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

Title: SU-F-T-372: Surface and Peripheral Dose in Compensator-Based FFF Beam IMRT

Abstract

Purpose: Flattening filter free (FFF) beams produce higher dose rates. Combined with compensator IMRT techniques, the dose delivery for each beam can be much shorter compared to the flattened beam MLC-based or compensator-based IMRT. This ‘snap shot’ IMRT delivery is beneficial to patients for tumor motion management. Due to softer energy, surface doses in FFF beam treatment are usually higher than those from flattened beams. Because of less scattering due to no flattening filter, peripheral doses are usually lower in FFF beam treatment. However, in compensator-based IMRT using FFF beams, the compensator is in the beam pathway. Does it introduce beam hardening effects and scattering such that the surface dose is lower and peripheral dose is higher compared to FFF beam MLC-based IMRT? Methods: This study applied Monte Carlo techniques to investigate the surface and peripheral doses in compensator-based IMRT using FFF beams and compared it to the MLC-based IMRT using FFF beams and flattened beams. Besides various thicknesses of copper slabs to simulate various thicknesses of compensators, a simple cone-shaped compensator was simulated to mimic a clinical application. The dose distribution in water phantom by the cone-shaped compensator was then simulated by multiple MLC defined FFF and flattened beamsmore » with various openings. After normalized to Dmax, the surface and peripheral dose was compared between the FFF beam compensator-based IMRT and FFF/flattened beam MLC-based IMRT. Results: The surface dose at the central 0.5mm depth was close between the compensator and 6FFF MLC dose distributions, and about 8% (of Dmax) higher than the flattened 6MV MLC dose. At 8cm off axis at dmax, the peripheral dose between the 6FFF and flattened 6MV MLC demonstrated similar doses, while the compensator dose was about 1% higher. Conclusion: Compensator does not reduce the surface doses but slightly increases the peripheral doses due to scatter inside compensator.« less

Authors:
 [1]; ; ; ; ; ;  [2]
  1. University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA (United States)
  2. H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22648970
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; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; BEAMS; DOSE RATES; MONTE CARLO METHOD; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIOTHERAPY; SCATTERING; SIMULATION

