Verification of intensity modulated stereotactic radiotherapy using Monte Carlo calculations and EPID dosimetry

The purpose of this work was to develop a comprehensive IMSRT QA procedure that examined, using EPID dosimetry and Monte Carlo (MC) calculations, each step in the treatment planning and delivery process. These steps included verification of the field shaping, treatment planning system (RTPS) dose calculations, and patient dose delivery. Verification of each step in the treatment process is assumed to result in correct dose delivery to the patient. ^ The accelerator MC model was verified against commissioning data for field sizes from 0.8 × 0.8 cm 2 to 10 × 10 cm 2. Depth doses were within 2% local percent difference (LPD) in low gradient regions and 1 mm distance to agreement (DTA) in high gradient regions. Lateral profiles were within 2% LPD in low gradient regions and 1 mm DTA in high gradient regions. Calculated output factors were within 1% of measurement for field sizes ≥1 × 1 cm2. ^ The measured and calculated pretreatment EPID dose patterns were compared using criteria of 5% LPD, 1 mm DTA, or 2% of central axis pixel value with ≥95% of compared points required to pass for successful verification. Pretreatment field verification resulted in 97% percent of the points passing. ^ The RTPS and Monte Carlo phantom dose calculations were compared using 5% LPD, 2 mm DTA, or 2% of the maximum dose with ≥95% of compared points required passing for successful verification. RTPS calculation verification resulted in 97% percent of the points passing. ^ The measured and calculated EPID exit dose patterns were compared using criteria of 5% LPD, 1 mm DTA, or 2% of central axis pixel value with ≥95% of compared points required to pass for successful verification. Exit dose verification resulted in 97% percent of the points passing. ^ Each of the processes above verified an individual step in the treatment planning and delivery process. The combination of these verification steps ensures accurate treatment delivery to the patient. This work shows that Monte Carlo calculations and EPID dosimetry can be used to quantitatively verify IMSRT treatments resulting in improved patient care and, potentially, improved clinical outcome. ^

Monte Carlo and analytical dose calculations for ocular proton therapy

Uveal melanoma is a rare but life-threatening form of ocular cancer. Contemporary treatment techniques include proton therapy, which enables conservation of the eye and its useful vision. Dose to the proximal structures is widely believed to play a role in treatment side effects, therefore, reliable dose estimates are required for properly evaluating the therapeutic value and complication risk of treatment plans. Unfortunately, current simplistic dose calculation algorithms can result in errors of up to 30% in the proximal region. In addition, they lack predictive methods for absolute dose per monitor unit (D/MU) values. ^ To facilitate more accurate dose predictions, a Monte Carlo model of an ocular proton nozzle was created and benchmarked against measured dose profiles to within ±3% or ±0.5 mm and D/MU values to within ±3%. The benchmarked Monte Carlo model was used to develop and validate a new broad beam dose algorithm that included the influence of edgescattered protons on the cross-field intensity profile, the effect of energy straggling in the distal portion of poly-energetic beams, and the proton fluence loss as a function of residual range. Generally, the analytical algorithm predicted relative dose distributions that were within ±3% or ±0.5 mm and absolute D/MU values that were within ±3% of Monte Carlo calculations. Slightly larger dose differences were observed at depths less than 7 mm, an effect attributed to the dose contributions of edge-scattered protons. Additional comparisons of Monte Carlo and broad beam dose predictions were made in a detailed eye model developed in this work, with generally similar findings. ^ Monte Carlo was shown to be an excellent predictor of the measured dose profiles and D/MU values and a valuable tool for developing and validating a broad beam dose algorithm for ocular proton therapy. The more detailed physics modeling by the Monte Carlo and broad beam dose algorithms represent an improvement in the accuracy of relative dose predictions over current techniques, and they provide absolute dose predictions. It is anticipated these improvements can be used to develop treatment strategies that reduce the incidence or severity of treatment complications by sparing normal tissue. ^

BENCHMARKING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW INDEPENDENT MONTE CARLO DOSE CALCULATION QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT TOOL FOR CLINICAL TRIALS

