Literature DB >> 17634651

Monte Carlo simulations for configuring and testing an analytical proton dose-calculation algorithm.

Wayne Newhauser1, Jonas Fontenot, Yuanshui Zheng, Jerimy Polf, Uwe Titt, Nicholas Koch, Xiaodong Zhang, Radhe Mohan.   

Abstract

Contemporary treatment planning systems for proton radiotherapy typically use analytical pencil-beam algorithms - which require a comprehensive set of configuration data - to predict the absorbed dose distributions in the patient. In order to reduce the time required to prepare a new proton treatment planning system for clinical use, it was desirable to configure the planning system before measured beam data were available. However, it was not known if the Monte Carlo simulation method was a practical alternative to measuring beam profiles. The purpose of this study was to develop a model of a passively scattered proton therapy unit, to simulate the properties of the proton fields using the Monte Carlo technique and to configure an analytical treatment planning system using the simulated beam data. Additional simulations and treatment plans were calculated in order to validate the pencil-beam predictions against the Monte Carlo simulations using realistic treatment beams. Comparison of dose distributions in a water phantom revealed small dose difference and distances to agreement under the validation conditions. The total simulation time for generating the 768 beam configuration profiles was approximately 6 weeks using 30 nodes in a parallel processing cluster. The results of this study show that it is possible to configure and test a proton treatment planning system prior to the availability of measured proton beam data. The model presented here provided a means to reduce by several months the time required to prepare an analytical treatment planning system for patient treatments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17634651     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/52/15/014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  50 in total

1.  An MCNPX Monte Carlo model of a discrete spot scanning proton beam therapy nozzle.

Authors:  Gabriel O Sawakuchi; Dragan Mirkovic; Luis A Perles; Narayan Sahoo; X Ron Zhu; George Ciangaru; Kazumichi Suzuki; Michael T Gillin; Radhe Mohan; Uwe Titt
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Predicted risks of second malignant neoplasm incidence and mortality due to secondary neutrons in a girl and boy receiving proton craniospinal irradiation.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Anita Mahajan; Dragan Mirkovic; Rui Zhang; Annelise Giebeler; David Kornguth; Mark Harvey; Shiao Woo; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Risk of second malignant neoplasm following proton versus intensity-modulated photon radiotherapies for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Phillip J Taddei; Rebecca M Howell; Sunil Krishnan; Sarah B Scarboro; Dragan Mirkovic; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Adjustment of the lateral and longitudinal size of scanned proton beam spots using a pre-absorber to optimize penumbrae and delivery efficiency.

Authors:  Uwe Titt; Dragan Mirkovic; Gabriel O Sawakuchi; Luis A Perles; Wayne D Newhauser; Phillip J Taddei; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  An analytic model of neutron ambient dose equivalent and equivalent dose for proton radiotherapy.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; Angélica Pérez-Andújar; Jonas D Fontenot; Phillip J Taddei; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Contribution to Neutron Fluence and Neutron Absorbed Dose from Double Scattering Proton Therapy System Components.

Authors:  A Pérez-Andújar; W D Newhauser; P M Deluca
Journal:  Nucl Technol       Date:  2009-01-01

7.  Comparison of risk of radiogenic second cancer following photon and proton craniospinal irradiation for a pediatric medulloblastoma patient.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; Rebecca M Howell; Annelise Giebeler; Phillip J Taddei; Anita Mahajan; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Risk-optimized proton therapy to minimize radiogenic second cancers.

Authors:  Laura A Rechner; John G Eley; Rebecca M Howell; Rui Zhang; Dragan Mirkovic; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Maximum proton kinetic energy and patient-generated neutron fluence considerations in proton beam arc delivery radiation therapy.

Authors:  E Sengbusch; A Pérez-Andújar; P M DeLuca; T R Mackie
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Neutron production from beam-modifying devices in a modern double scattering proton therapy beam delivery system.

Authors:  Angélica Pérez-Andújar; Wayne D Newhauser; Paul M Deluca
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-01-16       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.