The Monte Carlo (MC) method has been shown through many research studies to calculate accurate dose distributions for clinical radiotherapy, particularly in heterogeneous patient tissues where the effects of electron transport cannot be accurately handled with conventional, deterministic dose algorithms. Despite its proven accuracy and the potential for improved dose distributions to influence treatment outcomes, the long calculation times previously associated with MC simulation rendered this method impractical for routine clinical treatment planning. However, the development of faster codes optimized for radiotherapy calculations and improvements in computer processor technology have substantially reduced calculation times to, in some instances, within minutes on a single processor. These advances have motivated several major treatment planning system vendors to embark upon the path of MC techniques. Several commercial vendors have already released or are currently in the process of releasing MC algorithms for photon and/or electron beam treatment planning. Consequently, the accessibility and use of MC treatment planning algorithms may well become widespread in the radiotherapy community. With MC simulation, dose is computed stochastically using first principles; this method is therefore quite different from conventional dose algorithms. Issues such as statistical uncertainties, the use of variance reduction techniques, the ability to account for geometric details in the accelerator treatment head simulation, and other features, are all unique components of a MC treatment planning algorithm. Successful implementation by the clinical physicist of such a system will require an understanding of the basic principles of MC techniques. The purpose of this report, while providing education and review on the use of MC simulation in radiotherapy planning, is to set out, for both users and developers, the salient issues associated with clinical implementation and experimental verification of MC dose algorithms. As the MC method is an emerging technology, this report is not meant to be prescriptive. Rather, it is intended as a preliminary report to review the tenets of the MC method and to provide the framework upon which to build a comprehensive program for commissioning and routine quality assurance of MC-based treatment planning systems.
A recent paper analyzed the sensitivity to various simulation parameters of the Monte Carlo simulations of nine beams from three major manufacturers of commercial medical linear accelerators, ranging in energy from 4-25 MV. In this work the nine models are used: to calculate photon energy spectra and average energy distributions and compare them to those published by Mohan et al. [Med. Phys. 12, 592-597 (1985)]; to separate the spectra into primary and scatter components from the primary collimator, the flattening filter and the adjustable collimators; and to calculate the contaminant-electron fluence spectra and the electron contribution to the depth-dose curves. Notwithstanding the better precision of the calculated spectra, they are similar to those calculated by Mohan et al. The three photon spectra at 6 MV from the machines of three different manufacturers show differences in their shapes as well as in the efficiency of bremsstrahlung production in the corresponding target and filter combinations. The contribution of direct photons to the photon energy fluence in a 10 x 10 field varies between 92% and 97%, where the primary collimator contributes between 0.6% and 3.4% and the flattening filter contributes between 0.6% and 4.5% to the head-scatter energy fluence. The fluence of the contaminant electrons at 100 cm varies between 5 x 10(-9) and 2.4 x 10(-7) cm(-2) per incident electron on target, and the corresponding spectrum for each beam is relatively invariant inside a 10 x 10 cm2 field. On the surface the dose from electron contamination varies between 5.7% and 11% of maximum dose and, at the depth of maximum dose, between 0.16% and 2.5% of maximum dose. The photon component of the percentage depth-dose at 10 cm depth is compared with the general formula provided by AAPM's task group 51 and confirms the claimed accuracy of 2%.
The BEAM code is used to simulate nine photon beams from three major manufacturers of medical linear accelerators (Varian, Elekta, and Siemens), to derive and evaluate estimates for the parameters of the electron beam incident on the target, and to study the effects of some mechanical parameters like target width, primary collimator opening, flattening filter material and density. The mean energy and the FWHM of the incident electron beam intensity distributions (assumed Gaussian and cylindrically symmetric) are derived by matching calculated percentage depth-dose curves past the depth of maximum dose (within 1% of maximum dose) and off-axis factors (within 2sigma at 1% statistics or less) with measured data from the AAPM RTC TG-46 compilation. The off-axis factors are found to be very sensitive to the mean energy of the electron beam, the FWHM of its intensity distribution, its angle of incidence, the dimensions of the upper opening of the primary collimator, the material of the flattening filter and its density. The off-axis factors are relatively insensitive to the FWHM of the electron beam energy distribution, its divergence and the lateral dimensions of the target. The depth-dose curves are sensitive to the electron beam energy, and to its energy distribution, but they show no sensitivity to the FWHM of the electron beam intensity distribution. The electron beam incident energy can be estimated within 0.2 MeV when matching either the measured off-axis factors or the central-axis depth-dose curves when the calculated uncertainties are about 0.7% at the 1 sigma level. The derived FWHM (+/-0.1 mm) of the electron beam intensity distributions all fall within 1 mm of the manufacturer specifications except in one case where the difference is 1.2 mm.
We have benchmarked photon beam simulations with the EGS4 user code BEAM [Rogers et al., Med. Phys. 22, 503-524 (1995)] by comparing calculated and measured relative ionization distributions in water from the 10 and 20 MV photon beams of the NRC linac. Unlike previous calculations, the incident electron energy is known independently to 1%, the entire extra-focal radiation is simulated, and electron contamination is accounted for. The full Monte Carlo simulation of the linac includes the electron exit window, target, flattening filter, monitor chambers, collimators, as well as the PMMA walls of the water phantom. Dose distributions are calculated using a modified version of the EGS4 user code DOSXYZ which additionally allows scoring of average energy and energy fluence in the phantom. Dose is converted to ionization by accounting for the (L/rho)water(air) variation in the phantom, calculated in an identical geometry for the realistic beams using a new EGS4 user code, SPRXYZ. The variation of (L/rho)water(air) with depth is a 1.25% correction at 10 MV and a 2% correction at 20 MV. At both energies, the calculated and the measured values of ionization on the central axis in the buildup region agree within 1% of maximum ionization relative to the ionization at 10 cm depth. The agreement is well within statistics elsewhere. The electron contamination contributes 0.35(+/- 0.02) to 1.37(+/- 0.03)% of the maximum dose in the buildup region at 10 MV and 0.26(+/- 0.03) to 3.14(+/- 0.07)% of the maximum dose at 20 MV. The penumbrae at 3 depths in each beam (in g/cm2), 1.99 (dmax, 10 MV only), 3.29 (dmax, 20 MV only), 9.79 and 19.79, agree with ionization chamber measurements to better than 1 mm. Possible causes for the discrepancy between calculations and measurements are analyzed and discussed in detail.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.