Measured and Monte Carlo simulated electron backscatter to the monitor chamber for the Varian TrueBeam Linac.

To accurately simulate therapeutic electron beams using Monte Carlo methods, backscatter from jaws into the monitor chamber must be accounted for via the backscatter factor, S b. Measured and simulated values of S b for the TrueBeam are investigated. Two approaches for measuring S b are presented. Both require service mode operation with the dose and pulse forming networking servos turned off in order to assess changes in dose rate with field size. The first approach samples an instantaneous dose rate, while the second approach times the delivery of a fixed number of monitor units to assess dose rate. Dose rates were measured for 6, 12 and 20 MeV electrons for jaw- or MLC-shaped apertures between [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] cm2. The measurement techniques resulted in values of S b that agreed within 0.21% for square and asymmetric fields collimated by the jaws. Measured values of S b were used to calculate the forward dose component in a virtual monitor chamber using BEAMnrc. Based on this forward component, simulated values of S b were calculated and compared to measurement and Varian's VirtuaLinac simulations. BEAMnrc results for jaw-shaped fields agreed with measurements and with VirtuaLinac simulations within 0.2%. For MLC-shaped fields, the respective measurement techniques differed by as much as 0.41% and BEAMnrc results differed with measurement by as much as 0.4%, however, all measured and simulated values agreed within experimental uncertainty. Measurement sensitivity was not sufficient to capture the small backscatter effect due to the MLC, and Monte Carlo predicted backscatter from the MLC to be no more than 0.3%. Backscatter from the jaws changed the electron dose rate by up to 2.6%. This reinforces the importance of including a backscatter factor in simulations of electron fields shaped with secondary collimating jaws, but presents the option of ignoring it when jaws are retracted and collimation is done with the MLC.

Validation of Varian TrueBeam electron phase-spaces for Monte Carlo simulation of MLC-shaped fields.

PURPOSE: This work evaluates Varian's electron phase-space sources for Monte Carlo simulation of the TrueBeam for modulated electron radiation therapy (MERT) and combined, modulated photon and electron radiation therapy (MPERT) where fields are shaped by the photon multileaf collimator (MLC) and delivered at 70 cm SSD. METHODS: Monte Carlo simulations performed with EGSnrc-based BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc and penelope-based PRIMO are compared against diode measurements for 5 × 5, 10 × 10, and 20 × 20 cm(2) MLC-shaped fields delivered with 6, 12, and 20 MeV electrons at 70 cm SSD (jaws set to 40 × 40 cm(2)). Depth dose curves and profiles are examined. In addition, EGSnrc-based simulations of relative output as a function of MLC-field size and jaw-position are compared against ion chamber measurements for MLC-shaped fields between 3 × 3 and 25 × 25 cm(2) and jaw positions that range from the MLC-field size to 40 × 40 cm(2). RESULTS: Percent depth dose curves generated by BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc and PRIMO agree with measurement within 2%, 2 mm except for PRIMO's 12 MeV, 20 × 20 cm(2) field where 90% of dose points agree within 2%, 2 mm. Without the distance to agreement, differences between measurement and simulation are as large as 7.3%. Characterization of simulated dose parameters such as FWHM, penumbra width and depths of 90%, 80%, 50%, and 20% dose agree within 2 mm of measurement for all fields except for the FWHM of the 6 MeV, 20 × 20 cm(2) field which falls within 2 mm distance to agreement. Differences between simulation and measurement exist in the profile shoulders and penumbra tails, in particular for 10 × 10 and 20 × 20 cm(2) fields of 20 MeV electrons, where both sets of simulated data fall short of measurement by as much as 3.5%. BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc simulated outputs agree with measurement within 2.3% except for 6 MeV MLC-shaped fields. Discrepancies here are as great as 5.5%. CONCLUSIONS: TrueBeam electron phase-spaces available from Varian have been implemented in two distinct Monte Carlo simulation packages to produce dose distributions and outputs that largely reflect measurement. Differences exist in the profile shoulders and penumbra tails for the 20 MeV phase-space off-axis and in the outputs for the 6 MeV phase-space.

Comparison of measured Varian Clinac 21EX and TrueBeam accelerator electron field characteristics.