Introduction Commercial treatment planning systems employ a variety of dose calculation algorithms to plan and predict the dose distributions a patient receives during external beam radiation therapy. Traditionally, the Radiological Physics Center has relied on measurements to assure that institutions participating in the National Cancer Institute sponsored clinical trials administer radiation in doses that are clinically comparable to those of other participating institutions. To complement the effort of the RPC, an independent dose calculation tool needs to be developed that will enable a generic method to determine patient dose distributions in three dimensions and to perform retrospective analysis of radiation delivered to patients who enrolled in past clinical trials. Methods A multi-source model representing output for Varian 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams was developed and evaluated. The Monte Carlo algorithm, know as the Dose Planning Method (DPM), was used to perform the dose calculations. The dose calculations were compared to measurements made in a water phantom and in anthropomorphic phantoms. Intensity modulated radiation therapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy techniques were used with the anthropomorphic phantoms. Finally, past patient treatment plans were selected and recalculated using DPM and contrasted against a commercial dose calculation algorithm. Results The multi-source model was validated for the Varian 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams. The benchmark evaluations demonstrated the ability of the model to accurately calculate dose for the Varian 6 MV and the Varian 10 MV source models. The patient calculations proved that the model was reproducible in determining dose under similar conditions described by the benchmark tests. Conclusions The dose calculation tool that relied on a multi-source model approach and used the DPM code to calculate dose was developed, validated, and benchmarked for the Varian 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams. Several patient dose distributions were contrasted against a commercial algorithm to provide a proof of principal to use as an application in monitoring clinical trial activity.

A 3-D CT assisted Monte Carlo evaluation of intracavitary brachytherapy implants

Intracavitary brachytherapy (ICB) combined with external beam irradiation for treatment of cervical cancer is highly successful in achieving local control. The M.D. Anderson Cancer Center employs Fletcher Suit Delclos (FSD) applicators. FSD applicators contain shields to limit dose to critical structures. Dosimetric evaluation of ICB implants is limited to assessing dose at reference points. These points serve as surrogates for treatment intensity and critical structure dose. Several studies have mentioned that the ICRU38 reference points inadequately characterize the dose distribution. Also, the ovoid shields are rarely considered in dosimetry. ^ The goal of this dissertation was to ascertain the influence of the ovoid shields on patient dose distributions. Monte Carlo dosimetry (MCD) was applied to patient computed tomography(CT) scans. These data were analyzed to determine the effect of the shields on dose to standard reference points and the bladder and rectum. The hypothesis of this work is that the ICRU38 bladder and rectal points computed conventionally are not clinically acceptable surrogates for the maximum dose points as determined by MCD. ^ MCD was applied to the tandem and ovoids. The FSD ovoids and tandem were modeled in a single input file that allowed dose to be calculated for any patient. Dose difference surface histograms(DDSH) were computed for the bladder and rectum. Reference point doses were compared between shielded and unshielded ovoids, and a commercial treatment planning system. ^ The results of this work showed the tandem tip screw caused a 33% reduction in dose. The ovoid shields reduced the dose by a maximum of 48.9%. DDSHs revealed on average 5% of the bladder surface area was spared 53 cGy and 5% of the rectal surface area was spared 195 cGy. The ovoid shields on average reduced the dose by 18% for the bladder point and 25% for the rectal point. The Student's t-test revealed the ICRU38 bladder and rectal points do not predict the maximum dose for these organs. ^ It is concluded that modeling the tandem and ovoid internal structures is necessary for accurate dose calculations, the bladder shielding segments may not be necessary, and that the ICRU38 bladder point is irrelevant. ^

Pencil -beam redefinition algorithm dose calculations for electron therapy treatment planning

The electron pencil-beam redefinition algorithm (PBRA) of Shiu and Hogstrom has been developed for use in radiotherapy treatment planning (RTP). Earlier studies of Boyd and Hogstrom showed that the PBRA lacked an adequate incident beam model, that PBRA might require improved electron physics, and that no data existed which allowed adequate assessment of the PBRA-calculated dose accuracy in a heterogeneous medium such as one presented by patient anatomy. The hypothesis of this research was that by addressing the above issues the PBRA-calculated dose would be accurate to within 4% or 2 mm in regions of high dose gradients. A secondary electron source was added to the PBRA to account for collimation-scattered electrons in the incident beam. Parameters of the dual-source model were determined from a minimal data set to allow ease of beam commissioning. Comparisons with measured data showed 3% or better dose accuracy in water within the field for cases where 4% accuracy was not previously achievable. A measured data set was developed that allowed an evaluation of PBRA in regions distal to localized heterogeneities. Geometries in the data set included irregular surfaces and high- and low-density internal heterogeneities. The data was estimated to have 1% precision and 2% agreement with accurate, benchmarked Monte Carlo (MC) code. PBRA electron transport was enhanced by modeling local pencil beam divergence. This required fundamental changes to the mathematics of electron transport (divPBRA). Evaluation of divPBRA with the measured data set showed marginal improvement in dose accuracy when compared to PBRA; however, 4% or 2mm accuracy was not achieved by either PBRA version for all data points. Finally, PBRA was evaluated clinically by comparing PBRA- and MC-calculated dose distributions using site-specific patient RTP data. Results show PBRA did not agree with MC to within 4% or 2mm in a small fraction (<3%) of the irradiated volume. Although the hypothesis of the research was shown to be false, the minor dose inaccuracies should have little or no impact on RTP decisions or patient outcome. Therefore, given ease of beam commissioning, documentation of accuracy, and calculational speed, the PBRA should be considered a practical tool for clinical use. ^

