Two beam profile measurement detectors have been developed at Indiana University Cyclotron Facility to address the need for a tool to efficiently verify dose distributions created with active methods of clinical proton beam delivery. The multipad ionization chamber (MPIC) has 128 ionization chambers arranged in one plane and is designed to measure lateral profiles in fields up to 38 cm in diameter. The MPIC pads have a 5 mm pitch for fields up to 20 cm in diameter and a 7 mm pitch for larger fields, providing the accuracy of field size determination about 0.5 mm. The multilayer ionization chamber (MLIC) detector contains 122 small-volume ionization chambers stacked at a 1.82 mm step (water-equivalent) for depth-dose profile measurements. The MLIC detector can measure profiles up to 20 cm in depth, and determine the 80% distal dose fall-off with about 0.1 mm precision. Both detectors can be connected to the same set of electronics modules, which comprise the detectors' data acquisition system. The detectors have been tested in clinical proton fields produced with active methods of beam delivery such as uniform scanning and energy stacking. This article describes detector performance tests and discusses their results. The test results indicate that the MPIC and MLIC detectors can be used for dosimetric characterization of clinical proton fields. The detectors offer significant time savings during measurements in actively delivered beams compared with traditional measurements using a water phantom.
Comprehensive measurements at a large subset of available beam conditions are needed to commission output factors for proton therapy beams. The empirical modeling agrees well with the measured output factor data. This investigation indicates that it is possible to accurately predict output factors and thus eliminate or reduce time-consuming patient-specific output measurements for proton treatments.
Purpose
Our purposes are to compare the accuracy of RaySearch's analytical pencil beam (APB) and Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms for clinical proton therapy and to present clinical validation data using a novel animal tissue lung phantom.
Methods
We constructed a realistic lung phantom composed of a rack of lamb resting on a stack of rectangular natural cork slabs simulating lung tissue. The tumor was simulated using 70% lean ground lamb meat inserted in a spherical hole with diameter 40 ± 5 mm carved into the cork slabs. A single‐field plan using an anterior beam and a two‐field plan using two anterior‐oblique beams were delivered to the phantom. Ion chamber array measurements were taken medial and distal to the tumor. Measured doses were compared with calculated RayStation APB and MC calculated doses.
Results
Our lung phantom enabled measurements with the MatriXX PT at multiple depths in the phantom. Using the MC calculations, the 3%/3 mm gamma index pass rates, comparing measured with calculated doses, for the distal planes were 74.5% and 85.3% for the APB and 99.1% and 92% for the MC algorithms. The measured data revealed up to 46% and 30% underdosing within the distal regions of the target volume for the single and the two field plans when APB calculations are used. These discrepancies reduced to less than 18% and 7% respectively using the MC calculations.
Conclusions
RaySearch Laboratories' Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm is superior to the pencil‐beam algorithm for lung targets. Clinicians relying on the analytical pencil‐beam algorithm should be aware of its pitfalls for this site and verify dose prior to delivery. We conclude that the RayStation MC algorithm is reliable and more accurate than the APB algorithm for lung targets and therefore should be used to plan proton therapy for patients with lung cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.