M.K. Fix

Dosimetric impact of geometric errors due to respiratory motion prediction on dynamic multileaf collimator-based four-dimensional radiation delivery.

The synchronization of dynamic multileaf collimator (DMLC) response with respiratory motion is critical to ensure the accuracy of DMLC-based four dimensional (4D) radiation delivery. In practice, however, a finite time delay (response time) between the acquisition of tumor position and multileaf collimator response necessitates predictive models of respiratory tumor motion to synchronize radiation delivery. Predicting a complex process such as respiratory motion introduces geometric errors, which have been reported in several publications. However, the dosimetric effect of such errors on 4D radiation delivery has not yet been investigated. Thus, our aim in this work was to quantify the dosimetric effects of geometric error due to prediction under several different conditions. Conformal and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans for a lung patient were generated for anterior-posterior/posterior-anterior (AP/PA) beam arrangements at 6 and 18 MV energies to provide planned dose distributions. Respiratory motion data was obtained from 60 diaphragm-motion fluoroscopy recordings from five patients. A linear adaptive filter was employed to predict the tumor position. The geometric error of prediction was defined as the absolute difference between predicted and actual positions at each diaphragm position. Distributions of geometric error of prediction were obtained for all of the respiratory motion data. Planned dose distributions were then convolved with distributions for the geometric error of prediction to obtain convolved dose distributions. The dosimetric effect of such geometric errors was determined as a function of several variables: response time (0-0.6 s), beam energy (6∕18MV), treatment delivery (3D∕4D), treatment type (conformal/IMRT), beam direction (AP/PA), and breathing training type (free breathing/audio instruction/visual feedback). Dose difference and distance-to-agreement analysis was employed to quantify results. Based on our data, the dosimetric impact of prediction (a) increased with response time, (b) was larger for 3D radiation therapy as compared with 4D radiation therapy, (c) was relatively insensitive to change in beam energy and beam direction, (d) was greater for IMRT distributions as compared with conformal distributions, (e) was smaller than the dosimetric impact of latency, and (f) was greatest for respiration motion with audio instructions, followed by visual feedback and free breathing. Geometric errors of prediction that occur during 4D radiation delivery introduce dosimetric errors that are dependent on several factors, such as response time, treatment-delivery type, and beam energy. Even for relatively small response times of 0.6 s into the future, dosimetric errors due to prediction could approach delivery errors when respiratory motion is not accounted for at all. To reduce the dosimetric impact, better predictive models and/or shorter response times are required.

Monte Carlo source model for photon beam radiotherapy: photon source characteristics

A major barrier to widespread clinical implementation of Monte Carlo dose calculation is the difficulty in characterizing the radiation source within a generalized source model. This work aims to develop a generalized three-component source model (target, primary collimator, flattening filter) for 6- and 18-MV photon beams that match full phase-space data (PSD). Subsource by subsource comparison of dose distributions, using either source PSD or the source model as input, allows accurate source characterization and has the potential to ease the commissioning procedure, since it is possible to obtain information about which subsource needs to be tuned. This source model is unique in that, compared to previous source models, it retains additional correlations among PS variables, which improves accuracy at nonstandard source-to-surface distances (SSDs). In our study, three-dimensional (3D) dose calculations were performed for SSDs ranging from 50 to 200 cm and for field sizes from 1 x 1 to 30 x 30 cm2 as well as a 10 x 10 cm2 field 5 cm off axis in each direction. The 3D dose distributions, using either full PSD or the source model as input, were compared in terms of dose-difference and distance-to-agreement. With this model, over 99% of the voxels agreed within +/-1% or 1 mm for the target, within 2% or 2 mm for the primary collimator, and within +/-2.5% or 2 mm for the flattening filter in all cases studied. For the dose distributions, 99% of the dose voxels agreed within 1% or 1 mm when the combined source model-including a charged particle source and the full PSD as input-was used. The accurate and general characterization of each photon source and knowledge of the subsource dose distributions should facilitate source model commissioning procedures by allowing scaling the histogram distributions representing the subsources to be tuned.

