skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-E-T-08: A Beam Source Model for Monte Carlo Simulations of a Double-Scattering Proton Beam Delivery System Using Beam Current Modulation

Abstract

Purpose: To reconstruct phase-space information upstream of patient specific collimators for Monte Carlo simulations using only radiotherapy planning system data. Methods: The proton energies are calculated based on residual ranges, e.g., sum of prescribed ranges in a patient and SSD. The Kapchinskij and Vladimirskij (KV) distribution was applied to sample proton’s x-y positions and momentum direction and the beam shape was assumed to be a circle. Free parameters, e.g., the initial energy spread and the emittance of KV distribution were estimated from the benchmarking with commissioning data in a commercial treatment planning system for an operational proton therapy center. The number of histories, which defines the height of individual pristine Bragg peaks (BP) of Spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP), are weighted based on beam current modulation and a correction factor is applied to take into account the fluence reduction as the residual range decreases due to the rotation of the range modulator wheel. The timedependent behaviors, e.g., the changes of the residual range and histories per a pristine BP, are realized by utilizing TOPAS (Tool for Particle Simulation). Results: Benchmarking simulations for selected SOBPs ranging 7.5 cm to 15.5 cm matched within 2 mm in range and up to 5 mmmore » in SOBP width against measurement data in water phantom. We found this model tends to underestimate entrance dose by about 5 % in comparison to measurement. This was attributed to the situation that the energy distribution used in the model was limited in its granularity at the limit of single energy spectrum for the narrow angle modulator steps used in the proximal pull back region of the SOBPs. Conclusion: Within these limitations the source modeling method proved itself an acceptable alternative of a full treatment head simulation when the machine geometry and materials information are not available.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22545143
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; BEAM CURRENTS; BRAGG CURVE; COMPUTERIZED SIMULATION; ENERGY SPECTRA; MODULATION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PATIENTS; PHANTOMS; PHASE SPACE; PROTON BEAMS; RADIOTHERAPY; WIDTH

Citation Formats

Shin, J, Merchant, T E, Lee, S, Li, Z, Shin, D, and Farr, J B. SU-E-T-08: A Beam Source Model for Monte Carlo Simulations of a Double-Scattering Proton Beam Delivery System Using Beam Current Modulation. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924369.
Shin, J, Merchant, T E, Lee, S, Li, Z, Shin, D, & Farr, J B. SU-E-T-08: A Beam Source Model for Monte Carlo Simulations of a Double-Scattering Proton Beam Delivery System Using Beam Current Modulation. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924369.
Shin, J, Merchant, T E, Lee, S, Li, Z, Shin, D, and Farr, J B. Mon . "SU-E-T-08: A Beam Source Model for Monte Carlo Simulations of a Double-Scattering Proton Beam Delivery System Using Beam Current Modulation". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924369.
@article{osti_22545143,
title = {SU-E-T-08: A Beam Source Model for Monte Carlo Simulations of a Double-Scattering Proton Beam Delivery System Using Beam Current Modulation},
author = {Shin, J and Merchant, T E and Lee, S and Li, Z and Shin, D and Farr, J B},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To reconstruct phase-space information upstream of patient specific collimators for Monte Carlo simulations using only radiotherapy planning system data. Methods: The proton energies are calculated based on residual ranges, e.g., sum of prescribed ranges in a patient and SSD. The Kapchinskij and Vladimirskij (KV) distribution was applied to sample proton’s x-y positions and momentum direction and the beam shape was assumed to be a circle. Free parameters, e.g., the initial energy spread and the emittance of KV distribution were estimated from the benchmarking with commissioning data in a commercial treatment planning system for an operational proton therapy center. The number of histories, which defines the height of individual pristine Bragg peaks (BP) of Spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP), are weighted based on beam current modulation and a correction factor is applied to take into account the fluence reduction as the residual range decreases due to the rotation of the range modulator wheel. The timedependent behaviors, e.g., the changes of the residual range and histories per a pristine BP, are realized by utilizing TOPAS (Tool for Particle Simulation). Results: Benchmarking simulations for selected SOBPs ranging 7.5 cm to 15.5 cm matched within 2 mm in range and up to 5 mm in SOBP width against measurement data in water phantom. We found this model tends to underestimate entrance dose by about 5 % in comparison to measurement. This was attributed to the situation that the energy distribution used in the model was limited in its granularity at the limit of single energy spectrum for the narrow angle modulator steps used in the proximal pull back region of the SOBPs. Conclusion: Within these limitations the source modeling method proved itself an acceptable alternative of a full treatment head simulation when the machine geometry and materials information are not available.