Citation Formats

Zhang, D, Feygelman, V, Moros, E, Latifi, K, Hoffe, S, Frakes, J, and Zhang, G. SU-F-T-372: Surface and Peripheral Dose in Compensator-Based FFF Beam IMRT. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956557.
Zhang, D, Feygelman, V, Moros, E, Latifi, K, Hoffe, S, Frakes, J, & Zhang, G. SU-F-T-372: Surface and Peripheral Dose in Compensator-Based FFF Beam IMRT. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956557.
Zhang, D, Feygelman, V, Moros, E, Latifi, K, Hoffe, S, Frakes, J, and Zhang, G. 2016. "SU-F-T-372: Surface and Peripheral Dose in Compensator-Based FFF Beam IMRT". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956557.
@article{osti_22648970,
title = {SU-F-T-372: Surface and Peripheral Dose in Compensator-Based FFF Beam IMRT},
author = {Zhang, D and Feygelman, V and Moros, E and Latifi, K and Hoffe, S and Frakes, J and Zhang, G},
abstractNote = {Purpose: Flattening filter free (FFF) beams produce higher dose rates. Combined with compensator IMRT techniques, the dose delivery for each beam can be much shorter compared to the flattened beam MLC-based or compensator-based IMRT. This ‘snap shot’ IMRT delivery is beneficial to patients for tumor motion management. Due to softer energy, surface doses in FFF beam treatment are usually higher than those from flattened beams. Because of less scattering due to no flattening filter, peripheral doses are usually lower in FFF beam treatment. However, in compensator-based IMRT using FFF beams, the compensator is in the beam pathway. Does it introduce beam hardening effects and scattering such that the surface dose is lower and peripheral dose is higher compared to FFF beam MLC-based IMRT? Methods: This study applied Monte Carlo techniques to investigate the surface and peripheral doses in compensator-based IMRT using FFF beams and compared it to the MLC-based IMRT using FFF beams and flattened beams. Besides various thicknesses of copper slabs to simulate various thicknesses of compensators, a simple cone-shaped compensator was simulated to mimic a clinical application. The dose distribution in water phantom by the cone-shaped compensator was then simulated by multiple MLC defined FFF and flattened beams with various openings. After normalized to Dmax, the surface and peripheral dose was compared between the FFF beam compensator-based IMRT and FFF/flattened beam MLC-based IMRT. Results: The surface dose at the central 0.5mm depth was close between the compensator and 6FFF MLC dose distributions, and about 8% (of Dmax) higher than the flattened 6MV MLC dose. At 8cm off axis at dmax, the peripheral dose between the 6FFF and flattened 6MV MLC demonstrated similar doses, while the compensator dose was about 1% higher. Conclusion: Compensator does not reduce the surface doses but slightly increases the peripheral doses due to scatter inside compensator.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956557},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: Beam orientation optimization in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is computationally intensive, and various single beam ranking techniques have been proposed to reduce the search space. Up to this point, none of the existing ranking techniques considers the clinically important dose-volume effects of the involved structures, which may lead to clinically irrelevant angular ranking. The purpose of this work is to develop a clinically sensible angular ranking model with incorporation of dose-volume effects and to show its utility for IMRT beam placement. Methods and Materials: The general consideration in constructing this angular ranking function is that a beamlet/beam is preferablemore » if it can deliver a higher dose to the target without exceeding the tolerance of the sensitive structures located on the path of the beamlet/beam. In the previously proposed dose-based approach, the beamlets are treated independently and, to compute the maximally deliverable dose to the target volume, the intensity of each beamlet is pushed to its maximum intensity without considering the values of other beamlets. When volumetric structures are involved, the complication arises from the fact that there are numerous dose distributions corresponding to the same dose-volume tolerance. In this situation, the beamlets are not independent and an optimization algorithm is required to find the intensity profile that delivers the maximum target dose while satisfying the volumetric constraints. In this study, the behavior of a volumetric organ was modeled by using the equivalent uniform dose (EUD). A constrained sequential quadratic programming algorithm (CFSQP) was used to find the beam profile that delivers the maximum dose to the target volume without violating the EUD constraint or constraints. To assess the utility of the proposed technique, we planned a head-and-neck and abdominal case with and without the guidance of the angular ranking information. The qualities of the two types of IMRT plans were compared quantitatively. Results: An effective angular ranking model with consideration of volumetric effect has been developed. It is shown that the previously reported dose-based angular ranking represents a special case of the general formalism proposed here. Application of the technique to a abdominal and a head-and-neck IMRT case indicated that the proposed technique is capable of producing clinically sensible angular ranking. In both cases, we found that the IMRT plans obtained under the guidance of EUD-based angular ranking were improved in comparison with that obtained using the conventional uniformly spaced beams. Conclusions: The EUD-based function is a general approach for angular ranking and allows us to identify the potentially good and bad angles for clinically complicated cases. The ranking can be used either as a guidance to facilitate the manual beam placement or as prior information to speed up the computer search for the optimal beam configuration. Thus the proposed technique should have positive clinical impact in facilitating the IMRT planning process.« less
  • Compared with multileaf collimator (MLC)-based intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for moving targets, compensator-based IMRT has advantages such as shorter beam-on time, fewer monitor units with potentially decreased secondary carcinogenesis risk, better optimization-to-deliverable dose conversion, and often better dose conformity. Some of the disadvantages include additional time for the compensators to be built and delivered, as well as extra cost. Patients undergoing treatment of abdominal cancers often experience weight loss. It would be necessary to account for this change in weight with a new plan and a second set of compensators. However, this would result in treatment delays and added costs. Wemore » have developed a method to re-plan the patient using the same set of compensators. Because the weight changes seen with the treatment of abdominal cancers are usually relatively small, a new 4D computed tomography (CT) acquired in the treatment position with markers on the original isocenter tattoos can be registered to the original planning scan. The contours of target volumes from the original scans are copied to the new scan after fusion. The original compensator set can be used together with a few field-in-field (FiF) beams defined by the MLC (or beams with cerrobend blocks for accelerators not equipped with a MLC). The weights of the beams with compensators are reduced so that the FiF or blocked beams can be optimized to mirror the original plan and dose distribution. Seven abdominal cancer cases are presented using this technique. The new plan on the new planning CT images usually has the same dosimetric quality as the original. The target coverage and dose uniformity are improved compared with the plan without FiF/block modification. Techniques combining additional FiF or blocked beams with the original compensators optimize the treatment plans when patients lose weight and save time and cost compared with generating plans with a new set of compensators.« less
