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

Title: SU-F-SPS-05: Experimental Validation of Peripheral Dose Distribution of Electron Beams for Eclipse Electron Monte Carlo Algorithm

Abstract

Purpose: In this study, the two available calculation algorithms of the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system(TPS), the electron Monte Carlo(eMC) and General Gaussian Pencil Beam(GGPB) algorithms were used to compare measured and calculated peripheral dose distribution of electron beams. Methods: Peripheral dose measurements were carried out for 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 and 22 MeV electron beams of Varian Triology machine using parallel plate ionization chamber and EBT3 films in the slab phantom. Measurements were performed for 6×6, 10×10 and 25×25cm{sup 2} cone sizes at dmax of each energy up to 20cm beyond the field edges. Using the same film batch, the net OD to dose calibration curve was obtained for each energy. Films were scanned 48 hours after irradiation using an Epson 1000XL flatbed scanner. Dose distribution measured using parallel plate ionization chamber and EBT3 film and calculated by eMC and GGPB algorithms were compared. The measured and calculated data were then compared to find which algorithm calculates peripheral dose distribution more accurately. Results: The agreement between measurement and eMC was better than GGPB. The TPS underestimated the out of field doses. The difference between measured and calculated doses increase with the cone size. The largest deviation between calculatedmore » and parallel plate ionization chamber measured dose is less than 4.93% for eMC, but it can increase up to 7.51% for GGPB. For film measurement, the minimum gamma analysis passing rates between measured and calculated dose distributions were 98.2% and 92.7% for eMC and GGPB respectively for all field sizes and energies. Conclusion: Our results show that the Monte Carlo algorithm for electron planning in Eclipse is more accurate than previous algorithms for peripheral dose distributions. It must be emphasized that the use of GGPB for planning large field treatments with 6 MeV could lead to inaccuracies of clinical significance.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. Medipol University, Istanbul, Istanbul (Turkey)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22624422
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 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; ALGORITHMS; CALIBRATION; ELECTRON BEAMS; IONIZATION; IONIZATION CHAMBERS; IRRADIATION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHANTOMS; PLANNING; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIATION DOSES; VALIDATION

Citation Formats

Cebe, M, Pacaci, P, Mabhouti, H, Codel, G, Sanli, E, Serin, E, Kucuk, N, Kucukmorkoc, E, Doyuran, M, Canoglu, D, Altinok, A, Acar, H, and Caglar Ozkok, H. SU-F-SPS-05: Experimental Validation of Peripheral Dose Distribution of Electron Beams for Eclipse Electron Monte Carlo Algorithm. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4955680.
Cebe, M, Pacaci, P, Mabhouti, H, Codel, G, Sanli, E, Serin, E, Kucuk, N, Kucukmorkoc, E, Doyuran, M, Canoglu, D, Altinok, A, Acar, H, & Caglar Ozkok, H. SU-F-SPS-05: Experimental Validation of Peripheral Dose Distribution of Electron Beams for Eclipse Electron Monte Carlo Algorithm. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955680.
Cebe, M, Pacaci, P, Mabhouti, H, Codel, G, Sanli, E, Serin, E, Kucuk, N, Kucukmorkoc, E, Doyuran, M, Canoglu, D, Altinok, A, Acar, H, and Caglar Ozkok, H. Wed . "SU-F-SPS-05: Experimental Validation of Peripheral Dose Distribution of Electron Beams for Eclipse Electron Monte Carlo Algorithm". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955680.
@article{osti_22624422,
title = {SU-F-SPS-05: Experimental Validation of Peripheral Dose Distribution of Electron Beams for Eclipse Electron Monte Carlo Algorithm},
author = {Cebe, M and Pacaci, P and Mabhouti, H and Codel, G and Sanli, E and Serin, E and Kucuk, N and Kucukmorkoc, E and Doyuran, M and Canoglu, D and Altinok, A and Acar, H and Caglar Ozkok, H},
abstractNote = {Purpose: In this study, the two available calculation algorithms of the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system(TPS), the electron Monte Carlo(eMC) and General Gaussian Pencil Beam(GGPB) algorithms were used to compare measured and calculated peripheral dose distribution of electron beams. Methods: Peripheral dose measurements were carried out for 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 and 22 MeV electron beams of Varian Triology machine using parallel plate ionization chamber and EBT3 films in the slab phantom. Measurements were performed for 6×6, 10×10 and 25×25cm{sup 2} cone sizes at dmax of each energy up to 20cm beyond the field edges. Using the same film batch, the net OD to dose calibration curve was obtained for each energy. Films were scanned 48 hours after irradiation using an Epson 1000XL flatbed scanner. Dose distribution measured using parallel plate ionization chamber and EBT3 film and calculated by eMC and GGPB algorithms were compared. The measured and calculated data were then compared to find which algorithm calculates peripheral dose distribution more accurately. Results: The agreement between measurement and eMC was better than GGPB. The TPS underestimated the out of field doses. The difference between measured and calculated doses increase with the cone size. The largest deviation between calculated and parallel plate ionization chamber measured dose is less than 4.93% for eMC, but it can increase up to 7.51% for GGPB. For film measurement, the minimum gamma analysis passing rates between measured and calculated dose distributions were 98.2% and 92.7% for eMC and GGPB respectively for all field sizes and energies. Conclusion: Our results show that the Monte Carlo algorithm for electron planning in Eclipse is more accurate than previous algorithms for peripheral dose distributions. It must be emphasized that the use of GGPB for planning large field treatments with 6 MeV could lead to inaccuracies of clinical significance.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4955680},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}