Accurate Monte Carlo simulations for nozzle design, commissioning and quality assurance for a proton radiation therapy facility.

Monte Carlo dosimetry calculations are essential methods in radiation therapy. To take full advantage of this tool, the beam delivery system has to be simulated in detail and the initial beam parameters have to be known accurately. The modeling of the beam delivery system itself opens various areas where Monte Carlo calculations prove extremely helpful, such as for design and commissioning of a therapy facility as well as for quality assurance verification. The gantry treatment nozzles at the Northeast Proton Therapy Center (NPTC) at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) were modeled in detail using the GEANT4.5.2 Monte Carlo code. For this purpose, various novel solutions for simulating irregular shaped objects in the beam path, like contoured scatterers, patient apertures or patient compensators, were found. The four-dimensional, in time and space, simulation of moving parts, such as the modulator wheel, was implemented. Further, the appropriate physics models and cross sections for proton therapy applications were defined. We present comparisons between measured data and simulations. These show that by modeling the treatment nozzle with millimeter accuracy, it is possible to reproduce measured dose distributions with an accuracy in range and modulation width, in the case of a spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP), of better than 1 mm. The excellent agreement demonstrates that the simulations can even be used to generate beam data for commissioning treatment planning systems. The Monte Carlo nozzle model was used to study mechanical optimization in terms of scattered radiation and secondary radiation in the design of the nozzles. We present simulations on the neutron background. Further, the Monte Carlo calculations supported commissioning efforts in understanding the sensitivity of beam characteristics and how these influence the dose delivered. We present the sensitivity of dose distributions in water with respect to various beam parameters and geometrical misalignments. This allows the definition of tolerances for quality assurance and the design of quality assurance procedures.

[1]  P Andreo,et al.  Monte Carlo and analytical calculation of proton pencil beams for computerized treatment plan optimization , 1997, Physics in medicine and biology.

[2]  H Paganetti,et al.  Nuclear interactions in proton therapy: dose and relative biological effect distributions originating from primary and secondary particles. , 2002, Physics in medicine and biology.

[3]  H Paganetti,et al.  Test of GEANT3 and GEANT4 nuclear models for 160 MeV protons stopping in CH2. , 2003, Medical physics.

[4]  P Andreo,et al.  Monte Carlo calculated stopping-power ratios, water/air, for clinical proton dosimetry (50-250 MeV). , 1997, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  Robert J. Schneider,et al.  Multiple Coulomb scattering of 160 MeV protons , 1993 .

[6]  H Paganetti,et al.  Nuclear interactions of 160 MeV protons stopping in copper: a test of Monte Carlo nuclear models. , 1999, Medical physics.

[7]  H Paganetti,et al.  Four-dimensional Monte Carlo simulation of time-dependent geometries , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  A M Koehler,et al.  Flattening of proton dose distributions for large-field radiotherapy. , 1977, Medical physics.

[9]  E Grusell,et al.  A general solution to charged particle beam flattening using an optimized dual-scattering-foil technique, with application to proton therapy beams. , 1994, Physics in medicine and biology.

[10]  Pedro Andreo,et al.  Stopping powers for the ion-chamber dosimetry of radiotherapeutic heavy-particle beams , 1992 .

[11]  Thomas Bortfeld,et al.  Beam delivery sequencing for intensity modulated proton therapy. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  M Goitein,et al.  Distal penetration of proton beams: the effects of air gaps between compensating bolus and patient. , 1989, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  M Goitein,et al.  Biophysical modelling of proton radiation effects based on amorphous track models , 2001, International journal of radiation biology.

[14]  M Goitein,et al.  Compensating for heterogeneities in proton radiation therapy. , 1984, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  G T Chen,et al.  Beam scanning for heavy charged particle radiotherapy. , 1983, Medical physics.

[16]  Robert J. Schneider,et al.  Range modulators for protons and heavy ions , 1975 .

[17]  Joseph F. Janni,et al.  Energy loss, range, path length, time-of-flight, straggling, multiple scattering, and nuclear interaction probability , 1982 .

[18]  H Paganetti,et al.  Monte Carlo method to study the proton fluence for treatment planning. , 1998, Medical physics.

[19]  Andy Buffler,et al.  Energy Spectra in the NAC Proton Therapy Beam , 1997 .

[20]  Uwe Titt,et al.  Neutron shielding verification measurements and simulations for a 235-MeV proton therapy center , 2002 .

[21]  T Kanai,et al.  Spot scanning system for proton radiotherapy. , 1980, Medical physics.

[22]  S Agosteo,et al.  Secondary neutron and photon dose in proton therapy. , 1998, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[23]  P Andreo,et al.  Constraints of the multiple-scattering theory of Molière in Monte Carlo simulations of the transport of charged particles. , 1993, Medical physics.