN predictions generally agree with manual calculations.

Dosimetric verification of two commercially available three-dimensional treatment planning systems using the TG 23 test package

The Task Group 23 (TG-23) radiation treatment planning dosimetry verification package was used to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of two commercially available treatment planning systems. The TG-23 test package contains experimentally measured beam data for two x-ray beams (4 and 18 MV) that can be used as input for 3D-RTP (three-dimensional radiation treatment planning) systems. Once the beam data is entered and modeled, a series of test cases are performed that isolate different aspects of the dose computational process. The computed values from the 3D-RTP system are compared against the measured dosimetry data, included in the package, for a set of comparison points within each test case. Both of the treatment planning systems that were studied provided excellent agreement between computed and measured doses. The cumulative 4 and 18 MV TG-23 test results for the convolution/superposition based planning system indicates that 96% of the dosimetric test points are within +/-2%, and 98% are within +/-3% of the tabulated TG-23 values. The dosimetric TG-23 test results for the pencil beam kernel based planning system are similar, with 96% of the test points falling within +/-2%, and 99% falling within +/-3% of the TG-23 measurements.