Monte Carlo linear accelerator simulation of megavoltage photon beams: Independent determination of initial beam parameters

Almberg, Sigrun Saur; Frengen, Jomar; Kylling, Arve; Lindmo, Tore

doi:10.1118/1.3668315

Cited by 41 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The present analysis is therefore limited to the maximum field size of the linac (i.e., 40 × 40 cm 2 ). The FF beam model of the linear accelerator has previously been benchmarked against measurements, 21 and the settings are therefore only briefly summarized in the following. The incident electron beam was assumed to have a Gaussian radial intensity distribution (source number 19 in BEAMnrc) with an elliptical shape.…”

Section: Iia Linac and Phantom Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monte Carlo study of in‐field and out‐of‐field dose distributions from a linear accelerator operating with and without a flattening‐filter

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Iia Linac and Phantom Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monte Carlo study of in‐field and out‐of‐field dose distributions from a linear accelerator operating with and without a flattening‐filter

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The linac model was constructed based on the technical data provided by the manufacturer and previously published work . Details of the model parameters and validation have been presented elsewhere .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The linac model was constructed based on the technical data provided by the manufacturer and previously published work. 47 Details of the model parameters and validation have been presented elsewhere. 48 For the BEAMnrc simulations, bremsstrahlung cross-section enhancement was turned on, while other transport parameters were set to default values.…”

Section: B2 Monte Carlo Model Of Elekta Agility Linear Acceleratormentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental verification of 4D Monte Carlo simulations of dose delivery to a moving anatomy

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Generally, the MC‐based linac head is verified using PDDs and beam profiles for several rectangular fields formed by specifically shaped collimators or variable jaws 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 . On the other hand, the secondary collimator in the Vero4DRT is of a fixed type and the field is formed using the MLC only.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, the linac head, exclusive of MLC, is modeled against measurement data as a patient‐independent component. Next, the patient‐dependent MLC model is compared with several measurement data using well‐commissioned phase space data (PSD) from the linac head 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a dose verification system for Vero4DRT using Monte Carlo method

Ishihara

Sawada

Nakamura

et al. 2014

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vero4DRT is an innovative image‐guided radiotherapy system employing a C‐band X‐ray head with gimbal mechanics. The purposes of this study were to propose specific MC models of the linac head and multileaf collimator (MLC) for the Vero4DRT and to verify their accuracy. For a 6 MV photon beam delivered by the Vero4DRT, a simulation code was implemented using EGSnrc. The linac head model and the MLC model were simulated based on its specification. Next, the percent depth dose (PDD) and beam profiles at depths of 15, 100, and 200 mm were simulated under source‐to‐surface distance of 900 and 1000 mm. Field size was set to 150×150.15emmm2 at a depth of 100 mm. Each of the simulated dosimetric metrics was then compared with the corresponding measurements by a 0.125 cc ionization chamber. After that, intra‐ and interleaf leakage, tongue‐and‐groove, and rounded‐leaf profiles were simulated for the static MLC model. Meanwhile, film measurements were performed using EDR2 films under similar conditions to simulation. The measurement for the rounded‐leaf profile was performed using the water phantom and the ionization chamber. The leaf physical density and abutting leaf gap were adjusted to obtain good agreement between the simulated intra‐ and interleaf leakage profiles and measurements. For the MLC model in step‐and‐shoot cases, a pyramid and a prostate IMRT field were simulated, while film measurements were performed using EDR2. For the linac head, exclusive of MLC, the difference in PDD was <1.0% after the buildup region. The simulated beam profiles agreed to within 1.3% at each depth. The MLC model has been shown to reproduce dose measurements within 2.5% for static tests. The MLC is made of tungsten alloy with a purity of 95%. The leaf gap of 0.015 cm and the MLC physical density of 18.0.15emnormalg/.15emcm3, which provided the best agreement between the simulated and measured leaf leakage, were assigned to our MC model. As a result, the simulated step‐and‐shoot IMRT dose distributions agreed with the film measurements to within 3.3%, with exception of the penumbra region. We have developed specific MC models of the linac head and the MLC in the Vero4DRT system. The results have demonstrated that our MC models have high accuracy.PACS numbers: 87.55.K‐, 87.56.nk, 87.56.bd

show abstract

Monte Carlo linear accelerator simulation of megavoltage photon beams: Independent determination of initial beam parameters

Cited by 41 publications

References 20 publications

Monte Carlo study of in‐field and out‐of‐field dose distributions from a linear accelerator operating with and without a flattening‐filter

Monte Carlo study of in‐field and out‐of‐field dose distributions from a linear accelerator operating with and without a flattening‐filter

Experimental verification of 4D Monte Carlo simulations of dose delivery to a moving anatomy

Development of a dose verification system for Vero4DRT using Monte Carlo method

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About