An efficient framework for photon Monte Carlo treatment planning

Currently photon Monte Carlo treatment planning (MCTP) for a patient stored in the patient database of a treatment planning system (TPS) can usually only be performed using a cumbersome multi-step procedure where many user interactions are needed. This means automation is needed for usage in clinical routine. In addition, because of the long computing time in MCTP, optimization of the MC calculations is essential. For these purposes a new graphical user interface (GUI)-based photon MC environment has been developed resulting in a very flexible framework. By this means appropriate MC transport methods are assigned to different geometric regions by still benefiting from the features included in the TPS. In order to provide a flexible MC environment, the MC particle transport has been divided into different parts: the source, beam modifiers and the patient. The source part includes the phase-space source, source models and full MC transport through the treatment head. The beam modifier part consists of one module for each beam modifier. To simulate the radiation transport through each individual beam modifier, one out of three full MC transport codes can be selected independently. Additionally, for each beam modifier a simple or an exact geometry can be chosen. Thereby, different complexity levels of radiation transport are applied during the simulation. For the patient dose calculation, two different MC codes are available. A special plug-in in Eclipse providing all necessary information by means of Dicom streams was used to start the developed MC GUI. The implementation of this framework separates the MC transport from the geometry and the modules pass the particles in memory; hence, no files are used as the interface. The implementation is realized for 6 and 15 MV beams of a Varian Clinac 2300 C/D. Several applications demonstrate the usefulness of the framework. Apart from applications dealing with the beam modifiers, two patient cases are shown. Thereby, comparisons are performed between MC calculated dose distributions and those calculated by a pencil beam or the AAA algorithm. Interfacing this flexible and efficient MC environment with Eclipse allows a widespread use for all kinds of investigations from timing and benchmarking studies to clinical patient studies. Additionally, it is possible to add modules keeping the system highly flexible and efficient.

Photon-beam subsource sensitivity to the initial electron-beam parameters.

One limitation to the widespread implementation of Monte Carlo (MC) patient dose-calculation algorithms for radiotherapy is the lack of a general and accurate source model of the accelerator radiation source. Our aim in this work is to investigate the sensitivity of the photon-beam subsource distributions in a MC source model (with target, primary collimator, and flattening filter photon subsources and an electron subsource) for 6- and 18-MV photon beams when the energy and radial distributions of initial electrons striking a linac target change. For this purpose, phase-space data (PSD) was calculated for various mean electron energies striking the target, various normally distributed electron energy spread, and various normally distributed electron radial intensity distributions. All PSD was analyzed in terms of energy, fluence, and energy fluence distributions, which were compared between the different parameter sets. The energy spread was found to have a negligible influence on the subsource distributions. The mean energy and radial intensity significantly changed the target subsource distribution shapes and intensities. For the primary collimator and flattening filter subsources, the distribution shapes of the fluence and energy fluence changed little for different mean electron energies striking the target, however, their relative intensity compared with the target subsource change, which can be accounted for by a scaling factor. This study indicates that adjustments to MC source models can likely be limited to adjusting the target subsource in conjunction with scaling the relative intensity and energy spectrum of the primary collimator, flattening filter, and electron subsources when the energy and radial distributions of the initial electron-beam change.

Leaf transmission reduction using moving jaws for dynamic MLC IMRT.

The aim of this work is to investigate to what extent it is possible to use the secondary collimator jaws to reduce the transmitted radiation through the multileaf collimator (MLC) during an intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). A method is developed and introduced where the jaws follow the open window of the MLC dynamically (dJAW method). With the aid of three academic cases (Closed MLC, Sliding-gap, and Chair) and two clinical cases (prostate and head and neck) the feasibility of the dJAW method and the influence of this method on the applied dose distributions are investigated. For this purpose the treatment planning system Eclipse and the Research-Toolbox were used as well as measurements within a solid water phantom were performed. The transmitted radiation through the closed MLC leads to an inhomogeneous dose distribution. In this case, the measured dose within a plane perpendicular to the central axis differs up to 40% (referring to the maximum dose within this plane) for 6 and 15 MV. The calculated dose with Eclipse is clearly more homogeneous. For the Sliding-gap case this difference is still up to 9%. Among other things, these differences depend on the depth of the measurement within the solid water phantom and on the application method. In the Chair case, the dose in regions where no dose is desired is locally reduced by up to 50% using the dJAW method instead of the conventional method. The dose inside the chair-shaped region decreased up to 4% if the same number of monitor units (MU) as for the conventional method was applied. The undesired dose in the volume body minus the planning target volume in the clinical cases prostate and head and neck decreased up to 1.8% and 1.5%, while the number of the applied MU increased up to 3.1% and 2.8%, respectively. The new dJAW method has the potential to enhance the optimization of the conventional IMRT to a further step.

