Pencil-Beam Redefinition Algorithm Robert Boyd, Ph.D.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

1 COMPARISON BETWEEN PLATO ISODOSE DISTRIBUTION OF A 192 IR SOURCE AND THOSE SIMULATED WITH GEANT4 TOOLKIT F. Foppiano 1, S. Agostinelli 1, S. Garelli.

Advertisements

Derivation of initial electron beam energy spectrum Janusz Harasimowicz Establishment for Nuclear Equipment

The Vin č a Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia * Universita degli studi di Bologna, DIENCA, Italia Radovan D. Ili}, Milan Pe{i}, Radojko Pavlovi}

Backscatter for EPID dosimetry

Energy deposition and neutron background studies for a low energy proton therapy facility Roxana Rata*, Roger Barlow* * International Institute for Accelerator.

Photon Beam Monitor-Unit Calculations

Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre and Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland 8th ECMP, Athens, Dosimetry audits in radiotherapy.

A general purpose dosimetric system for brachytherapy

MONTE-CARLO TECHNIQUES APPLIED TO PROTON DOSIMETRY AND RADIATION SAFETY F. Guillaume, G. Rucka, J. Hérault, N. Iborra, P. Chauvel 1 XXXV European Cyclotron.

Reduced Dose of Proton CT Compared to X-Ray CT in Tissue-Density Variation Sensitivity T. Satogata, T. Bacarian, S. Peggs, A.G. Ruggiero, and F.A. Dilmanian.

G4NAMU GEANT4 North America Medical Users Organization (G4NAMU) GEANT4 in external beam therapy Harald Paganetti.

Mark Rayner, Analysis workshop 4 September ‘08: Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing, slide 1 Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing Analysis.

Radiation Dosimetry Dose Calculations D, LET & H can frequently be obtained reliably by calculations: Alpha & low – Energy Beta Emitters Distributed in.

1 Chris Rogers MICE Collaboration Meeting 11th Feb 2005 Tracking and Cooling performance of G4MICE.

Introduction The effect of air-cavities within the human body, for example in the head and neck regions, present possible sources of error when calculating.

At the position d max of maximum energy loss of radiation, the number of secondary ionizations products peaks which in turn maximizes the dose at that.

The brachytherapy advanced example Susanna Guatelli (CERN/INFN)

Electron Beams: Physical Principles and Dosimetry

Electron Beams: Physical Principles and Dosimetry

Dose Distribution and Scatter Analysis

Results The measured-to-predicted dose ratio criteria used by the RPC to credential institutions is , however for this work, a criteria of

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم و قل رب زدنى علماً ﴿و قل رب زدنى علماً﴾ صدق الله العظيم.

Woong Cho 11 of February, 2014 Principle of convolution/superposition algorithm for dose calculation for Treatment Planning System.

Quality Control in Radiation Therapy, A New Concept: Dosimetry Check

External Beam Radiation Therapy Special Procedures

Научно-практический центр протонной лучевой терапии и радиохирургии (Москва-Дубна) A SYSTEM FOR MEASUREMENT OF A THERAPEUTIC PROTON BEAM DOSE DISTRIBUTION.

Patient Plan Results: Table 3 shows the ratio of the Pinnacle TPS calculation to the DPM recalculation for the mean dose from selected regions of interest.

Abstract A time resolved radial profile neutron diagnostic is being designed for the National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX). The design goal is to.

Radiation Protection in Radiotherapy

Automated Electron Step Size Optimization in EGS5 Scott Wilderman Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiological Sciences, University of Michigan.

G. Bartesaghi, 11° ICATPP, Como, 5-9 October 2009 MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS ON NEUTRON TRANSPORT AND ABSORBED DOSE IN TISSUE-EQUIVALENT PHANTOMS EXPOSED.

MONTE CARLO BASED ADAPTIVE EPID DOSE KERNEL ACCOUNTING FOR DIFFERENT FIELD SIZE RESPONSES OF IMAGERS S. Wang, J. Gardner, J. Gordon W. Li, L. Clews, P.

Surface dose prediction and verification for IMRT plans using line dose profiles † Ronald E. Berg, † Michael S. Gossman and ‡ Stephen J. Klash † Erlanger.

Monte Carlo Comparison of RPCs and Liquid Scintillator R. Ray 5/14/04  RPCs with 1-dimensional readout (generated by RR) and liquid scintillator with.

Application of a 2-D ionization chamber array for dose verification of dynamic IMRT with a micro-MLC Fujio ARAKI, PhD 1, S. TAJIRI 2, H. TOMINAGA 2, K.

