The development and verification of an independent dose calculation toolkit for proton Therapy
Guo Mengya1,2, Li Xiufang3, Liu Qi1,2, Wang Jie3, Deng Xiuzhen1,2, Gu Shuaizhe1,2, Pu Yuehu3,4, Chen Zhiling4
1Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 201800, China; 2University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China; 3Shanghai APACTRON Particle Equipment Co. Ltd, Shanghai 201800, China; 4Shanghai Advanced Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 201210, China
Abstract：Objective To develop and validate the accuracy of an independent dose calculation toolkit for the horizontal beamline of Shanghai Advanced Proton Therapy (SAPT) facility based on an open‐source dose calculation engine. Methods Machine data, such as absolute integral depth doses (IDDs) and lateral profiles in air were measured and lateral profiles in water were derived by Monte‐Carlo simulations. The dose computation models for SAPT horizontal beamline pencil beams in water were achieved by combining machine data and dose calculation engine. The verification of the dose reconstruction toolkit included absolute dose verification and relative dose verification. The absolute dose verification is performed to mainly compare the reconstructed value and the measured value at different depths along the center axis of the beam direction of a cube plan. The relative dose verification is conducted to mainly compare the lateral profile or two‐dimensional dose distribution between the measured value and the reconstructed value. Meanwhile, the precision of double‐gaussian and single‐gaussian lateral beam models was compared. Results The deviations of the absolute dose between the calculated and measured values were basically within 2%. The deviations of 20%‐80% penumbra between the measured and the calculated values were within 1 mm, and deviations of the full width at half height were within 2 mm. For 3 cube plans and 2 clinical cases, the two‐dimensional gamma pass rates (3 mm/3%) between the measured and calculated dose distributions at the corresponding depths were greater than 95%. The double‐gaussian lateral beam model was more accurate in the high dose gradient region and deeper depth. Conclusion The precision of independent dose calculation toolkit is acceptable for clinical requirements, which can be employed to investigate other dose‐related issues.
Guo Mengya,Li Xiufang,Liu Qi et al. The development and verification of an independent dose calculation toolkit for proton Therapy[J]. Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology, 2022, 31(10): 910-915.
[1] Lomax AJ, Böhringer T, Bolsi A, et al.Treatment planning and verification of proton therapy using spot scanning: initial experiences[J]. Med Phys, 2004,31(11):3150-3157. DOI: 10.1118/1.1779371. [2] Lomax AJ, Pedroni E, Schaffner B, et al.3D treatment planning for conformal proton therapy by spot scanning[C]// Faulkner K. Proc. 19th L. H. ConferenceGray. London: BIR Publishing,1996: 67-71. [3] Patterson TF, Boucher HW, Herbrecht R, et al.Strategy of following voriconazole versus amphotericin B therapy with other licensed antifungal therapy for primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis: impact of other therapies on outcome[J]. Clin Infect Dis, 2005,41(10):1448-1452. DOI: 10.1086/497126. [4] Meier G, Besson R, Nanz A, et al.Independent dose calculations for commissioning, quality assurance and dose reconstruction of PBS proton therapy[J]. Phys Med Biol, 2015,60(7):2819-2836. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/60/7/2819. [5] Guo MY, Li XF, Wang J, et al.Reformatted method for two‐dimensional detector arrays measurement data in proton pencil beam scanning[J]. Nucl Sci Tech, 2021,32(6):83-93. [6] Ulrich S, Wieser HP, Cao W, et al.Impact of respiratory motion on variable relative biological effectiveness in 4D-dose distributions of proton therapy[J]. Acta Oncol, 2017,56(11):1420-1427. DOI: 10.1080/0284186X.2017.1354131. [7] Cisternas E, Mairani A, Ziegenhein P, et al. matRad ‐ a multi‐modality open source 3D treatment planning toolkit[M/OL].//Jaffray DA. World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering. Toronto : [s.n.], 2015: 1608‐1611.[2021-10-01].https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978- 3-319-19387-8_391. [8] Wieser HP, Cisternas E, Wahl N, et al.Development of the open-source dose calculation and optimization toolkit matRad[J]. Med Phys, 2017,44(6):2556-2568. DOI: 10.1002/mp.12251. [9] Siddon RL.Fast calculation of the exact radiological path for a three-dimensional CT array[J]. Med Phys, 1985,12(2):252-255. DOI: 10.1118/1.595715. [10] Zhu XR, Poenisch F, Lii M, et al.Commissioning dose computation models for spot scanning proton beams in water for a commercially available treatment planning system[J]. Med Phys, 2013,40(4):041723. DOI: 10.1118/1.4798229. [11] Palmans H, Vatnitsky SM.Beam monitor calibration in scanned light-ion beams[J]. Med Phys, 2016,43(11):5835. DOI: 10.1118/1.4963808. [12] Russo S, Mirandola A, Molinelli S, et al.Characterization of a commercial scintillation detector for 2-D dosimetry in scanned proton and carbon ion beams[J]. Phys Med, 2017,34:48-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.01.011. [13] Eyges L. Multiple Scattering with Energy Loss[J]. Physical Review, 1948,74(10):1534‐1535. DOI:10.1103/PhysRev.74. 1534. [14] Russell KR, Grusell E, Montelius A.Dose calculations in proton beams: range straggling corrections and energy scaling[J]. Phys Med Biol, 1995,40(6):1031-1043. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/40/6/005. [15] Low DA, Harms WB, Mutic S, et al.A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions[J]. Med Phys, 1998,25(5):656-661. DOI: 10.1118/1.598248. [16] Arjomandy B, Taylor P, Ainsley C, et al.AAPM task group 224: Comprehensive proton therapy machine quality assurance[J]. Med Phys, 2019,46(8):e678-e705. DOI: 10.1002/mp.13622.
2022, Vol. 31 
