Dosimetry and Monte Carlo modelling of the Papillon+ contact X-ray brachytherapy device.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to develop and validate a Monte Carlo (MC) model for the Papillon+ contact x-ray brachytherapy (CXB) device, producing 50 kilovolt (kV) X-rays, specifically focusing on its application with a 25 mm diameter rectal applicator for contact therapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The validation process involved depth dose and transverse dose profile measurements using EBT3 gafchromic films positioned in a plastic water low energy range phantom. The half-value layer (HVL) was further measured and derived from the simulated X-ray spectra. RESULTS: Excellent agreement within ±2% was achieved between the measured and simulated on-axis depth dose curves for the 25 mm rectal applicator. Transverse dose profile measurements showed a high level of agreement between the simulation and measurements, on average 3.1% in contact with the applicator at the surface of the phantom and on average 1.7% at 10 mm depth. A close agreement within 5.5% was noticed concerning the HVL between the measurement and simulation. The simulated gamma spectra and 2D-dose distribution demonstrated a soft X-ray energy spectrum and a uniform dose distribution in contact with the applicator. CONCLUSIONS: An MC model was successfully developed for the Papillon+ eBT device with a 25 mm diameter rectal applicator. The validated model, with its demonstrated accuracy in depth dose and transverse dose profile simulations, is a valuable tool for quality assurance and patient safety and, in a later phase, may be used for treatment planning, dose calculations and tissue inhomogeneity corrections.

Intraoperative electron beam intercomparison of 6 sites using mailed thermoluminescence dosimetry: Absolute dose and energy.

PURPOSE: In 2018, the Netherlands Commission on Radiation Dosimetry subcommittee on IORT initiated a limited intercomparison of electron IORT (IOERT) in Belgium and The Netherlands. The participating institutions have enough variability in age, type of equipment, and in dose calibration protocols. METHODS: In this study, three types of IOERT-dedicated mobile accelerators were represented: Mobetron 2000, LIAC HWL and LIAC. Mobetron produces electron beams with energies of 6, 9 and 12 MeV, while LIAC HWL and LIAC can deliver 6, 8, 10 and 12 MeV electron beams. For all energies, the reference beam (10 cm diameter, 0° incidence) and 5 cm diameter beams were measured, as these smaller beams are used more frequently in clinic. The mailed TLD service from the Radiation Dosimetry Services (RDS, Houston, USA) has been used. Following RDS' standard procedures, each beam was irradiated to 300 cGy at dmax with TLDs around dmax and around depth of 50 % dose (R50). Absolute dose at 100 % and beam energy, expressed as R50, could be verified in this way. RESULTS: All absolute doses and energies under reference conditions were well within RDS-stated uncertainties: dose deviations were <5 % and deviations in R50 were <5 mm. For the small 5 cm beams, all results were also within acceptance levels except one absolute dose value. Deviations were not significantly dependent on manufacturer, energy, diameter and calibration protocol. CONCLUSIONS: All absolute dose values, except one of a non-reference beam, and all energy values were well within the measurement accuracy of RDS TLDs.

High precision bladder cancer irradiation by integrating a library planning procedure of 6 prospectively generated SIB IMRT plans with image guidance using lipiodol markers.

PURPOSE: To increase local control and decrease side effects for urinary bladder cancer patients by integrating a library planning procedure with image guidance using lipiodol markers. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty patients with T2-T4N0M0 grade 2-3 invasive bladder carcinoma were treated according to an online adaptive protocol. Initially, the gross tumour volume (GTV) was demarcated during cystoscopy by injecting several drops of lipiodol in the submucosa around the tumour. Subsequently two CT scans were acquired with a full bladder and a voided bladder. On both scans, the boost volume (GTV) and the low-risk bladder volume were delineated. Using an interpolation tool, six concomitant boost IMRT plans with increasing bladder volumes were generated. For each fraction the procedure at the treatment unit was as follows: Firstly, a ConeBeam-CT was acquired and based on the amount of bladder filling the best fitting bladder contours and corresponding GTV and IMRT plans were selected. Secondly, the lipiodol markers were registered using the corresponding GTV contours and it was verified that the corresponding 95%-isodose surface covered the entire bladder. Finally, an online setup correction was applied based on this registration and the corresponding treatment plan was irradiated. RESULTS: The lipiodol markers were very useful in outlining the GTV at the planning CT and for daily setup correction. While the patients strived for a full bladder filling at time of the treatment, this was seldom accomplished. Due to our protocol an appropriate plan with adequate coverage of the PTV and without excessive dose to healthy tissue was delivered every day. The treatment was very well tolerated by all patients. At the end of the treatment no grade 3 urinary or gastro-intestinal toxicity was observed. After a median follow-up of 28 months two local relapses occurred. CONCLUSION: Using the library planning approach combined with online image guidance using lipiodol markers, we were able to deliver a highly conformal dose distribution to all bladder cancer patients achieving promising clinical results.

Dosimetric comparison of interactive planned and dynamic dose calculated prostate seed brachytherapy.

PURPOSE: To compare the dosimetrical results of an interactive planning procedure and a procedure based on dynamic dose calculation for permanent prostate brachytherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 6/2000 and 11/2005, 510 patients underwent (125)I implants for T1-T2 prostate cancer. Before 4/2003, 187 patients were treated using an interactive technique that included needle updating. After that period, 323 patients were treated with a more refined dynamic technique that included constant updating of the deposited seed position. The comparison is based on postimplant dose - volume parameters such as the V(100) and d(90) for the target, V(100)(r) for the rectum and d(10)(u) for the urethra. Furthermore, the target volume ratios (TVR identical with V(100)(body)/V(100)), and the homogeneity indices (HI identical with [V(100)-V(150)]/V(100)) were calculated as additional quality parameters. RESULTS: The dose outside the target volume was significantly reduced, the V(100)(r) decreased from 1.4 cm(3) for the interactive technique to 0.6 cm(3) for the dynamic technique. Similarly the mean TVR reduced from 1.66 to 1.44. In addition, the mean V(100) increased from 92% for the interactive procedure to 95% for the dynamic procedure. More importantly, the percentage of patients with a V(100) < 80% reduced from 5% to 1%. A slight decline was observed with regard to the d(10)(u) (136% vs. 140%) and the HI (0.58 vs. 0.51). CONCLUSION: The dynamic implant procedure resulted in improved implants. Almost ideal dose coverage was achieved, while minimizing the dose outside the prostate.