Monte Carlo characterization of high atomic number inorganic scintillators for in vivo dosimetry in 192 Ir brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND: There is increased interest in in vivo dosimetry for 192 Ir brachytherapy (BT) treatments using high atomic number (Z) inorganic scintillators. Their high light output enables construction of small detectors with negligible stem effect and simple readout electronics. Experimental determination of absorbed-dose energy dependence of detectors relative to water is prevalent, but it can be prone to high detector positioning uncertainties and does not allow for decoupling of absorbed-dose energy dependence from other factors affecting detector response . PURPOSE: To investigate which measurement conditions and detector properties could affect their absorbed-dose energy dependence in BT in vivo dosimetry. METHODS: We used a general-purpose Monte Carlo (MC) code PENELOPE for the characterization of high-Z inorganic scintillators with the focus on ZnSe ( Z ¯ = 32 $\bar{Z}=32$ ) Z. Two other promising media CsI ( Z ¯ = 54 $\bar{Z}=54$ ) and Al2 O3 ( Z ¯ = 11 $\bar{Z}=11$ ) were included for comparison in selected scenarios. We determined absorbed-dose energy dependence of crystals relative to water under different scatter conditions (calibration phantom 12 × 12 × 30 cm3 , characterization phantoms 20 × 20 × 20 cm3 , 30 × 30 × 30 cm3 , 40 × 40 × 40 cm3 , and patient-like elliptic phantom 40 × 30 × 25 cm3 ). To mimic irradiation conditions during prostate treatments, we evaluated whether the presence of pelvic bones and calcifications affect ZnSe response. ZnSe detector design influence was also investigated. RESULTS: In contrast to low-Z organic and medium-Z inorganic scintillators, ZnSe and CsI media have substantially greater absorbed-dose energy dependence relative to water. The response was phantom-size dependent and changed by 11% between limited- and full-scatter conditions for ZnSe, but not for Al2 O3 . For a given phantom size, a part of the absorbed-dose energy dependence of ZnSe is caused not due to in-phantom scatter but due to source anisotropy. Thus, the absorbed-dose energy dependence of high-Z scintillators is a function of not only the radial distance but also the polar angle. Pelvic bones did not affect ZnSe response, whereas large and intermediate size calcifications reduced it by 9% and 5%, respectively, when placed midway between the source and the detector. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike currently prevalent low- and medium-Z scintillators, high-Z crystals are sensitive to characterization and in vivo measurement conditions. However, good agreement between MC data for ZnSe in the present study and experimental data for ZnSe:O by Jørgensen et al. (2021) suggests that detector signal is proportional to the average absorbed dose to the detector cavity. This enables an easy correction for non-TG43-like scenarios (e.g., patient sizes and calcifications) through MC simulations. Such information should be provided to the clinic by the detector vendors.

Impact of theI-value of diamond on the energy deposition in different beam qualities.

Diamond detectors are increasingly employed in dosimetry. Their response has been investigated by means of Monte Carlo (MC) methods, but there is no consensus on what mass densityρ, mean excitation energyIand number of conduction electrons per atomnceto use in the simulations. The ambiguity occurs due to its seeming similarity with graphite (both are carbon allotropes). Except for the difference inρbetween crystalline graphite (2.265 g cm-3) and diamond (3.515 g cm-3), their dielectric properties are assumed to be identical. This is incorrect, and the two materials should be distinguished: (ρ= 2.265 g cm-3,I= 81.0 eV,nce= 1) for graphite and (ρ= 3.515 g cm-3,I= 88.5 eV,nce= 0) for diamond. Simulations done with the MC codepenelopeshow that the energy imparted in diamond decreases by up to 1% with respect to 'pseudo-diamond' (ρ= 3.515 g cm-3,I= 81.0 eV,nce= 0) depending on the beam quality and cavity thickness. The energy imparted changed the most in cavities that are small compared with the range of electrons. The difference in the density-effect term relative to graphite was the smallest for diamond owing to an interplay effect thatρ,Iandncehave on this term, in contrast to pseudo-diamond media when eitherρorIalone were adjusted. The study also presents a parameterized density-effect correction function for diamond that may be used by MC codes like EGSnrc. Theestarprogram assumes thatnce= 2 for all carbon-based materials, hence it delivers an erroneous density-effect correction term for graphite and diamond. Despite the small changes of the energy imparted in diamond simulated with two differentIvalues and expected close-to-negligible deviation from the published small-field output correction data, it is important to pay attention to material properties and model the medium faithfully.

Experimental investigation of TRS-483 reference dosimetry correction factors for Leksell Gamma Knife® Icon™ beams.

