Purpose In the previous treatment planning system (TPS) for CyberKnife (CK), multileaf collimator (MLC)‐based treatment plans could be created only by using the finite‐size pencil beam (FSPB) algorithm. Recently, a new TPS, including the FSPB with lateral scaling option (FSPB+) and Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms, was developed. In this study, we performed basic and clinical end‐to‐end evaluations for MLC‐based CK tumor‐tracking radiotherapy using the MC, FSPB+, and FSPB. Methods Water‐ and lung‐equivalent slab phantoms were combined to obtain the percentage depth dose (PDD) and off‐center ratio (OCR). The CK M6 system and Precision TPS were employed, and PDDs and OCRs calculated by the MC, FSPB+, and FSPB were compared with the measured doses obtained for 30.8 × 30.8 mm2 and 60.0 × 61.6 mm2 fields. A lung motion phantom was used for clinical evaluation and MLC‐based treatment plans were created using the MC. The doses were subsequently recalculated using the FSPB+ and FSPB, while maintaining the irradiation parameters. The calculated doses were compared with the doses measured using a microchamber (for target doses) or a radiochromic film (for dose profiles). The dose volume histogram (DVH) indices were compared for all plans. Results In homogeneous and inhomogeneous phantom geometries, the PDDs calculated by the MC and FSPB+ agreed with the measurements within ±2.0% for the region between the surface and a depth of 250 mm, whereas the doses calculated by the FSPB in the lung‐equivalent phantom region were noticeably higher than the measurements, and the maximum dose differences were 6.1% and 4.4% for the 30.8 × 30.8 mm2 and 60.0 × 61.6 mm2 fields, respectively. The maximum distance to agreement values of the MC, FSPB+, and FSPB at the penumbra regions of OCRs were 1.0, 0.6, and 1.1 mm, respectively, but the best agreement was obtained between the MC‐calculated curve and measurements at the boundary of the water‐ and lung‐equivalent slabs, compared with those of the FSPB+ and FSPB. For clinical evaluations using the lung motion phantom, under the static motion condition, the dose errors measured by the microchamber were −1.0%, −1.9%, and 8.8% for MC, FSPB+, and FSPB, respectively; their gamma pass rates for the 3%/2 mm criterion comparing to film measurement were 98.4%, 87.6%, and 31.4% respectively. Under respiratory motion conditions, there was no noticeable decline in the gamma pass rates. In the DVH indices, for most of the gross tumor volume and planning target volume, significant differences were observed between the MC and FSPB, and between the FSPB+ and FSPB. Furthermore, significant differences were observed for lung Dmean, V15 Gy, and V20 Gy between the MC, FSPB+, and FSPB. Conclusions The results indicate that the doses calculated using the MC and FSPB+ differed remarkably in inhomogeneous regions, compared with the FSPB. Because the MC was the most consistent with the measurements, it is recommended for final dose calculations in inhomogeneous regions such as the lung. Furthermore, the sufficient accurac...
Background: Small-field dosimetry is challenging for radiotherapy dosimetry because of the loss of lateral charged equilibrium, partial occlusion of the primary photon source by the collimating devices, perturbation effects caused by the detector materials and their design, and the detector size relative to the radiation field size, which leads to a volume averaging effect. Therefore, a suitable tool for small-field dosimetry requires high spatial resolution, tissue equivalence, angular independence, and energy and dose rate independence to achieve sufficient accuracy. Recently, with the increasing use of combinations of coplanar and non-coplanar beams for small-field dosimetry, there is a need to clarify angular dependence for dosimetry where the detector is oriented at various angles to the incident beam. However, the effect of angular dependence on small-field dosimetry with coplanar and non-coplanar beams has not been fully clarified.Purpose: This study clarified the effect of angular dependence on small-field dosimetry with coplanar and non-coplanar beams using various detectors. Methods: Seven different detectors were used: CC01, RAZOR, RAZOR Nano, Pinpoint 3D, stereotactic field diode (SFD), microSilicon, and microDiamond. All measurements were taken using a TrueBeam STx with 6 MV and 10 MV flattening filter-free (FFF) energies using a water-equivalent spherical phantom with a source-to-axis distance of 100 cm. The detector was inserted in a perpendicular orientation, and the gantry was rotated at 15 • increments from the incidence beam angle. A multi-leaf collimator (MLC) with four field sizes of 0.5 × 0.5, 1 × 1, 2 × 2, and 3 × 3 cm 2 , and four couch angles from 0 • , 30 • , 60 • , and 90 • (coplanar and non-coplanar) were adopted. The angular dependence response (AR) was defined as the ratio of the detector response at a given irradiation gantry angle normalized to the detector response at 0 • . The maximum AR differences were calculated between the maximum and minimum AR values for each detector, field size, energy, and couch angle. Results:The maximum AR difference for the coplanar beam was within 3.3% for all conditions, excluding the maximum AR differences in 0.5 × 0.5 cm 2 field for CC01 and RAZOR. The maximum AR difference for non-coplanar beams was within 2.5% for fields larger than 1 × 1 cm 2 , excluding the maximum AR differences for RAZOR Nano, SFD, and microSilicon. The Pinpoint 3D demonstrated stable AR tendencies compared to other detectors. The maximum difference was within 2.0%, except for the 0.5 × 0.5 cm 2 field and couch angle at 90 • . The tendencies of AR values for each detector were similar when using different energies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.