Fast Monte Carlo dose calculation for photon beams based on the VMC electron algorithm

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been increasingly used as an efficacious treatment modality for early‐stage non‐small cell lung cancer. The accuracy of dose calculations is compromised due to the presence of inhomogeneity. For the purpose of a consistent prescription, radiation doses were calculated without heterogeneity correction in several RTOG trials. For patients participating in these trials, recalculations of the planned doses with more accurate dose methods could provide better correlations between the treatment outcomes and the planned doses. Using a Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation algorithm as a gold standard, we compared the recalculated doses with the MC algorithm to the original pencil beam (PB) calculations for our institutional clinical lung SBRT plans. The focus of this comparison is to investigate the volume and location dependence on the differences between the two dose calculations. Thirty‐one clinical plans that followed RTOG and other protocol guidelines were retrospectively investigated in this study. Dosimetric parameters, such as D1, D95, and D99 for the PTV and D1 for organs at risk, were compared between two calculations. Correlations of mean lung dose and V20 of lungs between two calculations were investigated. Significant dependence on tumor size and location was observed from the comparisons between the two dose calculation methods. When comparing the PB calculations without heterogeneity correction to the MC calculations with heterogeneity correction, we found that in terms of D95 of PTV: (1) the two calculations resulted in similar D95 for edge tumors with volumes greater than 25.1 cc; (2) an average overestimation of 5% in PB calculations for edge tumors with volumes less than 25.1 cc; and (3) an average overestimation of 9% or underestimation of 3% in PB calculations for island tumors with volumes smaller or greater than 22.6 cc, respectively. With heterogeneity correction, the PB calculations resulted in an average reduction of 23.8% and 15.3% in the D95 for the PTV for island and edge lesions, respectively, when compared to the MC calculations. For organs at risks, very small differences were found among all the comparisons. Excellent correlations for mean dose and V20 of lungs were observed between the two calculations. This study demonstrated that using a single scaling factor may be overly simplified when accounting for the effects of heterogeneity correction. Accurate dose calculations, such as the Monte Carlo algorithms, are highly recommended to understand dose responses in lung SBRT.PACS number: 87.53.Ly

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dose calculation differences between Monte Carlo and pencil beam depend on the tumor locations and volumes for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy

Zhuang

Djemil

Pan

et al. 2013

“…Similar to the VSM, the TPFs are used instead of direct MC simulation to significantly reduce calculation times. Finally, x‐ray voxel Monte Carlo (XVMC)10 is used to calculate the dose in the patient model defined by the patient CT dataset.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agility MLC transmission optimization in the Monaco treatment planning system

Roche

Crane

Powers

et al. 2018

The Monaco Monte Carlo treatment planning system uses three‐beam model components to achieve accuracy in dose calculation. These components include a virtual source model (VSM), transmission probability filters (TPFs), and an x‐ray voxel Monte Carlo (XVMC) engine to calculate the dose in the patient. The aim of this study was to assess the TPF component of the Monaco TPS and optimize the TPF parameters using measurements from an Elekta linear accelerator with an Agility™ multileaf collimator (MLC). The optimization began with all TPF parameters set to their default value. The function of each TPF parameter was characterized and a value was selected that best replicated measurements with the Agility™ MLC. Both vendor provided fields and a set of additional test fields were used to create a rigorous systematic process, which can be used to optimize the TPF parameters. It was found that adjustment of the TPF parameters based on this process resulted in improved point dose measurements and improved 3D gamma analysis pass rates with Octavius 4D. All plans calculated with the optimized beam model had a gamma pass rate of > 95% using criteria of 2% global dose/2 mm distance‐to‐agreement, while some plans calculated with the default beam model had pass rates as low as 88.4%. For measured point doses, the improvement was particularly noticeable in the low‐dose regions of the clinical plans. In these regions, the average difference from the planned dose reduced from 4.4 ± 4.5% to 0.9 ± 2.7% with a coverage factor (k = 2) using the optimized beam model. A step‐by‐step optimization guide is provided at the end of this study to assist in the optimization of the TPF parameters in the Monaco TPS. Although it is possible to achieve good clinical results by randomly selecting TPF parameter values, it is recommended that the optimization process outlined in this study is followed so that the transmission through the TPF is characterized appropriately.

“…The Monaco TPS currently has a clinical MC dose calculation algorithm called XVMC (12) for photons, which is founded on the voxel‐based MC algorithm (VMC) (13) for electron beams. The new GPUMCD algorithm is capable of modeling dose for both a standard linear accelerator and for an Elekta MRI linear accelerator where it can model magnetic field effects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental evaluation of a GPU‐based Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm in the Monaco treatment planning system

Paudel

Kim

Sarfehnia

et al. 2016

A new GPU‐based Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm (GPUMCD), developed by the vendor Elekta for the Monaco treatment planning system (TPS), is capable of modeling dose for both a standard linear accelerator and an Elekta MRI linear accelerator. We have experimentally evaluated this algorithm for a standard Elekta Agility linear accelerator. A beam model was developed in the Monaco TPS (research version 5.09.06) using the commissioned beam data for a 6 MV Agility linac. A heterogeneous phantom representing several scenarios — tumor‐in‐lung, lung, and bone‐in‐tissue — was designed and built. Dose calculations in Monaco were done using both the current clinical Monte Carlo algorithm, XVMC, and the new GPUMCD algorithm. Dose calculations in a Pinnacle TPS were also produced using the collapsed cone convolution (CCC) algorithm with heterogeneity correction. Calculations were compared with the measured doses using an ionization chamber (A1SL) and Gafchromic EBT3 films for 2×2 cm2,5×5 cm2, and 10×2 cm2 field sizes. The percentage depth doses (PDDs) calculated by XVMC and GPUMCD in a homogeneous solid water phantom were within 2%/2 mm of film measurements and within 1% of ion chamber measurements. For the tumor‐in‐lung phantom, the calculated doses were within 2.5%/2.5 mm of film measurements for GPUMCD. For the lung phantom, doses calculated by all of the algorithms were within 3%/3 mm of film measurements, except for the 2×2 cm2 field size where the CCC algorithm underestimated the depth dose by ∼5% in a larger extent of the lung region. For the bone phantom, all of the algorithms were equivalent and calculated dose to within 2%/2 mm of film measurements, except at the interfaces. Both GPUMCD and XVMC showed interface effects, which were more pronounced for GPUMCD and were comparable to film measurements, whereas the CCC algorithm showed these effects poorly.PACS number(s): 87.53.Bn, 87.55.dh, 87.55.km