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

Title: SU-F-T-367: Using PRIMO, a PENELOPE-Based Software, to Improve the Small Field Dosimetry of Linear Accelerators

Abstract

Purpose: To calculate output correction factors for Varian Clinac 2100iX beams for seven small field detectors and use the values to determine the small field output factors for the linacs at Karolinska university hospital. Methods: Phase space files (psf) for square fields between 0.25cm and 10cm were calculated using the PENELOPE-based PRIMO software. The linac MC-model was tuned by comparing PRIMO-estimated and experimentally determined depth doses and lateral dose-profiles for 40cmx40cm fields. The calculated psf were used as radiation sources to calculate the correction factors of IBA and PTW detectors with the code penEasy/PENELOPE. Results: The optimal tuning parameters of the MClinac model in PRIMO were 5.4 MeV incident electron energy and zero energy spread, focal spot size and beam divergence. Correction factors obtained for the liquid ion chamber (PTW-T31018) are within 1% down to 0.5 cm fields. For unshielded diodes (IBA-EFD, IBA-SFD, PTW-T60017 and PTW-T60018) the corrections are up to 2% at intermediate fields (>1cm side), becoming down to −11% for fields smaller than 1cm. The shielded diode (IBA-PFD and PTW-T60016) corrections vary with field size from 0 to −4%. Volume averaging effects are found for most detectors in the presence of 0.25cm fields. Conclusion: Good agreement was foundmore » between correction factors based on PRIMO-generated psf and those from other publications. The calculated factors will be implemented in output factor measurements (using several detectors) in the clinic. PRIMO is a userfriendly general code capable of generating small field psf and can be used without having to code own linac geometries. It can therefore be used to improve the clinical dosimetry, especially in the commissioning of linear accelerators. Important dosimetry data, such as dose-profiles and output factors can be determined more accurately for a specific machine, geometry and setup by using PRIMO and having a MC-model of the detector used.« less

Authors:
;  [1];  [2];  [3]
  1. Department of Medical Physics, Karolinska University Hospital (Sweden)
  2. NCTeam, Strahlenklinik, Universitatsklinikum Essen (Germany)
  3. Institut de Tecniques Energetiques, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya (Spain)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22648965
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:
43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS; COMPUTER CODES; CORRECTIONS; DOSIMETRY; LINEAR ACCELERATORS; LIQUID IONIZATION CHAMBERS; MEV RANGE 01-10; PHASE SPACE