Fundamental Dosimetry Quantities and Concepts: Review Introduction to Medical Physics III: Therapy Steve Kirsner, MS Department of Radiation Physics.

Introduction Commercial implementations of the convolution/superposition (C/S) method make several approximations, which can lead to dose calculation inaccuracies.

Medical Accelerator F. Foppiano, M.G. Pia, M. Piergentili

Araki F. Ikegami T. and Ishidoya T.

Li HAN and Neal H. Clinthorne University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Performance comparison and system modeling of a Compton medical imaging system.

Part VIII:Medical Exposures in Radiotherapy

F. Foppiano, M.G. Pia, M. Piergentili

E. Mezzenga, E. Cagni, A. Botti, M. Orlandi, M. Iori Medical Physics Unit, ASMN-IRCCS of Reggio Emilia, Italy

P. Rodrigues, A. Trindade, L.Peralta, J. Varela GEANT4 Medical Applications at LIP GEANT4 Workshop, September – 4 October LIP – Lisbon.

What are the dose quantities in CT ? IAEA/RCA Kampala Kampala.

If information seems to be missing, make any reasonable assumptions. 1.A target has an areal density of 2.3 g/cm 2 and a thickness of 0.8 inch. What is.

Commissioning of a commercial treatment planning system for IMAT and Dose Painting treatment delivery. G. Pittomvils 1,,L. Paelinck 1, F. Crop 2, W. De.

Validation of GEANT4 versus EGSnrc Yann PERROT LPC, CNRS/IN2P3

The Effects of Small Field Dosimetry on the Biological Models Used In Evaluating IMRT Dose Distributions Gene Cardarelli,PhD, MPH.

Rapid Arc Treatment Verification: post evaluation on Delta-4 and proposal of a new verification protocol G. Pittomvils 1,,L. Paelinck 1, T. Boterberg 1,

MCS overview in radiation therapy

Adapting A Clinical Medical Accelerator For Primary Standard Dosimetry

Development of elements of 3D planning program for radiotherapy Graphical editor options  automated enclose of contour  correction of intersections 

E. Mezzenga 1, E. Cagni 1, A. Botti 1, M. Orlandi 1, W.D. Renner 2, M. Iori 1 1. Medical Physics Unit, ASMN-IRCCS of Reggio Emilia, Italy 2. MathResolution.

Chapter 5 Central Axis Depth Dose Calculations. 2 Definition of Beam Geometry The accurate delivery of a radiation dose to patient depends on the precise.

CHAPTER 3 DOSE DETERMINATION FOR EXTERNAL BEAMS

INTERCOMPARISON P3. Dose distribution of a proton beam

Electron Beam Therapy.

A system of dosimetric calculations

Template Matching Can Accurately Track Tumor Evaluation of Dose Calculation of RayStation Planning System in Heterogeneous Media Huijun Xu, Byongyong Yi,

A Brachytherapy Treatment Planning Software Based on Monte Carlo Simulations and Artificial Neural Network Algorithm Amir Moghadam.

Chapter 14 Electron Beam Therapy (1)

Ch 10. A System of Dosimetric Calculations

Proximity correction in electron beam lithography

By: Vi Nhan Nguyen University of Arizona

Geant4 at IST Applications in Brachytherapy

P. Rodrigues, A. Trindade, L.Peralta, J. Varela

Hot and cold spots are common problems associated with planning:

Computed Tomography (C.T)

Principles and Practice of Radiation Therapy

Presentation transcript:

Pencil-Beam Redefinition Algorithm Robert Boyd, Ph.D.

Pencil Beam Algorithms central axis of broad beam (Z) X pixel bounding pencil beams (2x2 mm2 at isocenter) Y Z X-Y plane normal to beam axis (Z)

Pencil Beam Redefinition DX Z Z+DZ X-Y planes are spaced 5 mm apart on Z axis

PBRA Physics Primary electron transport only delta-rays not modeled Multiple Coulomb scattering approximated with a Gaussian distribution large-angle scattering not modeled Mean collisional energy loss only catastrophic energy losses not modeled

PBRA Physics Approximations PBRA requires measured central-axis depth dose curve PBRA uses an energy-dependent correction factor C(E) to match calculated and measured central axis depth dose curve

Polyenergetic Spectrum

PBRA Correction Factor C(E) Solid Line: Monoenergetic PBRA C(E) Dashed Line: Polyenergetic PBRA C(E)

