[en] Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a two-dimensional (2D) ion chamber array detector quickly and accurately measures patient-specific dose distributions in treatment with passively scattered and spot scanning proton beams. Methods: The 2D ion chamber array detector MatriXX was used to measure the dose distributions in plastic water phantom from passively scattered and spot scanning proton beam fields planned for patient treatment. Planar dose distributions were measured using MatriXX, and the distributions were compared to those calculated using a treatment-planning system. The dose distributions generated by the treatment-planning system and a film dosimetry system were similarly compared. Results: For passively scattered proton beams, the gamma index for the dose-distribution comparison for treatment fields for three patients with prostate cancer and for one patient with lung cancer was less than 1.0 for 99% and 100% of pixels for a 3% dose tolerance and 3 mm distance-to-dose agreement, respectively. For spot scanning beams, the mean (± standard deviation) percentages of pixels with gamma indices meeting the passing criteria were 97.1%±1.4% and 98.8%±1.4% for MatriXX and film dosimetry, respectively, for 20 fields used to treat patients with prostate cancer. Conclusions: Unlike film dosimetry, MatriXX provides not only 2D dose-distribution information but also absolute dosimetry in fractions of minutes with acceptable accuracy. The results of this study indicate that MatriXX can be used to verify patient-field specific dose distributions in proton therapy.

[en] In this work we present a study of the impact of considering higher order terms in Moliere's multiple Coulomb scattering (MCS) theory for the purpose of calculating scanning proton pencil beam lateral dose profiles in water. The proton beam profile in air, just before entering the target medium, was modeled with a sum of Gaussians fitted with measured data. The subsequent proton scattering in water was described using the three-term Moliere distribution, which covers both small- and large-angle scatterings. We compared measured and computed lateral dose profiles at the 2 cm and at the near-Bragg peak depths for proton pencil beams with energies of 72.5 MeV, 121.2 MeV, 163.9 MeV and 221.8 MeV. At shallow depths, the Coulomb interaction model provided a good description of the profiles for all energies, except for 221.8 MeV. At the near-Bragg peak depths, the Coulomb interaction model provided a good description of the profiles only for the 72.5 MeV. The observed discrepancies may be attributed to the additional contributions from nuclear interactions, which may be quantified only after an accurate description of the MCS. The analysis presented in this work did not require user-adjustable parameters and may be carried out in a similar way for any other media, depths and proton energies.

[en] The purpose of this study is to validate a monitor unit (MU) calculation procedure for passively scattered proton therapy beams. The output dose per MU (d/MU) of a therapeutic radiation beam is traditionally calibrated under specific reference conditions. These conditions include beam energy, field size, suitable depth in water or water equivalent phantom in a low dose gradient region with known relative depth dose, and source to point of calibration distance. Treatment field settings usually differ from these reference conditions leading to a different d/MU that needs to be determined for delivering the prescribed dose. For passively scattered proton beams, the proton specific parameters, which need to be defined, are related to the energy, lateral scatterers, range modulating wheel, spread out Bragg peak (SOBP) width, thickness of any range shifter, the depth dose value relative to the normalization point in the SOBP, and scatter both from the range compensator and inhomogeneity in the patient. Following the custom for photons or electrons, a set of proton dosimetry factors, representing the changes in the d/MU relative to a reference condition, can be defined as the relative output factor (ROF), SOBP factor (SOBPF), range shifter factor (RSF), SOBP off-center factor (SOBPOCF), off-center ratio (OCR), inverse square factor (ISF), field size factor (FSF), and compensator and patient scatter factor (CPSF). The ROF, SOBPF, and RSF are the major contributors to the d/MU and were measured using an ion chamber in water tank during the clinical commissioning of each beam to create a dosimetry beam data table to be used for calculating the monitor units. The following simple formula is found to provide an independent method to determine the d/MU at the point of interest (POI) in the patient, namely, (d/MU)=ROF·SOBPF·RSF·SOBPOCF·OCR·FSF·ISF·CPSF. The monitor units for delivering the intended dose (D) to the POI can be obtained from MU=D divide (d/MU). The accuracy and robustness of the above formula were validated by calculating the d/MU in water for many different combinations of beam parameters and comparing it with the corresponding measured d/MU by an ion chamber in a water or water/plastic phantom. This procedure has been in use for MU calculation for patient treatment fields at our facility since May 2006. The differences in the calculated and measured values of the d/MU for 623 distinct fields used for patient treatment during the period of May 2006 to February 2007 are within 2% for 99% of these fields. The authors conclude that an intuitive formula similar to the one used for monitor unit calculation of therapeutic photon beams can be used to compute the monitor units of passively scattered proton therapy beams.