A convolution model for energy transport in a therapeutic fast neutron beam

A three-dimensional model has been proposed that uses Monte Carlo and fast Fourier transform convolution techniques to calculate the dose distribution from a fast neutron beam. This method transports scattered neutrons and photons in the forward, lateral, and backward directions and protons, electrons, and positrons in the forward and lateral directions by convolving energy spread kernels with initial interaction available energy distributions. The primary neutron and photon spectrums have been derived from narrow beam attenuation measurements. The positions and strengths of the effective primary neutron, scattered neutron, and photon sources have been derived from dual ion chamber measurements. The size of the effective primary neutron source has been measured using a copper activation technique. Heterogeneous tissue calculations require a weighted sum of two convolutions for each component since the kernels must be invariant for FFT convolution. Comparisons between calculations and measurements were performed for several water and heterogeneous phantom geometries. ^

Electron intensity modulation for mixed-beam radiation therapy with an x-ray multi-leaf collimator

The current standard treatment for head and neck cancer at our institution uses intensity-modulated x-ray therapy (IMRT), which improves target coverage and sparing of critical structures by delivering complex fluence patterns from a variety of beam directions to conform dose distributions to the shape of the target volume. The standard treatment for breast patients is field-in-field forward-planned IMRT, with initial tangential fields and additional reduced-weight tangents with blocking to minimize hot spots. For these treatment sites, the addition of electrons has the potential of improving target coverage and sparing of critical structures due to rapid dose falloff with depth and reduced exit dose. In this work, the use of mixed-beam therapy (MBT), i.e., combined intensity-modulated electron and x-ray beams using the x-ray multi-leaf collimator (MLC), was explored. The hypothesis of this study was that addition of intensity-modulated electron beams to existing clinical IMRT plans would produce MBT plans that were superior to the original IMRT plans for at least 50% of selected head and neck and 50% of breast cases. Dose calculations for electron beams collimated by the MLC were performed with Monte Carlo methods. An automation system was created to facilitate communication between the dose calculation engine and the treatment planning system. Energy and intensity modulation of the electron beams was accomplished by dividing the electron beams into 2x2-cm2 beamlets, which were then beam-weight optimized along with intensity-modulated x-ray beams. Treatment plans were optimized to obtain equivalent target dose coverage, and then compared with the original treatment plans. MBT treatment plans were evaluated by participating physicians with respect to target coverage, normal structure dose, and overall plan quality in comparison with original clinical plans. The physician evaluations did not support the hypothesis for either site, with MBT selected as superior in 1 out of the 15 head and neck cases (p=1) and 6 out of 18 breast cases (p=0.95). While MBT was not shown to be superior to IMRT, reductions were observed in doses to critical structures distal to the target along the electron beam direction and to non-target tissues, at the expense of target coverage and dose homogeneity. ^

Proton therapy versus intensity modulated x-ray therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer: Estimating secondary cancer risks

External beam radiation therapy is used to treat nearly half of the more than 200,000 new cases of prostate cancer diagnosed in the United States each year. During a radiation therapy treatment, healthy tissues in the path of the therapeutic beam are exposed to high doses. In addition, the whole body is exposed to a low-dose bath of unwanted scatter radiation from the pelvis and leakage radiation from the treatment unit. As a result, survivors of radiation therapy for prostate cancer face an elevated risk of developing a radiogenic second cancer. Recently, proton therapy has been shown to reduce the dose delivered by the therapeutic beam to normal tissues during treatment compared to intensity modulated x-ray therapy (IMXT, the current standard of care). However, the magnitude of stray radiation doses from proton therapy, and their impact on this incidence of radiogenic second cancers, was not known. ^ The risk of a radiogenic second cancer following proton therapy for prostate cancer relative to IMXT was determined for 3 patients of large, median, and small anatomical stature. Doses delivered to healthy tissues from the therapeutic beam were obtained from treatment planning system calculations. Stray doses from IMXT were taken from the literature, while stray doses from proton therapy were simulated using a Monte Carlo model of a passive scattering treatment unit and an anthropomorphic phantom. Baseline risk models were taken from the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII report. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to characterize the uncertainty of risk calculations to uncertainties in the risk model, the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of neutrons for carcinogenesis, and inter-patient anatomical variations. ^ The risk projections revealed that proton therapy carries a lower risk for radiogenic second cancer incidence following prostate irradiation compared to IMXT. The sensitivity analysis revealed that the results of the risk analysis depended only weakly on uncertainties in the risk model and inter-patient variations. Second cancer risks were sensitive to changes in the RBE of neutrons. However, the findings of the study were qualitatively consistent for all patient sizes and risk models considered, and for all neutron RBE values less than 100. ^