VMC++ versus BEAMnrc: A comparison of simulated linear accelerator heads for photon beams

BEAMnrc, a code for simulating medical linear accelerators based on EGSnrc, has been bench-marked and used extensively in the scientific literature and is therefore often considered to be the gold standard for Monte Carlo simulations for radiotherapy applications. However, its long computation times make it too slow for the clinical routine and often even for research purposes without a large investment in computing resources. VMC++ is a much faster code thanks to the intensive use of variance reduction techniques and a much faster implementation of the condensed history technique for charged particle transport. A research version of this code is also capable of simulating the full head of linear accelerators operated in photon mode (excluding multileaf collimators, hard and dynamic wedges). In this work, a validation of the full head simulation at 6 and 18 MV is performed, simulating with VMC++ and BEAMnrc the addition of one head component at a time and comparing the resulting phase space files. For the comparison, photon and electron fluence, photon energy fluence, mean energy, and photon spectra are considered. The largest absolute differences are found in the energy fluences. For all the simulations of the different head components, a very good agreement (differences in energy fluences between VMC++ and BEAMnrc <1%) is obtained. Only a particular case at 6 MV shows a somewhat larger energy fluence difference of 1.4%. Dosimetrically, these phase space differences imply an agreement between both codes at the <1% level, making VMC++ head module suitable for full head simulations with considerable gain in efficiency and without loss of accuracy.

Monte Carlo implementation, validation, and characterization of a 120 leaf MLC

PURPOSE Recently, the new high definition multileaf collimator (HD120 MLC) was commercialized by Varian Medical Systems providing high resolution in the center section of the treatment field. The aim of this work is to investigate the characteristics of the HD120 MLC using Monte Carlo (MC) methods. METHODS Based on the information of the manufacturer, the HD120 MLC was implemented into the already existing Swiss MC Plan (SMCP). The implementation has been configured by adjusting the physical density and the air gap between adjacent leaves in order to match transmission profile measurements for 6 and 15 MV beams of a Novalis TX. These measurements have been performed in water using gafchromic films and an ionization chamber at an SSD of 95 cm and a depth of 5 cm. The implementation was validated by comparing diamond measured and calculated penumbra values (80%-20%) for different field sizes and water depths. Additionally, measured and calculated dose distributions for a head and neck IMRT case using the DELTA(4) phantom have been compared. The validated HD120 MLC implementation has been used for its physical characterization. For this purpose, phase space (PS) files have been generated below the fully closed multileaf collimator (MLC) of a 40 × 22 cm(2) field size for 6 and 15 MV. The PS files have been analyzed in terms of energy spectra, mean energy, fluence, and energy fluence in the direction perpendicular to the MLC leaves and have been compared with the corresponding data using the well established Varian 80 leaf (MLC80) and Millennium M120 (M120 MLC) MLCs. Additionally, the impact of the tongue and groove design of the MLCs on dose has been characterized. RESULTS Calculated transmission values for the HD120 MLC are 1.25% and 1.34% in the central part of the field for the 6 and 15 MV beam, respectively. The corresponding ionization chamber measurements result in a transmission of 1.20% and 1.35%. Good agreement has been found for the comparison between transmission profiles resulting from MC simulations and film measurements. The simulated and measured values for the penumbra agreed within <0.5 mm for all field sizes, depths, and beam energies, and a good agreement has been found between the measured and the calculated dose distributions for the IMRT case. The total energy spectra are almost identical for the three MLCs. However, the mean energy, fluence and energy fluence are significantly different. Due to the different leaf widths of the MLCs, the shape of these distributions is different, each representing its leave structure. Due to the increase in width from the inner to the outer HD120 MLC leaves, the fluence and energy fluence clearly decrease below the outer leaves. The MLC80 and the M120 MLC resulted in an increase of the fluence and energy fluence compared with those resulted for the HD120 MLC. The dose reduction can exceed 20% compared with the dose of the open field due to the tongue and groove design of the HD120 MLC. CONCLUSIONS The HD120 MLC has been successfully implemented into the SMCP. Comparisons between MC calculations and measurements show very good agreement. The SMCP is now able to calculate accurate dose distributions for treatment plans using the HD120 MLC.

Assessment of patient setup errors in IGRT in combination with a six degrees of freedom couch