  • Purpose: Compensator-based IMRT coupled with the high dose rate flattening filter free (FFF) beams offers an intriguing possibility of delivering an intensity modulated radiation field in just a few seconds. As a first step, the authors evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of the treatment planning system (TPS) FFF beam model with compensators. Methods: A 6 MV FFF beam from a TrueBeam accelerator (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto CA) was modeled in PINNACLE TPS (v. 9.0, Philips Radiation Oncology, Fitchburg WI). Flat brass slabs from 0.3 to 7 cm thick and an 18 deg. brass wedge were used to adjust the beammore » model. A 2D (MAPCHECK) and 3D (ARCCHECK) diode arrays (Sun Nuclear Corp, Melbourne FL), were investigated for use with the compensator FFF beams. Corrections for diode sensitivity caused by the spectral changes in the beam were introduced. Four compensator plans based on the AAPM TG-119 report were developed. A composite ion chamber measurement, beam by beam MAPCHECK measurements, and a composite ARCCHECK measurement were performed. The array results were analyzed with the same thresholds as in TG-119 report--3%/3 mm with global dose normalization--as well as with the more stringent combinations of the gamma analysis criteria. Results: The FFF beam shows a greater variation of the effective attenuation coefficient with brass thickness due to the prevalence of the low energy photons compared to the conventional 6X beam. As a result, a compromise had to be made while trying to achieve dose agreement for a combination of field sizes, brass thicknesses, and measurement depths ({>=}5 cm in water). An agreement of measured and calculated dose to within 1% was observed for brass thicknesses up to 2 cm. For the 3 cm slab, an error of up to 2.8% was noted for the field sizes above 10 x 10 cm{sup 2}, and up to 3.8% for the 5 x 5 cm{sup 2} field. Both diode arrays exhibit a substantial sensitivity drop as the compensator thickness increases, reaching 10% for a 7 cm brass slab. A simple correction based on the brass thickness along the ray was introduced to counteract this effect. Pooled for five profiles, the average ratio of uncorrected and corrected MAPCHECK to ion chamber readings are 0.966 and 1.008, respectively. With the proper correction, all MAPCHECK measurement to calculation comparisons exhibit 100%{gamma}(3%/3 mm) passing rates with global dose-error normalization. For the TG-119-type plans, the average {gamma}(2%/2 mm) passing rate with local normalization is 94% (range 87.8%-98.3%). The lower ARCCHECK{gamma}-analysis passing rates (corrected for diode sensitivity) are predictable based on the observed PDD discrepancies. However, with the 3%/3 mm thresholds and global normalization, the average {gamma}-analysis passing rate is 96.4% (range 89.9%-100%). Conclusions: MAPCHECK analysis demonstrates high passing rates with the stringent {gamma}(2%/2 mm) and local normalization criteria combination. The geometry of the ARCCHECK array creates a stress test for the FFF TPS model because of the shallow depth of the entrance diodes and large air cavity. Hence, the ARCCHECK{gamma}-analysis passing rates are lower than with the MAPCHECK, while still on par with TG-119.« less
  • Purpose: To study the dosimetric properties of cadmium free alloy which is used in compensator based IMRT. Methods: A mixture of 30% of lead,52% of bismuth and 18% of tin was used to prepare alloy. We prepared slabs of different thicknesses ranging from 0.71 cm to 6.14 cm. Density of alloy was measured by Archimedes’ principle using SI-234 Denver instrument and water as buoyant liquid. Transmission, linear attenuation coefficient (µ), tissue phantom ration (TPR), beam hardening, surface dose (Ds), percentage depth dose (PDD) and effect of scatter were measured and analyze for different field size and different thickness of compensatormore » for 6 MV photon beam. Measurements were carried out at 100 cm SSD and 160 cm SSD. Results: Density of alloy was found to be 9.5456 gm/cm3. Melting point of alloy is 90–95 °C. For a field size of 10×10 cm2 µ was 0.4253 cm-1 at 100 cm SSD. Calculated TPR was found to be within 3 % of measured TPR. Ds was found to be decreasing with increasing thickness of compensator. 1cm, 1.98 cm and 4.16 cm thick compensator slab decreased surface dose by 4.2%, 6.1% and 9.5% respectively for a field size of 10×10cm2 at 100 cm SSD. As field size increases Ds increases for a given compensator thickness. This is due to increase in amount of scattered dose from wider collimator opening. For smaller field size, PDDs are increased from 3.0% to 5.5% of open beam PDDs as compensator thickness increases from 1 cm to 6.14 cm at a depth of 10 cm in water. For larger field size variation in PDDs is not significant. Conclusion: High degree of modulation can be achieved from this compensator material, which is essential in compensator based IMRT. Dosimetric properties analyzed in this study establish this alloy as a reliable, cost effective, reusable compensator material.« less
  • This study was conducted to ascertain whether homogeneous target dose planning is suitable for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of peripheral lung cancer under appropriate breath-holding. For 20 peripheral lung tumors, paired dynamic conformal arc plans were generated by only adjusting the leaf margin to the planning target volume (PTV) edge for fulfilling the conditions such that the prescription isodose surface (IDS) encompassing exactly 95% of the PTV (PTV D{sub 95}) corresponds to 95% and 80% IDS, normalized to 100% at the PTV isocenter under a pencil beam (PB) algorithm with radiologic path length correction. These plans were recalculated using themore » x-ray voxel Monte Carlo (XVMC) algorithm under otherwise identical conditions, and then compared. Lesions abutting the parietal pleura or not were defined as edge or island tumors, respectively, and the influences of the target volume and its location relative to the chest wall on the target dose were examined. The median (range) leaf margin required for the 95% and 80% plans was 3.9 mm (1.3 to 5.0) and −1.2 mm (−1.8 to 0.1), respectively. Notably, the latter was significantly correlated negatively with PTV. In the 80% plans, the PTV D{sub 95} was slightly higher under XVMC, whereas the PTV D{sub 98} was significantly lower, irrespective of the dose calculation algorithm used. Other PTV and all gross tumor volume doses were significantly higher, while the lung doses outside the PTV were slightly lower. The target doses increased as a function of PTV and were significantly lower for island tumors than for edge tumors. In conclusion, inhomogeneous target dose planning using smaller leaf margin for a larger tumor volume was deemed suitable in ensuring more sufficient target dose while slightly reducing lung dose. In addition, more inhomogeneous target dose planning using <80% IDS (e.g., 70%) for PTV covering would be preferable for island tumors.« less