PURPOSE: Radiosurgery using the Leksell Gamma Knife® (LGK) Icon™ is an established technique used for treating intracranial lesions. The largest beam field size the LGK Icon can produce is a 16 mm diameter sphere. Despite this, reference dosimetry on the LGK Icon is typically performed using ionization chambers calibrated in 10 × 10 cm2 fields. Furthermore, plastic phantoms are widely used instead of liquid water phantoms. In an effort to resolve these issues, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in collaboration with American Association of Physicists in medicine (AAPM) recently published Technical Report Series No. 483 (TRS-483) as a Code of Practice for small-field dosimetry. TRS-483 includes small-field correction factors, k Q msr , Q 0 f msr , f ref , intended to account for the differences between setups when using small-field modalities such as the LGK Icon, and conventional setups. Since the publication of TRS-483, at least three new sets of values of k Q msr , Q 0 f msr , f ref for the LGK Icon have been published. The purpose of this study was to experimentally investigate the published values of k Q msr , Q 0 f msr , f ref for commonly used phantom and ionization chamber (IC) models for the LGK Icon. METHODS: Dose-rates from two LGK units were determined using acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and Certified Medical Grade Solid Water® (SW) phantoms, and PTW 31010 and PTW 31016 ICs. Correction factors were applied, and the resulting dose-rates compared. Relative validity of the correction factors was investigated by taking the ratios of dose-rate correction factor products. Additionally, dose-rates from the individual sectors were determined in order to calculate the beam attenuation caused by the ABS phantom adapter. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: It was seen that the dose-rate is underestimated by at least 1% when using the ABS phantom, which was attributed to fluence perturbation caused by the IC and phantom adapter. Published correction factors k Q msr , Q 0 f msr , f ref account for these effects to varying degree and should be used. The SW phantom is unlikely to underestimate the dose-rate by more than 1%, and applying k Q msr , Q 0 f msr , f ref could not be shown to be necessary. Out of the two phantom models, the ABS phantom is not recommended for use in LGK reference dosimetry. The use of newly published values of k Q msr , Q 0 f msr , f ref should be considered.

Investigation of a synthetic diamond detector response in kilovoltage photon beams.

PURPOSE: An important characteristic of radiation dosimetry detectors is their energy response which consists of absorbed-dose and intrinsic energy responses. The former can be characterized using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, whereas the latter (i.e., detector signal per absorbed dose to detector) is extracted from experimental data. Such a characterization is especially relevant when detectors are used in nonrelative measurements at a beam quality that differs from the calibration beam quality. Having in mind the possible application of synthetic diamond detectors (microDiamond PTW 60019, Freiburg, Germany) for nonrelative dosimetry of low-energy brachytherapy (BT) beams, we determined their intrinsic and absorbed-dose energy responses in 25-250 kV beams relative to a 60 Co beam, which is usually the reference beam quality for detector calibration in radiotherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three microDiamond detectors and, for comparison, two silicon diodes (PTW 60017) were calibrated in terms of air-kerma free in air in six x-ray beam qualities (from 25 to 250 kV) and in terms of absorbed dose to water in a 60 Co beam at the national metrology laboratory in Sweden. The PENELOPE/penEasy MC radiation transport code was used to calculate the absorbed-dose energy response of the detectors (modeled based on blueprints) relative to air and water depending on calibration conditions. The MC results were used to extract the relative intrinsic energy response of the detectors from the overall energy response. Measurements using an independent setup with a single ophthalmic BEBIG I25.S16 125 I BT seed (effective photon energy of 28 keV) were used as a qualitative check of the extracted intrinsic energy response correction factors. Additionally, the impact of the thickness of the active volume as well as the presence of extra-cameral components on the absorbed-dose energy response of a microDiamond detector was studied using MC simulations. RESULTS: The relative intrinsic energy response of the microDiamond detectors was higher by a factor of 2 in 25 and 50 kV beams compared to the 60 Co beam. The variation in the relative intrinsic energy response of silicon diodes was within 10% over the investigated photon energy range. The use of relative intrinsic energy response correction factors improved the agreement among the absorbed dose to water values determined using microDiamond detectors and silicon diodes, as well as with the TG-43 formalism-based calculations for the 125 I seed. MC study of microDiamond detector design features provided a possible explanation for inter-detector response variation at low-energy photon beams by differences in the effective thickness of the active volume. CONCLUSIONS: MicroDiamond detectors had a non-negligible variation in the relative intrinsic energy response (factor of 2) which was comparable to that in the absorbed-dose energy response relative to water at low-energy photon beams. Silicon diodes, in contrast, had an absorbed-dose energy dependence on photon energy that varied by a factor of 6, whereas the intrinsic energy dependence on beam quality was within 10%. It is important to decouple these two responses for a full characterization of detector energy response especially when the user and reference beam qualities differ significantly, and MC alone is not enough.

6-MV small field output factors: intra-/intermachine comparison and implementation of TRS-483 using various detectors and several linear accelerators.