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924369},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}
  • Purpose: To estimate the dose delivered to a moving lung tumor by proton therapy beams of different modulation types, and compare with Monte Carlo predictions. Methods: A radiology support devices (RSD) phantom was irradiated with therapeutic proton radiation beams using two different types of modulation: uniform scanning (US) and double scattered (DS). The Eclipse© dose plan was designed to deliver 1.00Gy to the isocenter of a static ∼3×3×3cm (27cc) tumor in the phantom with 100% coverage. The peak to peak amplitude of tumor motion varied from 0.0 to 2.5cm. The radiation dose was measured with an ion-chamber (CC-13) located withinmore » the tumor. The time required to deliver the radiation dose varied from an average of 65s for the DS beams to an average of 95s for the US beams. Results: The amount of radiation dose varied from 100% (both US and DS) to the static tumor down to approximately 92% for the moving tumor. The ratio of US dose to DS dose ranged from approximately 1.01 for the static tumor, down to 0.99 for the 2.5cm moving tumor. A Monte Carlo simulation using TOPAS included a lung tumor with 4.0cm of peak to peak motion. In this simulation, the dose received by the tumor varied by ∼40% as the period of this motion varied from 1s to 4s. Conclusion: The radiation dose deposited to a moving tumor was less than for a static tumor, as expected. At large (2.5cm) amplitudes, the DS proton beams gave a dose closer to the desired dose than the US beams, but equal within experimental uncertainty. TOPAS Monte Carlo simulation can give insight into the moving tumor — dose relationship. This work was supported in part by the Philips corporation.« less
  • Purpose: To build the model of a spot scanning proton beam for the dose calculation of a synchrotron proton therapy accelerator, which is capable of accelerating protons from 50 up to 221 MeV. Methods: The spot scanning beam nozzle is modeled using TOPAS code, a simulation tool based on Geant4.9.6. The model contained a beam pipe vacuum window, a beam profile monitor, a drift chamber, two plane-parallel ionization chambers, and a spot-position monitor consisted of a multiwire ionization chamber. A water phantom is located with its upstream surface at the isocenter plane. The initial proton beam energy and anglar deflectionmore » are modeled using a Gaussian distribution with FWHM (Full Widths at Half Maximum) deponding on its beam energy. The phase space file (PSF) on a virtual surface located at the center between the two magnets is recorded. PSF is used to analyze the pencil beam features and offset the pencil beam position. The source model parameters are verificated by fitting the simulated Result to the measurement. Results: The simulated percentage depth dose (PDD) and lateral profiles of scanning pencil beams of various incident proton energies are verificated to the measurement. Generally the distance to agreement (DTA) of Bragg peaks is less than 0.2cm. The FWHM of Gaussian anglar distribution was adjusted to fit the lateral profile difference between the simulation and the measurement to less than 2∼3cm. Conclusion: A Monte Carlo model of a spot scanning proton beam was bullt based on a synchrotron proton therapy accelerator. This scanning pencil beam model will be as a block to build the broad proton beam as a proton TPS dose verification tool.« less
