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.

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 (6/18 MV), 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.