Polyenergetic PBRA

20-MeV Horizontal Bone Slab Varian Clinac 2100, 15x15-cm2 open applicator, 100 cm SSD

20-MeV Horizontal Bone Slab Varian Clinac 2100, 15x15-cm2 open applicator, 100 cm SSD

20-MeV Horizontal Air Slab Varian Clinac 2100, 15x15-cm2 open applicator, 100 cm SSD

20-MeV Vertical Air Slab Varian Clinac 2100, 15x15-cm2 open applicator, 100 cm SSD

20-MeV Vertical Air Slab Off-axis profile at 4.5 cm depth Varian Clinac 2100, 15x15-cm2 open applicator, 102 cm SSD

20-MeV Nose Surface Varian Clinac 2100, 15x15-cm2 open applicator, 100 cm SSD

9-MeV Nose Surface Off-axis profile at 1 cm depth Varian Clinac 2100, 15x15-cm2 open applicator, 100 cm SSD

PBRA Evaluation with Measured Data Set - Results PBRA was not able to achieve 4% or 2 mm dose calculation accuracy for all data points

Beam Modeling electron source SADvir custom beam collimation L0 isocenter patient

Dual-Source Beam Modeling primary electron source secondary electron source custom beam collimation isocenter patient

Dual-Source Model - 100 cm SSD Varian Clinac 1800, 9 MeV, 6x6-cm2 open applicator

Dual-Source Model - 110 cm SSD Varian Clinac 1800, 9 MeV, 6x6-cm2 open applicator

IMC - Transverse Plane Varian 2100, 16 MeV, 15x15-cm2 applicator, 105 cm SSD

IMC - Transverse Plane Varian 2100, 16 MeV, 15x15-cm2 applicator, 105 cm SSD

IMC - Sagittal Plane Varian 2100, 16 MeV, 15x15-cm2 applicator, 105 cm SSD

IMC - Sagittal Plane Varian 2100, 16 MeV, 15x15-cm2 applicator, 105 cm SSD

Parotid Gland - Transverse View Varian 2100, 16 MeV, 15x15-cm2 applicator, 100 cm SSD

Parotid Gland - Transverse View Varian 2100, 16 MeV, 15x15-cm2 applicator, 100 cm SSD

Ethmoid Sinuses - Transverse Plane Varian 2100, 16 MeV, 10x10-cm2 applicator, 100 cm SSD

Ethmoid Sinus - Transverse Plane Varian 2100, 16 MeV, 10x10-cm2 applicator, 100 cm SSD

Ethmoid Sinus - Profile at Y = 13.0 cm Varian 2100, 16 MeV, 10x10-cm2 applicator, 100 cm SSD

Clinical Evaluation - Results Accuracy criteria was not achieved for entire irradiated volume, albeit only a small volume (< 3.5%) had dose differences greater than 4% and greater than 2 mm DTA. PBRA showed good agreement with Monte Carlo in matching isodose lines. Better modeling of physics will improve the accuracy of PBRA-calculated dose.

Custom Bolus / Skin Collimation

Custom Bolus / Skin Collimation

Custom Bolus / Skin Collimation

Custom Bolus / Skin Collimation

Electron Arc Therapy

Skin Collimation

Arc Therapy with Skin Collimation

Pencil-Beam Divergence Current PBRA virtual source distance is equal to distance to broad beam virtual source mathematics assume “parallel”point beams integration performed over projected area svir Dx Dz

Pencil-Beam Divergence divPBRA virtual source distance is a pencil beam-specific parameter mathematics assume divergent point beams integration performed over normal pixel width svir Dx Dz

Local Pencil-Beam Divergence

20-MeV Horizontal Air Slab Varian Clinac 2100, 15x15-cm2 open applicator, 100 cm SSD

Pencil-Beam Divergence Results divPBRA was more accurate than PBRA for most data points divPBRA was not able to achieve 4% or 2 mm accuracy for all data points Calculation times were approximately 30% longer

Arc Beam Modeling

Future Work Dosimetry studies using PBRA Tomotherapy vs. conventional electron therapy Field matching for chest wall treatments Electron arc therapy planning using divPBRA Realistic dose deposition kernels using Monte Carlo Automated custom bolus/skin collimation planning using PBRA Translating PBRA to commercial system

Acknowledgements Kenneth Hogstrom, Ph.D. Almon Shiu, Ph.D. Dennis Leavitt, Ph.D. Mitch Price, M.S. Melinda Chi, M.S Paul Alderson, B.S.