PURPOSE The range of patient setup errors in six dimensions detected in clinical routine for cranial as well as for extracranial treatments, were analyzed while performing linear accelerator based stereotactic treatments with frameless patient setup systems. Additionally, the need for re-verification of the patient setup for situations where couch rotations are involved was analyzed for patients treated in the cranial region. METHODS AND MATERIALS A total of 2185 initial (i.e. after pre-positioning the patient with the infrared system but before image guidance) patient setup errors (1705 in the cranial and 480 in the extracranial region) obtained by using ExacTrac (BrainLAB AG, Feldkirchen, Germany) were analyzed. Additionally, the patient setup errors as a function of the couch rotation angle were obtained by analyzing 242 setup errors in the cranial region. Before the couch was rotated, the patient setup error was corrected at couch rotation angle 0° with the aid of image guidance and the six degrees of freedom (6DoF) couch. For both situations attainment rates for two different tolerances (tolerance A: ± 0.5mm, ± 0.5°; tolerance B: ± 1.0 mm, ± 1.0°) were calculated. RESULTS The mean (± one standard deviation) initial patient setup errors for the cranial cases were -0.24 ± 1.21°, -0.23 ± 0.91° and -0.03 ± 1.07° for the pitch, roll and couch rotation axes and 0.10 ± 1.17 mm, 0.10 ± 1.62 mm and 0.11 ± 1.29 mm for the lateral, longitudinal and vertical axes, respectively. Attainment rate (all six axes simultaneously) for tolerance A was 0.6% and 13.1% for tolerance B, respectively. For the extracranial cases the corresponding values were -0.21 ± 0.95°, -0.05 ± 1.08° and -0.14 ± 1.02° for the pitch, roll and couch rotation axes and 0.15 ± 1.77 mm, 0.62 ± 1.94 mm and -0.40 ± 2.15 mm for the lateral, longitudinal and vertical axes. Attainment rate (all six axes simultaneously) for tolerance A was 0.0% and 3.1% for tolerance B, respectively. After initial setup correction and rotation of the couch to treatment position a re-correction has to be performed in 77.4% of all cases to fulfill tolerance A and in 15.6% of all cases to fulfill tolerance B. CONCLUSION The analysis of the data shows that all six axes of a 6DoF couch are used extensively for patient setup in clinical routine. In order to fulfill high patient setup accuracies (e.g. for stereotactic treatments), a 6DoF couch is recommended. Moreover, re-verification of the patient setup after rotating the couch is required in clinical routine.

Monte Carlo dose calculation improvements for low energy electron beams using eMC

The electron Monte Carlo (eMC) dose calculation algorithm in Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems) is based on the macro MC method and is able to predict dose distributions for high energy electron beams with high accuracy. However, there are limitations for low energy electron beams. This work aims to improve the accuracy of the dose calculation using eMC for 4 and 6 MeV electron beams of Varian linear accelerators. Improvements implemented into the eMC include (1) improved determination of the initial electron energy spectrum by increased resolution of mono-energetic depth dose curves used during beam configuration; (2) inclusion of all the scrapers of the applicator in the beam model; (3) reduction of the maximum size of the sphere to be selected within the macro MC transport when the energy of the incident electron is below certain thresholds. The impact of these changes in eMC is investigated by comparing calculated dose distributions for 4 and 6 MeV electron beams at source to surface distance (SSD) of 100 and 110 cm with applicators ranging from 6 x 6 to 25 x 25 cm(2) of a Varian Clinac 2300C/D with the corresponding measurements. Dose differences between calculated and measured absolute depth dose curves are reduced from 6% to less than 1.5% for both energies and all applicators considered at SSD of 100 cm. Using the original eMC implementation, absolute dose profiles at depths of 1 cm, d(max) and R50 in water lead to dose differences of up to 8% for applicators larger than 15 x 15 cm(2) at SSD 100 cm. Those differences are now reduced to less than 2% for all dose profiles investigated when the improved version of eMC is used. At SSD of 110 cm the dose difference for the original eMC version is even more pronounced and can be larger than 10%. Those differences are reduced to within 2% or 2 mm with the improved version of eMC. In this work several enhancements were made in the eMC algorithm leading to significant improvements in the accuracy of the dose calculation for 4 and 6 MeV electron beams of Varian linear accelerators.

Generalized eMC implementation for Monte Carlo dose calculation of electron beams from different machine types

The electron Monte Carlo (eMC) dose calculation algorithm available in the Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems) is based on the macro MC method and uses a beam model applicable to Varian linear accelerators. This leads to limitations in accuracy if eMC is applied to non-Varian machines. In this work eMC is generalized to also allow accurate dose calculations for electron beams from Elekta and Siemens accelerators. First, changes made in the previous study to use eMC for low electron beam energies of Varian accelerators are applied. Then, a generalized beam model is developed using a main electron source and a main photon source representing electrons and photons from the scattering foil, respectively, an edge source of electrons, a transmission source of photons and a line source of electrons and photons representing the particles from the scrapers or inserts and head scatter radiation. Regarding the macro MC dose calculation algorithm, the transport code of the secondary particles is improved. The macro MC dose calculations are validated with corresponding dose calculations using EGSnrc in homogeneous and inhomogeneous phantoms. The validation of the generalized eMC is carried out by comparing calculated and measured dose distributions in water for Varian, Elekta and Siemens machines for a variety of beam energies, applicator sizes and SSDs. The comparisons are performed in units of cGy per MU. Overall, a general agreement between calculated and measured dose distributions for all machine types and all combinations of parameters investigated is found to be within 2% or 2 mm. The results of the dose comparisons suggest that the generalized eMC is now suitable to calculate dose distributions for Varian, Elekta and Siemens linear accelerators with sufficient accuracy in the range of the investigated combinations of beam energies, applicator sizes and SSDs.