PURPOSE: To investigate the applicability of output correction factors reported in TRS-483 on 6-MV small-field detector-reading ratios using four solid-state detectors. Also, to investigate variations in 6-MV small-field output factors (OF) among nominally matched linear accelerators (linacs). METHODS: The TRS-483 Code of Practice (CoP) introduced and provided output correction factors to be applied to measured detector-reading ratios to obtain OFs for several small-field detectors. Detector readings for 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm to 8 cm × 8 cm fields were measured and normalized to that of 10 cm × 10 cm field giving the detector-reading ratios. Three silicon diodes, IBA PFD, IBA EFD (IBA, Schwarzenbruck, Germany), PTW T60017, and one microdiamond, PTW T60019 (PTW, Freiburg, Germany), were used. Output correction factors from the CoP were applied to measured detector-reading ratios. Measurements were performed on six Clinac and six TrueBeam linacs (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, USA). An investigation of the relationship between the size of small fields and corresponding detector-reading ratio among the linacs was performed by measuring lateral dose profiles for 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm fields to determine the full width half maximum (FWHM). The relationship between the linacs' focal spot size and the small-field detector-reading ratio was investigated by measuring 10 cm × 10 cm lateral dose profiles and determining the penumbra width reflecting the focal spot size. Measurement geometry was as follows: gantry angle = 0°, collimator angle = 0°, source-to surface distance (SSD) = 90 cm, and depth in water = 10 cm. RESULTS: For a given linac and 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm field, the deviations in detector-reading ratios among the detectors were 9%-15% for the Clinacs and 4%-5% for the TrueBeams. Use of output correction factors reduced these deviations to 6%-12% and 3%-4%, respectively. For field sizes equal to or larger than 0.8 cm × 0.8 cm, the deviations were corrected to 1% using output correction factors for both Clinacs and TrueBeams. For a given detector and 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm field, the deviations in detector-reading ratios among the linacs were 11%-17% for the Clinacs and 5-6% for the TrueBeams. For 1 cm × 1 cm the deviations were 1%-2% for Clinacs and 1% for TrueBeams. For field sizes larger than 1 cm × 1 cm the deviations were within 1% for both Clinacs and TrueBeams. No relationship between FWHMs and detector-reading ratios for 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm was observed. For Clinacs, larger 10 cm × 10 cm penumbra width yielded lower 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm detector-reading ratio indicating an effect of the focal spot size. For TrueBeams, the spread of penumbra widths was lower compared to Clinacs and no similar relationship was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Output correction factors from the TRS-483 CoP are not sufficient for accurate determination of OF for 0.5 cm × 0.5 cm fields but are applicable for 0.8 cm × 0.8 cm to 8 cm × 8 cm fields. Nominally matched Clinacs and TrueBeams show large differences in detector-reading ratios for fields smaller than 1 cm × 1 cm.

Suitability of microDiamond detectors for the determination of absorbed dose to water around high-dose-rate 192 Ir brachytherapy sources.

PURPOSE: Experimental dosimetry of high-dose-rate (HDR) 192 Ir brachytherapy (BT) sources is complicated due to high dose and dose-rate gradients, and softening of photon energy spectrum with depth. A single crystal synthetic diamond detector microDiamond (PTW 60019, Freiburg, Germany) has a small active volume, high sensitivity, direct readout, and nearly water-equivalent active volume. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the suitability of microDiamond detectors for the determination of absorbed dose to water around HDR 192 Ir BT sources. Three microDiamond detectors were used, allowing for the comparison of their properties. METHODS: In-phantom measurements were performed using microSelectron and VariSource iX HDR 192 Ir BT treatment units. Their treatment planning systems (TPSs), Oncentra (v. 4.3) and BrachyVision (v. 13.6), respectively, were used to create irradiation plans for a cubic PMMA phantom with the microDiamond positioned at one of three source-to-detector distances (SDDs) (1.5, 2.5, and 5.5 cm) at a time. The source was stepped in increments of 0.5 cm over a total length of 6 cm to yield absorbed dose of 2 Gy at the nominal reference-point of the detector. Detectors were calibrated in 60 Co beam in terms of absorbed dose to water, and Monte Carlo (MC) calculated beam quality correction factors were applied to account for absorbed-dose energy dependence. Phantom correction factors were applied to account for differences in dimensions between the measurement phantom and a water phantom used for absorbed dose calculations made with a TPS. The same measurements were made with all three of the detectors. Additionally, dose-rate dependence and stability of the detectors were evaluated in 60 Co beam. RESULTS: The percentage differences between experimentally determined and TPS-calculated absorbed doses to water were from -1.3% to +2.9%. The values agreed to within experimental uncertainties, which were from 1.9% to 4.3% (k = 2) depending on the detector, SDD and treatment delivery unit. No dose-rate or intrinsic energy dependence corrections were applied. All microDiamonds were comparable in terms of preirradiation dose, stability of the readings and energy response, and showed a good agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that the microDiamond is potentially suitable for the determination of absorbed dose to water around HDR 192 Ir BT sources and may be used for independent verification of TPS's calculations, as well as for QA measurements of HDR 192 Ir BT treatment delivery units at clinical sites.