Citation Formats

Benmakhlouf, H, Andreo, P, Brualla, L, and Sempau, J. SU-F-T-367: Using PRIMO, a PENELOPE-Based Software, to Improve the Small Field Dosimetry of Linear Accelerators. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956552.
Benmakhlouf, H, Andreo, P, Brualla, L, & Sempau, J. SU-F-T-367: Using PRIMO, a PENELOPE-Based Software, to Improve the Small Field Dosimetry of Linear Accelerators. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956552.
Benmakhlouf, H, Andreo, P, Brualla, L, and Sempau, J. 2016. "SU-F-T-367: Using PRIMO, a PENELOPE-Based Software, to Improve the Small Field Dosimetry of Linear Accelerators". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956552.
@article{osti_22648965,
title = {SU-F-T-367: Using PRIMO, a PENELOPE-Based Software, to Improve the Small Field Dosimetry of Linear Accelerators},
author = {Benmakhlouf, H and Andreo, P and Brualla, L and Sempau, J},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To calculate output correction factors for Varian Clinac 2100iX beams for seven small field detectors and use the values to determine the small field output factors for the linacs at Karolinska university hospital. Methods: Phase space files (psf) for square fields between 0.25cm and 10cm were calculated using the PENELOPE-based PRIMO software. The linac MC-model was tuned by comparing PRIMO-estimated and experimentally determined depth doses and lateral dose-profiles for 40cmx40cm fields. The calculated psf were used as radiation sources to calculate the correction factors of IBA and PTW detectors with the code penEasy/PENELOPE. Results: The optimal tuning parameters of the MClinac model in PRIMO were 5.4 MeV incident electron energy and zero energy spread, focal spot size and beam divergence. Correction factors obtained for the liquid ion chamber (PTW-T31018) are within 1% down to 0.5 cm fields. For unshielded diodes (IBA-EFD, IBA-SFD, PTW-T60017 and PTW-T60018) the corrections are up to 2% at intermediate fields (>1cm side), becoming down to −11% for fields smaller than 1cm. The shielded diode (IBA-PFD and PTW-T60016) corrections vary with field size from 0 to −4%. Volume averaging effects are found for most detectors in the presence of 0.25cm fields. Conclusion: Good agreement was found between correction factors based on PRIMO-generated psf and those from other publications. The calculated factors will be implemented in output factor measurements (using several detectors) in the clinic. PRIMO is a userfriendly general code capable of generating small field psf and can be used without having to code own linac geometries. It can therefore be used to improve the clinical dosimetry, especially in the commissioning of linear accelerators. Important dosimetry data, such as dose-profiles and output factors can be determined more accurately for a specific machine, geometry and setup by using PRIMO and having a MC-model of the detector used.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956552},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: To determine detector-specific output correction factors,k{sub Q} {sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n}}}} {sub ,Q} {sub m{sub s{sub r}}} {sup f{sub {sup {sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n}{sub {sup ,f{sub {sup {sub m}{sub s}{sub r}{sub ,}}}}}}}} in 6 MV small photon beams for air and liquid ionization chambers, silicon diodes, and diamond detectors from two manufacturers. Methods: Field output factors, defined according to the international formalism published byAlfonso et al. [Med. Phys. 35, 5179–5186 (2008)], relate the dosimetry of small photon beams to that of the machine-specific reference field; they include a correction to measured ratios of detector readings, conventionally usedmore » as output factors in broad beams. Output correction factors were calculated with the PENELOPE Monte Carlo (MC) system with a statistical uncertainty (type-A) of 0.15% or lower. The geometries of the detectors were coded using blueprints provided by the manufacturers, and phase-space files for field sizes between 0.5 × 0.5 cm{sup 2} and 10 × 10 cm{sup 2} from a Varian Clinac iX 6 MV linac used as sources. The output correction factors were determined scoring the absorbed dose within a detector and to a small water volume in the absence of the detector, both at a depth of 10 cm, for each small field and for the reference beam of 10 × 10 cm{sup 2}. Results: The Monte Carlo calculated output correction factors for the liquid ionization chamber and the diamond detector were within about ±1% of unity even for the smallest field sizes. Corrections were found to be significant for small air ionization chambers due to their cavity dimensions, as expected. The correction factors for silicon diodes varied with the detector type (shielded or unshielded), confirming the findings by other authors; different corrections for the detectors from the two manufacturers were obtained. The differences in the calculated factors for the various detectors were analyzed thoroughly and whenever possible the results were compared to published data, often calculated for different accelerators and using the EGSnrc MC system. The differences were used to estimate a type-B uncertainty for the correction factors. Together with the type-A uncertainty from the Monte Carlo calculations, an estimation of the combined standard uncertainty was made, assigned to the mean correction factors from various estimates. Conclusions: The present work provides a consistent and specific set of data for the output correction factors of a broad set of detectors in a Varian Clinac iX 6 MV accelerator and contributes to improving the understanding of the physics of small photon beams. The correction factors cannot in general be neglected for any detector and, as expected, their magnitude increases with decreasing field size. Due to the reduced number of clinical accelerator types currently available, it is suggested that detector output correction factors be given specifically for linac models and field sizes, rather than for a beam quality specifier that necessarily varies with the accelerator type and field size due to the different electron spot dimensions and photon collimation systems used by each accelerator model.« less
  • Purpose: The Elekta beam modulator linac employs a 4-mm micro multileaf collimator (MLC) backed by a fixed jaw. Out-of-field dose discrepancies between treatment planning system (TPS) calculations and output water phantom measurements are caused by the 1-mm leaf gap required for all moving MLCs in a VMAT arc. In this study, MLC parameters are optimized to improve TPS out-of-field dose approximations. Methods: Static 2.4 cm square fields were created with a 1-mm leaf gap for MLCs that would normally park behind the jaw. Doses in the open field and leaf gap were measured with an A16 micro ion chamber andmore » EDR2 film for comparison with corresponding point doses in the Pinnacle TPS. The MLC offset table and tip radius were adjusted until TPS point doses agreed with photon measurements. Improvements to the beam models were tested using static arcs consisting of square fields ranging from 1.6 to 14.0 cm, with 45° collimator rotation, and 1-mm leaf gap to replicate VMAT conditions. Gamma values for the 3-mm distance, 3% dose difference criteria were evaluated using standard QA procedures with a cylindrical detector array. Results: The best agreement in point doses within the leaf gap and open field was achieved by offsetting the default rounded leaf end table by 0.1 cm and adjusting the leaf tip radius to 13 cm. Improvements in TPS models for 6 and 10 MV photon beams were more significant for smaller field sizes 3.6 cm or less where the initial gamma factors progressively increased as field size decreased, i.e. for a 1.6cm field size, the Gamma increased from 56.1% to 98.8%. Conclusion: The MLC optimization techniques developed will achieve greater dosimetric accuracy in small field VMAT treatment plans for fixed jaw linear accelerators. Accurate predictions of dose to organs at risk may reduce adverse effects of radiotherapy.« less
