Literature DB >> 20095258

Fast, accurate photon beam accelerator modeling using BEAMnrc: a systematic investigation of efficiency enhancing methods and cross-section data.

Margarida Fragoso1, Iwan Kawrakow, Bruce A Faddegon, Timothy D Solberg, Indrin J Chetty.   

Abstract

In this work, an investigation of efficiency enhancing methods and cross-section data in the BEAMnrc Monte Carlo (MC) code system is presented. Additionally, BEAMnrc was compared with VMC++, another special-purpose MC code system that has recently been enhanced for the simulation of the entire treatment head. BEAMnrc and VMC++ were used to simulate a 6 MV photon beam from a Siemens Primus linear accelerator (linac) and phase space (PHSP) files were generated at 100 cm source-to-surface distance for the 10 x 10 and 40 x 40 cm2 field sizes. The BEAMnrc parameters/techniques under investigation were grouped by (i) photon and bremsstrahlung cross sections, (ii) approximate efficiency improving techniques (AEITs), (iii) variance reduction techniques (VRTs), and (iv) a VRT (bremsstrahlung photon splitting) in combination with an AEIT (charged particle range rejection). The BEAMnrc PHSP file obtained without the efficiency enhancing techniques under study or, when not possible, with their default values (e.g., EXACT algorithm for the boundary crossing algorithm) and with the default cross-section data (PEGS4 and Bethe-Heitler) was used as the "base line" for accuracy verification of the PHSP files generated from the different groups described previously. Subsequently, a selection of the PHSP files was used as input for DOSXYZnrc-based water phantom dose calculations, which were verified against measurements. The performance of the different VRTs and AEITs available in BEAMnrc and of VMC++ was specified by the relative efficiency, i.e., by the efficiency of the MC simulation relative to that of the BEAMnrc base-line calculation. The highest relative efficiencies were approximately 935 (approximately 111 min on a single 2.6 GHz processor) and approximately 200 (approximately 45 min on a single processor) for the 10 x 10 field size with 50 million histories and 40 x 40 cm2 field size with 100 million histories, respectively, using the VRT directional bremsstrahlung splitting (DBS) with no electron splitting. When DBS was used with electron splitting and combined with augmented charged particle range rejection, a technique recently introduced in BEAMnrc, relative efficiencies were approximately 420 (approximately 253 min on a single processor) and approximately 175 (approximately 58 min on a single processor) for the 10 x 10 and 40 x 40 cm2 field sizes, respectively. Calculations of the Siemens Primus treatment head with VMC++ produced relative efficiencies of approximately 1400 (approximately 6 min on a single processor) and approximately 60 (approximately 4 min on a single processor) for the 10 x 10 and 40 x 40 cm2 field sizes, respectively. BEAMnrc PHSP calculations with DBS alone or DBS in combination with charged particle range rejection were more efficient than the other efficiency enhancing techniques used. Using VMC++, accurate simulations of the entire linac treatment head were performed within minutes on a single processor. Noteworthy differences (+/- 1%-3%) in the mean energy, planar fluence, and angular and spectral distributions were observed with the NIST bremsstrahlung cross sections compared with those of Bethe-Heitler (BEAMnrc default bremsstrahlung cross section). However, MC calculated dose distributions in water phantoms (using combinations of VRTs/AEITs and cross-section data) agreed within 2% of measurements. Furthermore, MC calculated dose distributions in a simulated water/air/water phantom, using NIST cross sections, were within 2% agreement with the BEAMnrc Bethe-Heitler default case.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20095258      PMCID: PMC2787063          DOI: 10.1118/1.3253300

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  24 in total

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

Authors:  M Fippel
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Accurate condensed history Monte Carlo simulation of electron transport. I. EGSnrc, the new EGS4 version.

Authors:  I Kawrakow
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Comparison of measured and Monte Carlo calculated dose distributions from the NRC linac.

Authors:  D Sheikh-Bagheri; D W Rogers; C K Ross; J P Seuntjens
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Description and dosimetric verification of the PEREGRINE Monte Carlo dose calculation system for photon beams incident on a water phantom.

Authors:  C L Hartmann Siantar; R S Walling; T P Daly; B Faddegon; N Albright; P Bergstrom; A F Bielajew; C Chuang; D Garrett; R K House; D Knapp; D J Wieczorek; L J Verhey
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Investigation of variance reduction techniques for Monte Carlo photon dose calculation using XVMC.

Authors:  I Kawrakow; M Fippel
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  On the efficiency of photon beam treatment head simulations.

Authors:  Iwan Kawrakow
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Technical note: overprediction of dose with default PRESTA-I boundary crossing in DOSXYZnrc and BEAMnrc.

Authors:  B R B Walters; I Kawrakow
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 8.  Report of the AAPM Task Group No. 105: Issues associated with clinical implementation of Monte Carlo-based photon and electron external beam treatment planning.

Authors:  Indrin J Chetty; Bruce Curran; Joanna E Cygler; John J DeMarco; Gary Ezzell; Bruce A Faddegon; Iwan Kawrakow; Paul J Keall; Helen Liu; C M Charlie Ma; D W O Rogers; Jan Seuntjens; Daryoush Sheikh-Bagheri; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Benchmarking of Monte Carlo simulation of bremsstrahlung from thick targets at radiotherapy energies.

Authors:  Bruce A Faddegon; Makoto Asai; Joseph Perl; Carl Ross; Josep Sempau; Jane Tinslay; Francesc Salvat
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  3D electron dose calculation using a Voxel based Monte Carlo algorithm (VMC).

Authors:  I Kawrakow; M Fippel; K Friedrich
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  5 in total

1.  Improved efficiency in Monte Carlo simulation for passive-scattering proton therapy.

Authors:  J Ramos Méndez; J Perl; J Schümann; J Shin; H Paganetti; B Faddegon
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  TOPAS-nBio: An Extension to the TOPAS Simulation Toolkit for Cellular and Sub-cellular Radiobiology.

Authors:  J Schuemann; A L McNamara; J Ramos-Méndez; J Perl; K D Held; H Paganetti; S Incerti; B Faddegon
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2019-01-04       Impact factor: 2.841

3.  Geometrical splitting technique to improve the computational efficiency in Monte Carlo calculations for proton therapy.

Authors:  José Ramos-Méndez; Joseph Perl; Bruce Faddegon; Jan Schümann; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Monte Carlo modeling of a Novalis Tx Varian 6 MV with HD-120 multileaf collimator.

Authors:  Luis Alberto Vazquez-Quino; Brian Massingill; Chengyu Shi; Alonso Gutierrez; Carlos Esquivel; Tony Eng; Nikos Papanikolaou; Sotirios Stathakis
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2012-09-06       Impact factor: 2.102

Review 5.  Monte Carlo methods for device simulations in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Hyojun Park; Harald Paganetti; Jan Schuemann; Xun Jia; Chul Hee Min
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 4.174

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.