Background. Adaptive intensity-modulated photon and proton radiotherapy (IMRT and IMPT) of head and neck (H & N) cancer requires frequent three-dimensional (3D) dose calculation. We compared two approaches for dose recalculation on the basis of intensity-corrected cone-beam (CB) x-ray computed tomography (CT) images. Material and methods. For nine H & N tumor patients, virtual CTs (vCT) were generated by deformable image registration of the planning CT (pCT) to the CBCT. The second intensity correction approach used population-based lookup tables for scaling CBCT intensities to the pCT HU range (CBCT LUT ). IMRT and IMPT plans were generated with a commercial treatment planning system. Dose recalculations on vCT and CBCT LUT were analyzed using a (3%, 3 mm) gamma-index analysis and comparison of normal tissue and tumor dose/volume parameters. A replanning CT (rpCT) acquired within three days of the CBCT served as reference. Single fi eld uniform dose (SFUD) proton plans were created and recalculated on vCT and CBCT LUT for proton range comparison. Results. Dose/volume parameters showed minor differences between rpCT, vCT and CBCT LUT in IMRT, but clinically relevant deviations between CBCT LUT and rpCT in the spinal cord for IMPT. Gamma-index pass-rates were found increased for vCT with respect to CBCT LUT in IMPT (by up to 21 percentage points) and IMRT (by up to 9 percentage points) for most cases. The SFUD-based proton range assessment showed improved agreement of vCT and rpCT, with 88 -99% of the depth dose profi les in beam ' s eye view agreeing within 3 mm. For CBCT LUT , only 80 -94% of the profi les fulfi lled this criterion. Conclusion. vCT and CBCT LUT are suitable options for dose recalculation in adaptive IMRT. In the scope of IMPT, the vCT approach is preferable.

PurposeThe dose core of a proton pencil beam (PB) is enveloped by a low dose area reaching several centimeters off the central axis and containing a considerable amount of the dose. Adequate modeling of the different components of the PB profile is, therefore, required for accurate dose calculation. In this study, we experimentally validated one electromagnetic and two nuclear scattering models in GATE/Geant4 for dose calculation of proton beams in the therapeutic energy window (62–252 MeV) with and without range shifter (RaShi).MethodsThe multiple Coulomb scattering (MCS) model was validated by lateral dose core profiles measured for five energies at up to four depths from beam plateau to Bragg peak region. Nuclear halo profiles of single PBs were evaluated for three (62.4, 148.2, and 252.7 MeV) and two (97.4 and 124.7 MeV) energies, without and with RaShi, respectively. The influence of the dose core and nuclear halo on field sizes varying from 2–20 cm was evaluated by means of output factors (OFs), namely frame factors (FFs) and field size factors (FSFs), to quantify the relative increase of dose when increasing the field size.ResultsThe relative increase in the dose core width in the simulations deviated negligibly from measurements for depths until 80% of the beam range, but was overestimated by up to 0.2 mm in σ toward the end of range for all energies. The dose halo region of the lateral dose profile agreed well with measurements in the open beam configuration, but was notably overestimated in the deepest measurement plane of the highest energy or when the beam passed through the RaShi. The root‐mean‐square deviations (RMSDs) between the simulated and the measured FSFs were less than 1% at all depths, but were higher in the second half of the beam range as compared to the first half or when traversing the RaShi. The deviations in one of the two tested hadron physics lists originated mostly in elastic scattering. The RMSDs could be reduced by approximately a factor of two by exchanging the default elastic scattering cross sections for protons.ConclusionsGATE/Geant4 agreed satisfyingly with most measured quantities. MCS was systematically overestimated toward the end of the beam range. Contributions from nuclear scattering were overestimated when the beam traversed the RaShi or at the depths close to the end of the beam range without RaShi. Both, field size effects and calculation uncertainties, increased when the beam traversed the RaShi. Measured field size effects were almost negligible for beams up to medium energy and were highest for the highest energy beam without RaShi, but vice versa when traversing the RaShi.

No abstract

Purpose: to present a reference Monte Carlo (MC) beam model developed in GATE/Geant4 for the MedAustron fixed beam line. The proposed model includes an absolute dose calibration in Dose-Area-Product (DAP) and it has been validated within clinical tolerances for non-isocentric treatments as routinely performed at MedAustron. Material and Methods: the proton beam model was parametrized at the nozzle entrance considering optic and energy properties of the pencil beam. The calibration in terms of absorbed dose to water was performed exploiting the relationship between number of particles and DAP by mean of a recent formalism. Typical longitudinal dose distribution parameters (range, distal penumbra and modulation) and transverse dose distribution parameters (spot sizes, field sizes and lateral penumbra) were evaluated. The model was validated in water, considering regular-shaped dose distribution as well as clinical plans delivered in non-isocentric conditions. Results: simulated parameters agree with measurements within the clinical requirements at different air gaps. The agreement of distal and longitudinal dose distribution parameters is mostly better than 1 mm. The dose difference in reference conditions and for 3D dose delivery in water is within 0.5% and 1.2%, respectively. Clinical plans were reproduced within 3%. Conclusion: a full nozzle beam model for active scanning proton pencil beam is described using GATE/Geant4. Absolute dose calibration based on DAP formalism was implemented. The beam model is fully validated in water over a wide range of clinical scenarios and will be inserted as a reference tool for research and for independent dose calculation in the clinical routine.