Effects of collimator backscatter in an Elekta linac by Monte Carlo simulation

The effects of radiation backscattered from the secondary collimators into the monitor chamber in an Elekta linac (producing 6 and 10 MV photon beams) are investigated using BEAMnrc Monte Carlo simulations. The degree and effects of this backscattered radiation are assessed by evaluating the changes to the calculated dose in the monitor chamber, and by determining a correction factor for those changes. Additionally, the fluency and energy characteristics of particles entering the monitor chamber from the downstream direction are evaluated by examining BEAMnrc phase-space data. It is shown that the proportion of particles backscattered into the monitor chamber is small (<0.35 %), for all field sizes studied. However, when the backscatter plate is removed from the model linac, these backscattered particles generate a noticeable increase in dose to the monitor chamber (up to approximate to 2.4 % for the 6 MV beam and up to 4.4 % for the 10 MV beam). With its backscatter plate in place, the Elekta linac (operating at 6 and 10 MV) is subject to negligible variation of monitor chamber dose with field size. At these energies, output variations in photon beams produced by the clinical Elekta linear accelerator can be attributed to head scatter alone. Corrections for field-size-dependence of monitor chamber dose are not necessary when running Monte Carlo simulations of the Elekta linac operating at 6 and 10 MV.

Technical note : modelling a complex micro-multileaf collimator using the standard BEAMnrc distribution

Purpose: The component modules in the standard BEAMnrc distribution may appear to be insufficient to model micro-multileaf collimators that have tri-faceted leaf ends and complex leaf profiles. This note indicates, however, that accurate Monte Carlo simulations of radiotherapy beams defined by a complex collimation device can be completed using BEAMnrc's standard VARMLC component module.---------- Methods: That this simple collimator model can produce spatially and dosimetrically accurate micro-collimated fields is illustrated using comparisons with ion chamber and film measurements of the dose deposited by square and irregular fields incident on planar, homogeneous water phantoms.---------- Results: Monte Carlo dose calculations for on- and off-axis fields are shown to produce good agreement with experimental values, even upon close examination of the penumbrae.--------- Conclusions: The use of a VARMLC model of the micro-multileaf collimator, along with a commissioned model of the associated linear accelerator, is therefore recommended as an alternative to the development or use of in-house or third-party component modules for simulating stereotactic radiotherapy and radiosurgery treatments. Simulation parameters for the VARMLC model are provided which should allow other researchers to adapt and use this model to study clinical stereotactic radiotherapy treatments.

Adapting a generic BEAMnrc model of the BrainLAB m3 micro-multileaf collimator to simulate a local collimation device

This work is focussed on developing a commissioning procedure so that a Monte Carlo model, which uses BEAMnrc’s standard VARMLC component module, can be adapted to match a specific BrainLAB m3 micro-multileaf collimator (μMLC). A set of measurements are recommended, for use as a reference against which the model can be tested and optimised. These include radiochromic film measurements of dose from small and offset fields, as well as measurements of μMLC transmission and interleaf leakage. Simulations and measurements to obtain μMLC scatter factors are shown to be insensitive to relevant model parameters and are therefore not recommended, unless the output of the linear accelerator model is in doubt. Ultimately, this note provides detailed instructions for those intending to optimise a VARMLC model to match the dose delivered by their local BrainLAB m3 μMLC device.

Monte Carlo modeling of a 4 mm conical collimator for a Novalis Tx Linear Accelerator

The work presented in this poster outlines the steps taken to model a 4 mm conical collimator (BrainLab, Germany) on a Novalis Tx linear accelerator (Varian, Palo Alto, USA) capable of producing a 6MV photon beam for treatment of Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) patients. The verification of this model was performed by measurements in liquid water and in virtual water. The measurements involved scanning depth dose and profiles in a water tank plus measurement of output factors in virtual water using Gafchromic® EBT3 film.

Preliminary Experience in Treatment of Papillary and Macular Retinoblastoma: Evaluation of Local Control and Local Complications After Treatment with Linear Accelerator-Based Stereotactic Radiotherapy with Micromultileaf Collimator as Second-Line or Salvage Treatment after chemotherapy

To determine the local control and complication rates for children with papillary and/or macular retinoblastoma progressing after chemotherapy and undergoing stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) with a micromultileaf collimator.

Comparison of monte carlo collimator transport methods for photon treatment planning in radiotherapy

The aim of this work was a Monte Carlo (MC) based investigation of the impact of different radiation transport methods in collimators of a linear accelerator on photon beam characteristics, dose distributions, and efficiency. Thereby it is investigated if it is possible to use different simplifications in the radiation transport for some clinical situations in order to save calculation time.

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.

Assessment of Collimator Jaw Optimization in Reducing Normal Tissue Irradiation with Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy

Purpose: To evaluate normal tissue dose reduction in step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) on the Varian 2100 platform by tracking the multileaf collimator (MLC) apertures with the accelerator jaws. Methods: Clinical radiation treatment plans for 10 thoracic, 3 pediatric and 3 head and neck patients were converted to plans with the jaws tracking each segment’s MLC apertures. Each segment was then renormalized to account for the change in collimator scatter to obtain target coverage within 1% of that in the original plan. The new plans were compared to the original plans in a commercial radiation treatment planning system (TPS). Reduction in normal tissue dose was evaluated in the new plan by using the parameters V5, V10, and V20 in the cumulative dose-volume histogram for the following structures: total lung minus GTV (gross target volume), heart, esophagus, spinal cord, liver, parotids, and brainstem. In order to validate the accuracy of our beam model, MLC transmission measurements were made and compared to those predicted by the TPS. Results: The greatest change between the original plan and new plan occurred at lower dose levels. The reduction in V20 was never more than 6.3% and was typically less than 1% for all patients. The reduction in V5 was 16.7% maximum and was typically less than 3% for all patients. The variation in normal tissue dose reduction was not predictable, and we found no clear parameters that indicated which patients would benefit most from jaw tracking. Our TPS model of MLC transmission agreed with measurements with absolute transmission differences of less than 0.1 % and thus uncertainties in the model did not contribute significantly to the uncertainty in the dose determination. Conclusion: The amount of dose reduction achieved by collimating the jaws around each MLC aperture in step-and-shoot IMRT does not appear to be clinically significant.

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. ^