  • Purpose: To evaluate the Monte Carlo simulated beam data with the measured commissioning data for the Mevion S250 proton therapy system. Method: The Mevion S250 proton therapy system utilizes a passive double scattering technique with a unique gantry mounted superconducting accelerator and offers effective proton therapy in a compact design concept. The field shaping system (FSS) includes first scattering foil, range modulator wheel (RMW), second scattering foil and post absorber and offers two field sizes and a total of 24 treatment options from proton range of 5 cm to 32 cm. The treatment nozzle was modeled in detail using TOPASmore » (TOolkit for PArticle Simulation) Monte Carlo code. The timing feathers of the moving modulator wheels were also implemented to generate the Spread Out Bragg Peak (SOBP). The simulation results including pristine Bragg Peak, SOBP and dose profiles were compared with the data measured during beam commissioning. Results: The comparison between the measured data and the simulation data show excellent agreement. For pristine proton Bragg Peaks, the simulated proton range (depth of distal 90%) values agreed well with the measured range values within 1 mm accuracy. The differences of the distal falloffs (depth from distal 80% to 20%) were also found to be less than 1 mm between the simulations and measurements. For the SOBP, the widths of modulation (depth of proximal 95% to distal 90%) were also found to agree with the measurement within 1 mm. The flatness of the simulated and measured lateral profiles was found to be 0.6 % and 1.1 %, respectively. Conclusion: The agreement between simulations and measurements demonstrate that TOPAS could be used as a viable platform to proton therapy applications. The matched simulation results offer a great tool and open opportunity for variety of applications.« less
  • Purpose: The PTCH is preparing the ocular proton beam nozzle for clinical use. Currently commissioning measurements are being performed using films, diodes and ionization chambers. In parallel, a Monte Carlo model of the beam line was created for integration into the automated Monte Carlo treatment plan computation system, MC{sup 2}. This work aims to compare Monte Carlo predictions to measured proton doses in order to validate the Monte Carlo model. Methods: A complete model of the double scattering ocular beam line has been created and is capable of simulating proton beams with a comprehensive set of beam modifying devices, includingmore » eleven different range modulator wheels. Simulations of doses in water were scored and compare to ion chamber measurements of depth doses, lateral dose profiles extracted from half beam block exposures of films, and diode measurements of lateral penumbrae at various depths. Results: All comparison resulted in an average relative entrance dose difference of less than 3% and peak dose difference of less than 2%. All range differences were smaller than 0.2 mm. The differences in the lateral beam profiles were smaller than 0.2 mm, and the differences in the penumbrae were all smaller than 0.4%. Conclusion: All available data shows excellent agreement of simulations and measurements. More measurements will have to be performed in order to completely and systematically validate the model. Besides simulating and measuring PDDs and lateral profiles of all remaining range modulator wheels, the absolute dosimetry factors in terms of number of source protons per monitor unit have to be determined.« less
  • 8 particle histories were run. Results: Range measurements of the Monte-Carlo simulations matched the measured data within 1mm. Distal fall-off of the simulated fields matched within <1mm. Lateral penumbra and field size measurements of the standard-sized square and half-beam blocked fields matched within 1mm at all three planes compared. A small difference was seen in the in-air profiles at doses <0%. The suspected cause of the difference was the aperture shape. The measured data utilized a divergent aperture. The Monte-Carlo calculation used a non-divergent aperture. Conclusion: The validation measurements indicate that we were able to accurately model the MEVION s250more » Proton therapy system using Monte-Carlo Calculations. This may reduce the commissioning time for future users. Purpose: Monte-Carlo modeling is an important tool for understanding the behavior of therapeutic proton beams in a heterogeneous media such as the patient. To gain confidence that a Monte-Carlo model is accurate in complex geometries and media, it must first be compared with measurement in simple situations. This study documents the validation of our Monte-Carlo Model. Methods: A model of the MEVION s250 Proton therapy system was created in the TOPAS Monte-Carlo environment using machine geometry and field shaping system information provided by the vendor. For each of 24 options, validation of the TOPAS model was performed by comparing the dose scored by TOPAS to the dose measurements obtained during the commissioning of the treatment planning system. The measurements compared consisted of: pristine peak depth-dose profiles, in-air profiles for a standard-sized square field (20cm×20cm or 10cm×10cm depending on the maximum field size for each option) at isocenter and at 20cm upstream and downstream of isocenter, and in-air profiles with a half-beam blocked aperture at isocenter and at 20cm upstream and downstream of isocenter. For all Monte-Carlo simulations,.« less