  • Purpose: To commission and evaluate an in vivo EPID-based transit dosimetry software (EPIgray, DOSIsoft, Cachan, France) using simple fields and TG119-based IMRT treatment plans. Methods: EPIgray was commissioned on a Truebeam based on finite tissue-maximum ratio (fTMR) measurements with solid water blocks of thicknesses between 0 and 37 cm. Field sizes varied from 2×2 to 20×20 cm{sup 2}. Subsequently, treatment plans of single and opposed beams with field sizes between 4×4 and 15×15 cm{sup 2} as well as IMRT plans were measured to evaluate the dose reconstruction accuracy. Single field dose predictions were made for anterior-posterior and lateral beams. IMRTmore » plans were created based on TG119 recommendations. The reconstructed dose was compared to the planned dose for selected points at isocenter and away from isocenter. Results: For single square fields, the dose in EPIgray was reconstructed within 3% accuracy at isocenter relative to the planned dose. Similarly, the relative deviation of the total dose was accurately reconstructed within 3% for all IMRT plans with points placed inside a high dose region near the isocenter. Predictions became less accurate than 5% when the evaluation point was outside the majority of IMRT beam segments. Additionally, points 5 cm or more away from the isocenter or within an avoidance structure were predicted less reliably. Conclusion: EPIgray formalism accuracy is adequate for an efficient error detection system. It provides immediate intra-fractional feedback on the delivery of treatment plans without affecting the treatment beam. Besides the EPID, no additional hardware is required, which makes it accessible to all clinics. The software evaluates point dose measurements to verify treatment plan delivery and patient positioning within 5% accuracy, depending on the placement of evaluation points. EPIgray is not intended to replace patient-specific quality assurance but should be utilized as an additional layer of safety for continuous patient treatment verification. This research is supported by DOSIsoft.« less
  • Purpose: The scope of this study was to determine a complete set of correction factors for several detectors in static small photon fields for two linear accelerators (linacs) and for several detectors. Methods: Measurements for Monte Carlo (MC) commissioning were performed for two linacs, Siemens Primus and Elekta Synergy. After having determined the source parameters that best fit the measurements of field specific output factors, profiles, and tissue-phantom ratio, the generalized version of the classical beam quality correction factor for static small fields, k{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}},more » were determined for several types of detectors by using the egs{sub c}hamber Monte Carlo user code which can accurately reproduce the geometry and the material composition of the detector. The influence of many parameters (energy and radial FWHM of the electron beam source, field dimensions, type of accelerator) on the value of k{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}} was evaluated. Moreover, a MC analysis of the parameters that influence the change of k{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}} as a function of field dimension was performed. A detailed analysis of uncertainties related to the measurements of the field specific output factor and to the Monte Carlo calculation of k{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}} was done. Results: The simulations demonstrated that the correction factor k{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}} can be considered independent from the quality beam factor Q in the range 0.68 {+-} 0.01 for all the detectors analyzed. The k{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}} of PTW 60012 and EDGE diodes can be assumed dependent only on the field size, for fields down to 0.5 x 0.5 cm{sup 2}. The microLion, and the microchambers, instead, must be used with some caution because they exhibit a slight dependence on the radial FWHM of the electron source, and therefore, a correction factor only dependent on field size can be used for fields {>=}0.75 x 0.75 and {>=}1.0 x 1.0 cm{sup 2}, respectively. The analysis of uncertainties gave an estimate of uncertainty for the 0.5 x 0.5 cm{sup 2} field of about 0.7% (1{sigma}) for k{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}} factor and of about 1.0% (1{sigma}) for the field output factor, {Omega}{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}}, of diodes, microchambers, and microLion. Conclusions: Stereotactic diodes with the appropriate k{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}} are recommended for determining {Omega}{sub Q{sub c{sub l{sub i{sub n,Q{sub m{sub s{sub r}{sup f{sub c}{sub l}{sub i}{sub n},f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}}}}}}}}} of small photon beams.« less
  • Electron-beam characteristics of a Philips SL25 linear accelerator have been studied. Central-axis percentage depth doses, cross-beam profiles and beam output factors of 6-, 10-, and 20-MeV beams, selected from the available energy range of 4 to 22 MeV, are reported in this paper. The main thrust of this work is to determine the systematic variation of beam characteristics, especially the output factor, with standard cone sizes and cerrobend beam-shaping cutouts down to a field size of 2{times}2 cm Output factors for the standard cones (open field) are energy dependent in a complex manner, increasing with the cone size for themore » 6-MeV beam whereas decreasing for 10- and 20-MeV beams. The output factor falls below unity at lower energies (6 and 10 MeV) for fields with at least one side smaller than 6 cm, and stays nearly constant for the 20-MeV beam. Measured output factors of small fields are least squares fitted by a second-order polynomial function. Output factors for small rectangular fields have been derived from the one-dimensional and square-root formulas, and the equivalent-square method. Only the one-dimensional formula predicts the measured output factors of highly elongated fields to within {plus minus}1% experimental uncertainties. Different cones with the same size electron cutout show a varied dose response, primarily due to variation in scattered electron contamination from the cones.« less