Cargando…

Development and evaluation of a GEANT4‐based Monte Carlo Model of a 0.35 T MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) linear accelerator

PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to develop and benchmark a magnetic resonance (MR)‐guided linear accelerator head model using the GEANT4 Monte Carlo (MC) code. The validated model was compared to the treatment planning system (TPS) and was also used to quantify the electron return effect (ERE) at...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Khan, Ahtesham Ullah, Simiele, Eric A., Lotey, Rajiv, DeWerd, Larry A., Yadav, Poonam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8251819/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33555052
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mp.14761
_version_ 1783717169082662912
author Khan, Ahtesham Ullah
Simiele, Eric A.
Lotey, Rajiv
DeWerd, Larry A.
Yadav, Poonam
author_facet Khan, Ahtesham Ullah
Simiele, Eric A.
Lotey, Rajiv
DeWerd, Larry A.
Yadav, Poonam
author_sort Khan, Ahtesham Ullah
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to develop and benchmark a magnetic resonance (MR)‐guided linear accelerator head model using the GEANT4 Monte Carlo (MC) code. The validated model was compared to the treatment planning system (TPS) and was also used to quantify the electron return effect (ERE) at a lung–water interface. METHODS: The average energy, including the spread in the energy distribution, and the radial intensity distribution of the incident electron beam were iteratively optimized in order to match the simulated beam profiles and percent depth dose (PDD) data to measured data. The GEANT4 MC model was then compared to the TPS model using several photon beam tests including oblique beams, an off‐axis aperture, and heterogeneous phantoms. The benchmarked MC model was utilized to compute output factors (OFs) with the 0.35 T magnetic field turned on and off. The ERE was quantified at a lung–water interface by simulating PDD curves with and without the magnetic field for 6.6 × 6.6  [Formula: see text] and 2.5 × 2.5  [Formula: see text] field sizes. A 2%/2 mm gamma criterion was used to compare the MC model with the TPS data throughout this study. RESULTS: The final incident electron beam parameters were 6.0 MeV average energy with a 1.5 MeV full width at half maximum (FWHM) Gaussian energy spread and a 1.0 mm FWHM Gaussian radial intensity distribution. The MC‐simulated OFs were found to be in agreement with the TPS‐calculated and measured OFs, and no statistical difference was observed between the 0.35 T and 0.0 T OFs. Good agreement was observed between the TPS‐calculated and MC‐simulated data for the photon beam tests with gamma pass rates ranging from 96% to 100%. An increase of 4.3% in the ERE was observed for the 6.6 × 6.6  [Formula: see text] field size relative to the 2.5 × 2.5  [Formula: see text] field size. The ratio of the 0.35 T PDD to the 0.0 T PDD was found to be up to 1.098 near lung–water interfaces for the 6.6 × 6.6  [Formula: see text] field size using the MC model. CONCLUSIONS: A vendor‐independent Monte Carlo model has been developed and benchmarked for a 0.35 T/6 MV MR‐linac. Good agreement was obtained between the GEANT4 and TPS models except near heterogeneity interfaces.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8251819
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82518192021-07-07 Development and evaluation of a GEANT4‐based Monte Carlo Model of a 0.35 T MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) linear accelerator Khan, Ahtesham Ullah Simiele, Eric A. Lotey, Rajiv DeWerd, Larry A. Yadav, Poonam Med Phys COMPUTATIONAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DOSIMETRY PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to develop and benchmark a magnetic resonance (MR)‐guided linear accelerator head model using the GEANT4 Monte Carlo (MC) code. The validated model was compared to the treatment planning system (TPS) and was also used to quantify the electron return effect (ERE) at a lung–water interface. METHODS: The average energy, including the spread in the energy distribution, and the radial intensity distribution of the incident electron beam were iteratively optimized in order to match the simulated beam profiles and percent depth dose (PDD) data to measured data. The GEANT4 MC model was then compared to the TPS model using several photon beam tests including oblique beams, an off‐axis aperture, and heterogeneous phantoms. The benchmarked MC model was utilized to compute output factors (OFs) with the 0.35 T magnetic field turned on and off. The ERE was quantified at a lung–water interface by simulating PDD curves with and without the magnetic field for 6.6 × 6.6  [Formula: see text] and 2.5 × 2.5  [Formula: see text] field sizes. A 2%/2 mm gamma criterion was used to compare the MC model with the TPS data throughout this study. RESULTS: The final incident electron beam parameters were 6.0 MeV average energy with a 1.5 MeV full width at half maximum (FWHM) Gaussian energy spread and a 1.0 mm FWHM Gaussian radial intensity distribution. The MC‐simulated OFs were found to be in agreement with the TPS‐calculated and measured OFs, and no statistical difference was observed between the 0.35 T and 0.0 T OFs. Good agreement was observed between the TPS‐calculated and MC‐simulated data for the photon beam tests with gamma pass rates ranging from 96% to 100%. An increase of 4.3% in the ERE was observed for the 6.6 × 6.6  [Formula: see text] field size relative to the 2.5 × 2.5  [Formula: see text] field size. The ratio of the 0.35 T PDD to the 0.0 T PDD was found to be up to 1.098 near lung–water interfaces for the 6.6 × 6.6  [Formula: see text] field size using the MC model. CONCLUSIONS: A vendor‐independent Monte Carlo model has been developed and benchmarked for a 0.35 T/6 MV MR‐linac. Good agreement was obtained between the GEANT4 and TPS models except near heterogeneity interfaces. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-03-04 2021-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8251819/ /pubmed/33555052 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mp.14761 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle COMPUTATIONAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DOSIMETRY
Khan, Ahtesham Ullah
Simiele, Eric A.
Lotey, Rajiv
DeWerd, Larry A.
Yadav, Poonam
Development and evaluation of a GEANT4‐based Monte Carlo Model of a 0.35 T MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) linear accelerator
title Development and evaluation of a GEANT4‐based Monte Carlo Model of a 0.35 T MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) linear accelerator
title_full Development and evaluation of a GEANT4‐based Monte Carlo Model of a 0.35 T MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) linear accelerator
title_fullStr Development and evaluation of a GEANT4‐based Monte Carlo Model of a 0.35 T MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) linear accelerator
title_full_unstemmed Development and evaluation of a GEANT4‐based Monte Carlo Model of a 0.35 T MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) linear accelerator
title_short Development and evaluation of a GEANT4‐based Monte Carlo Model of a 0.35 T MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) linear accelerator
title_sort development and evaluation of a geant4‐based monte carlo model of a 0.35 t mr‐guided radiation therapy (mrgrt) linear accelerator
topic COMPUTATIONAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DOSIMETRY
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8251819/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33555052
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mp.14761
work_keys_str_mv AT khanahteshamullah developmentandevaluationofageant4basedmontecarlomodelofa035tmrguidedradiationtherapymrgrtlinearaccelerator
AT simieleerica developmentandevaluationofageant4basedmontecarlomodelofa035tmrguidedradiationtherapymrgrtlinearaccelerator
AT loteyrajiv developmentandevaluationofageant4basedmontecarlomodelofa035tmrguidedradiationtherapymrgrtlinearaccelerator
AT dewerdlarrya developmentandevaluationofageant4basedmontecarlomodelofa035tmrguidedradiationtherapymrgrtlinearaccelerator
AT yadavpoonam developmentandevaluationofageant4basedmontecarlomodelofa035tmrguidedradiationtherapymrgrtlinearaccelerator