Dosimetric evaluation of a commercial proton spot scanning Monte-Carlo dose algorithm: comparisons against measurements and simulations

RaySearch Americas Inc. (NY) has introduced a commercial Monte Carlo dose algorithm (RS-MC) for routine clinical use in proton spot scanning. In this report, we provide a validation of this algorithm against phantom measurements and simulations in the GATE software package. We also compared the performance of the RayStation analytical algorithm (RS-PBA) against the RS-MC algorithm. A beam model (G-MC) for a spot scanning gantry at our proton center was implemented in the GATE software package. The model was validated against measurements in a water phantom and was used for benchmarking the RS-MC. Validation of the RS-MC was performed in a water phantom by measuring depth doses and profiles for three spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) beams with normal incidence, an SOBP with oblique incidence, and an SOBP with a range shifter and large air gap. The RS-MC was also validated against measurements and simulations in heterogeneous phantoms created by placing lung or bone slabs in a water phantom. Lateral dose profiles near the distal end of the beam were measured with a microDiamond detector and compared to the G-MC simulations, RS-MC and RS-PBA. Finally, the RS-MC and RS-PBA were validated against measured dose distributions in an Alderson-Rando (AR) phantom. Measurements were made using Gafchromic film in the AR phantom and compared to doses using the RS-PBA and RS-MC algorithms. For SOBP depth doses in a water phantom, all three algorithms matched the measurements to within  ±3% at all points and a range within 1 mm. The RS-PBA algorithm showed up to a 10% difference in dose at the entrance for the beam with a range shifter and  >30 cm air gap, while the RS-MC and G-MC were always within 3% of the measurement. For an oblique beam incident at 45°, the RS-PBA algorithm showed up to 6% local dose differences and broadening of distal fall-off by 5 mm. Both the RS-MC and G-MC accurately predicted the depth dose to within  ±3% and distal fall-off to within 2 mm. In an anthropomorphic phantom, the gamma index (dose tolerance  =  3%, distance-to-agreement  =  3 mm) was greater than 90% for six out of seven planes using the RS-MC, and three out seven for the RS-PBA. The RS-MC algorithm demonstrated improved dosimetric accuracy over the RS-PBA in the presence of homogenous, heterogeneous and anthropomorphic phantoms. The computation performance of the RS-MC was similar to the RS-PBA algorithm. For complex disease sites like breast, head and neck, and lung cancer, the RS-MC algorithm will provide significantly more accurate treatment planning.

[1]  M. A. Cortés-Giraldo,et al.  Recent developments in GEANT4 , 2016 .

[2]  Harald Paganetti,et al.  Quantification of proton dose calculation accuracy in the lung. , 2014, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  A. Dell'Acqua,et al.  Geant4 - A simulation toolkit , 2003 .

[4]  T Sasaki,et al.  Effect of inhomogeneity in a patient's body on the accuracy of the pencil beam algorithm in comparison to Monte Carlo , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  Harald Paganetti,et al.  Assessing the Clinical Impact of Approximations in Analytical Dose Calculations for Proton Therapy. , 2015, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  M. Marinelli,et al.  The role of a microDiamond detector in the dosimetry of proton pencil beams. , 2016, Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik.

[7]  D. Low,et al.  A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. , 1998, Medical physics.

[8]  M Goitein,et al.  A pencil beam algorithm for proton dose calculations. , 1996, Physics in medicine and biology.

[9]  H Paganetti,et al.  TOPAS: an innovative proton Monte Carlo platform for research and clinical applications. , 2012, Medical physics.

[10]  L Grevillot,et al.  A Monte Carlo pencil beam scanning model for proton treatment plan simulation using GATE/GEANT4 , 2011, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  Harald Paganetti,et al.  An algorithm to assess the need for clinical Monte Carlo dose calculation for small proton therapy fields based on quantification of tissue heterogeneity. , 2013, Medical physics.

[12]  E. Pedroni,et al.  Dose calculation models for proton treatment planning using a dynamic beam delivery system: an attempt to include density heterogeneity effects in the analytical dose calculation. , 1999, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  M. Fippel,et al.  A Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm for proton therapy. , 2004, Medical physics.

[14]  Matthias Fippel,et al.  A pencil beam algorithm for intensity modulated proton therapy derived from Monte Carlo simulations , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  H. Paganetti Range uncertainties in proton therapy and the role of Monte Carlo simulations , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[16]  Takeshi Himukai,et al.  Improved dose-calculation accuracy in proton treatment planning using a simplified Monte Carlo method verified with three-dimensional measurements in an anthropomorphic phantom , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[17]  K Parodi,et al.  A Monte Carlo-based treatment planning tool for proton therapy , 2013, Physics in medicine and biology.

[18]  A. Ferrari,et al.  The physics models of FLUKA: status and recent development , 2003, hep-ph/0306267.

[19]  Overview of particle and heavy ion transport code system PHITS , 2015 .

[20]  H Paganetti,et al.  Monte Carlo simulations will change the way we treat patients with proton beams today. , 2014, The British journal of radiology.

[21]  David Sarrut,et al.  Optimization of GEANT4 settings for Proton Pencil Beam Scanning simulations using GATE , 2010 .

[22]  E Pedroni,et al.  Monte Carlo dose calculations for spot scanned proton therapy , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[23]  Niek Schreuder,et al.  Smaller – Lighter – Cheaper: New Technological Concepts in Proton Therapy , 2012 .

[24]  Jan Seuntjens,et al.  A fast Monte Carlo code for proton transport in radiation therapy based on MCNPX , 2014, Journal of medical physics.

[25]  T. Wong,et al.  Clinical Commissioning of a Pencil Beam Scanning Treatment Planning System for Proton Therapy. , 2016, International journal of particle therapy.

[26]  U Isacsson,et al.  Implementation of pencil kernel and depth penetration algorithms for treatment planning of proton beams. , 2000, Physics in medicine and biology.

[27]  C Lartizien,et al.  GATE: a simulation toolkit for PET and SPECT. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[28]  S Lorentini,et al.  Characterization and validation of a Monte Carlo code for independent dose calculation in proton therapy treatments with pencil beam scanning , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.