Literature DB >> 32667848

Standardizing Monte Carlo simulation parameters for a reproducible dose-averaged linear energy transfer.

Wei Yang Calvin Koh1, Hong Qi Tan2, Khong Wei Ang2, Sung Yong Park2, Wen Siang Lew1, James Cheow Lei Lee1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETD) is one of the factors which determines relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for treatment planning in proton therapy. It is usually determined from Monte Carlo (MC) simulation. However, no standard simulation protocols were established for sampling of LETD. Simulation parameters like maximum step length and range cut will affect secondary electrons production and have an impact on the accuracy of dose distribution and LETD. We aim to show how different combinations of step length and range cut in GEANT4 will affect the result in sampling of LETD using different MC scoring methods.
METHODS: In this work, different step length and range cut value in a clinically relevant voxel geometry were used for comparison. Different LETD scoring methods were established and the concept of covariance between energy deposition per step and step length is used to explain the differences between them.
RESULTS: We recommend a maximum step length of 0.05 mm and a range cut of 0.01 mm in MC simulation as this yields the most consistent LETD value across different scoring methods. Different LETD scoring methods are also compared and variation up to 200% can be observed at the plateau of 80 MeV proton beam. Scoring Method one has one of the lowest percentage differences compared across all simulation parameters.
CONCLUSION: We have determined a set of maximum step length and range cut parameters to be used for LETD scoring in a 1 mm voxelized geometry. LETD scoring method should also be clearly defined and standardized to facilitate cross-institutional studies. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Establishing a standard simulation protocol for sampling LETD would reduce the discrepancy when comparing data across different centres, and this can improve the calculation for RBE.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32667848      PMCID: PMC7446002          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20200122

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  13 in total

1.  Elevated LET components in clinical proton beams.

Authors:  C Grassberger; H Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Analysis of the track- and dose-averaged LET and LET spectra in proton therapy using the geant4 Monte Carlo code.

Authors:  Fada Guan; Christopher Peeler; Lawrence Bronk; Changran Geng; Reza Taleei; Sharmalee Randeniya; Shuaiping Ge; Dragan Mirkovic; David Grosshans; Radhe Mohan; Uwe Titt
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 3.  Relative biological effectiveness (RBE) values for proton beam therapy. Variations as a function of biological endpoint, dose, and linear energy transfer.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Comparison of linear energy transfer scoring techniques in Monte Carlo simulations of proton beams.

Authors:  Dal A Granville; Gabriel O Sawakuchi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-07-06       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Dependence of LET on material and its impact on current RBE model.

Authors:  Hong Qi Tan; Wei Yang Calvin Koh; Lloyd Kuan Rui Tan; Jun Hao Phua; Khong Wei Ang; Sung Yong Park; Wen Siang Lew; James Cheow Lei Lee
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-07-05       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  LET-weighted doses effectively reduce biological variability in proton radiotherapy planning.

Authors:  Stephen J McMahon; Harald Paganetti; Kevin M Prise
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-11-09       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  A Monte Carlo study for the calculation of the average linear energy transfer (LET) distributions for a clinical proton beam line and a radiobiological carbon ion beam line.

Authors:  F Romano; G A P Cirrone; G Cuttone; F Di Rosa; S E Mazzaglia; I Petrovic; A Ristic Fira; A Varisano
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 8.  Comparing Photon and Charged Particle Therapy Using DNA Damage Biomarkers.

Authors:  Shayoni Ray; Egle Cekanaviciute; Ivan Paulino Lima; Brita Singers Sørensen; Sylvain V Costes
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2018-09-21

9.  A Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm for proton therapy.

Authors:  Matthias Fippel; Martin Soukup
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Efficient voxel navigation for proton therapy dose calculation in TOPAS and Geant4.

Authors:  J Schümann; H Paganetti; J Shin; B Faddegon; J Perl
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.