Literature DB >> 3952143

Degradation of the Bragg peak due to inhomogeneities.

M Urie, M Goitein, W R Holley, G T Chen.   

Abstract

The rapid fall-off of dose at the end of range of heavy charged particle beams has the potential in therapeutic applications of sparing critical structures just distal to the target volume. Here we explored the effects of highly inhomogeneous regions on this desirable depth-dose characteristic. The proton depth-dose distribution behind a lucite-air interface parallel to the beam was bimodal, indicating the presence of two groups of protons with different residual ranges, creating a step-like depth-dose distribution at the end of range. The residual ranges became more spread out as the interface was angled at 3 degrees, and still more at 6 degrees, to the direction of the beam. A second experiment showed little significant effect on the distal depth-dose of protons having passed through a mosaic of teflon and lucite. Anatomic studies demonstrated significant effects of complex fine inhomogeneities on the end of range characteristics. Monoenergetic protons passing through the petrous ridges and mastoid air cells in the base of skull showed a dramatic degradation of the distal Bragg peak. In beams with spread out Bragg peaks passing through regions of the base of skull, the distal fall-off from 90 to 20% dose was increased from its nominal 6 to well over 32 mm. Heavy ions showed a corresponding degradation in their ends of range. In the worst case in the base of skull region, a monoenergetic neon beam showed a broadening of the full width at half maximum of the Bragg peak to over 15 mm (compared with 4 mm in a homogeneous unit density medium). A similar effect was found with carbon ions in the abdomen, where the full width at half maximum of the Bragg peak (nominally 5.5 mm) was found to be greater than 25 mm behind gas-soft-tissue interfaces. We address the implications of these data for dose computation with heavy charged particles.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3952143     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/31/1/001

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


  16 in total

1.  The NAC proton treatment planning system.

Authors:  A N Schreuder; D T Jones; J E Symons; E A De Kock; J K Hough; J Wilson; F J Vernimmen; W Schlegel; A Höss; M Lee
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Degradation of proton depth dose distributions attributable to microstructures in lung-equivalent material.

Authors:  Uwe Titt; Martin Sell; Jan Unkelbach; Mark Bangert; Dragan Mirkovic; Uwe Oelfke; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 3.  Robust Proton Treatment Planning: Physical and Biological Optimization.

Authors:  Jan Unkelbach; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 5.934

4.  Radiotherapy treatment of early-stage prostate cancer with IMRT and protons: a treatment planning comparison.

Authors:  Alexei Trofimov; Paul L Nguyen; John J Coen; Karen P Doppke; Robert J Schneider; Judith A Adams; Thomas R Bortfeld; Anthony L Zietman; Thomas F Delaney; William U Shipley
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2007-05-21       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 5.  Myths and realities of range uncertainty.

Authors:  Antony John Lomax
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Uncertainties and correction methods when modeling passive scattering proton therapy treatment heads with Monte Carlo.

Authors:  Bryan Bednarz; Hsiao-Ming Lu; Martijn Engelsman; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 7.  Proton therapy - Present and future.

Authors:  Radhe Mohan; David Grosshans
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2016-12-03       Impact factor: 15.470

8.  Site-specific range uncertainties caused by dose calculation algorithms for proton therapy.

Authors:  J Schuemann; S Dowdell; C Grassberger; C H Min; H Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Interplay effects in proton scanning for lung: a 4D Monte Carlo study assessing the impact of tumor and beam delivery parameters.

Authors:  S Dowdell; C Grassberger; G C Sharp; H Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-05-20       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 10.  Range uncertainties in proton therapy and the role of Monte Carlo simulations.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti
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.