Dosimetric comparisons of radiation fields produced by Varian's newest linear accelerator, the TrueBeam, with those produced by older Varian accelerators are of interest from both practical and research standpoints. While photon fields have been compared in the literature, similar comparisons of electron fields have not yet been reported. In this work, electron fields produced by the TrueBeam are compared with those produced by Varian's Clinac 21EX accelerator. Diode measurements were taken of fields shaped with electron applicators and delivered at 100 cm SSD, as well as those shaped with photon MLCs without applicators and delivered at 70 cm SSD for field sizes ranging from 5 × 5 to 25 × 25 cm² at energies between 6 and 20 MeV. Additionally, EBT2 and EBT3 radio-chromic film measurements were taken of an MLC-shaped aperture with closed leaf pairs delivered at 70 cm SSD using 6 and 20 MeV electrons. The 6 MeV fields produced by the TrueBeam and Clinac 21EX were found to be almost indistinguishable. At higher energies, TrueBeam fields shaped by electron applicators were generally flatter and had less photon contamination compared to the Clinac 21EX. Differences in PDDs and profiles fell within 3% and 3 mm for the majority of measurements. The most notable differences for open fields occurred in the profile shoulders for the largest applicator field sizes. In these cases, the TrueBeam and Clinac 21EX data differed by as much as 8%. Our data indicate that an accurate electron beam model of the Clinac 21EX could be used as a starting point to simulate electron fields that are dosimetrically equivalent to those produced by the TrueBeam. Given that the Clinac 21EX shares head geometry with Varian's iX, Trilogy, and Novalis TX accelerators, our findings should also be applicable to these machines.

RapidArc treatment verification in 3D using polymer gel dosimetry and Monte Carlo simulation.

The aim of this study was to verify the advanced inhomogeneous dose distribution produced by a volumetric arc therapy technique (RapidArc) using 3D gel measurements and Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. The TPS (treatment planning system)-calculated dose distribution was compared with gel measurements and MC simulations, thus investigating any discrepancy between the planned dose delivery and the actual delivery. Additionally, the reproducibility of the delivery was investigated using repeated gel measurements. A prostate treatment plan was delivered to a 1.3 liter nPAG gel phantom using one single arc rotation and a target dose of 3.3 Gy. Magnetic resonance imaging of the gel was carried out using a 1.5 T scanner. The MC dose distributions were calculated using the VIMC-Arc code. The relative absorbed dose differences were calculated voxel-by-voxel, within the volume enclosed by the 90% isodose surface (VOI(90)), for the TPS versus gel and TPS versus MC. The differences between the verification methods, MC versus gel, and between two repeated gel measurements were investigated in the same way. For all volume comparisons, the mean value was within 1% and the standard deviation of the differences was within 2.5% (1SD). A 3D gamma analysis between the dose matrices were carried out using gamma criteria 3%/3 mm and 5%/5 mm (% dose difference and mm distance to agreement) within the volume enclosed by the 50% isodose surface (VOI(50)) and the 90% isodose surface (VOI(90)), respectively. All comparisons resulted in very high pass rates. More than 95% of the TPS points were within 3%/3 mm of both the gel measurement and MC simulation, both inside VOI(50) and VOI(90). Additionally, the repeated gel measurements showed excellent consistency, indicating reproducible delivery. Using MC simulations and gel measurements, this verification study successfully demonstrated that the RapidArc plan was both accurately calculated and delivered as planned.

Evaluation of the analytical anisotropic algorithm in an extreme water-lung interface phantom using Monte Carlo dose calculations.

Our study compares the performance of the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA), a new superposition-convolution algorithm recently implemented in the Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) Integrated Treatment Planning System (TPS), to that of the pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithm in an extreme (C-shaped, horizontal and vertical boundaries) water-lung interface phantom. Monte Carlo (MC) calculated dose distributions for a variety of clinical beam configurations at nominal energies of 6-MV and 18-MV are used as benchmarks in the comparison. Dose profiles extracted at three depths (4, 10, and 16 cm), two-dimensional (2D) maps of the dose differences, and dose difference statistics are used to quantify the accuracy of both photon-dose calculation algorithms. Results show that the AAA is considerably more accurate than the PBC, with the standard deviation of the dose differences within a region encompassing the lung block reduced by a factor of 2 and more. Confidence limits with the AAA were 4% or less for all beam configurations investigated; with the PBC, confidence limits ranged from 3.5% to 11.2%. Finally, AAA calculations for the small 4 x 4 18-MV beam, which is poorly modeled by PBC (dose differences as high as 16.1%), provided the same accuracy as the PBC model of the 6-MV beams commonly acceptable in clinical situations.