[en] A proton dose computational algorithm, performing an analytical superposition of infinitely narrow proton beamlets (ASPB) is introduced. The algorithm uses the standard pencil beam technique of laterally distributing the central axis broad beam doses according to the Moliere scattering theory extended to slablike varying density media. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of our computational tool by comparing it with experimental and Monte Carlo (MC) simulation data as benchmarks. In the tests, parallel wide beams of protons were scattered in water phantoms containing embedded air and bone materials with simple geometrical forms and spatial dimensions of a few centimeters. For homogeneous water and bone phantoms, the proton doses we calculated with the ASPB algorithm were found very comparable to experimental and MC data. For layered bone slab inhomogeneity in water, the comparison between our analytical calculation and the MC simulation showed reasonable agreement, even when the inhomogeneity was placed at the Bragg peak depth. There also was reasonable agreement for the parallelepiped bone block inhomogeneity placed at various depths, except for cases in which the bone was located in the region of the Bragg peak, when discrepancies were as large as more than 10%. When the inhomogeneity was in the form of abutting air-bone slabs, discrepancies of as much as 8% occurred in the lateral dose profiles on the air cavity side of the phantom. Additionally, the analytical depth-dose calculations disagreed with the MC calculations within 3% of the Bragg peak dose, at the entry and midway depths in the phantom. The distal depth-dose 20%-80% fall-off widths and ranges calculated with our algorithm and the MC simulation were generally within 0.1 cm of agreement. The analytical lateral-dose profile calculations showed smaller (by less than 0.1 cm) 20%-80% penumbra widths and shorter fall-off tails than did those calculated by the MC simulations. Overall, this work validates the usefulness of our ASPB algorithm as a reasonably fast and accurate tool for quality assurance in planning wide beam proton therapy treatment of clinical sites either composed of homogeneous materials or containing laterally extended inhomogeneities that are comparable in density and located away from the Bragg peak depths

[en] Scanned proton pencil beams carry a low-dose envelope that extends several centimeters from the individual beam's central axis. Thus, the total delivered dose depends on the size of the target volume and the corresponding number and intensity of beams necessary to cover the target volume uniformly. This dependence must be considered in dose calculation algorithms used by treatment planning systems. In this work, we investigated the sources of particles contributing to the low-dose envelope using the Monte Carlo technique. We used a validated model of our institution's scanning beam line to determine the contributions to the low-dose envelope from secondary particles created in a water phantom and particles scattered in beam line components. Our results suggested that, for high-energy beams, secondary particles produced by nuclear interactions in the water phantom are the major contributors to the low-dose envelope. For low-energy beams, the low-dose envelope is dominated by particles undergoing multiple Coulomb scattering in the beam line components and water phantom. Clearly, in the latter situation, the low-dose envelope depends directly on beam line design features. Finally, we investigated the dosimetric consequences of the low-dose envelope. Our results showed that if not modeled properly the low-dose envelope may cause clinically relevant dose disturbance in the target volume. This work suggested that this low-dose envelope is beam line specific for low-energy beams, should be thoroughly experimentally characterized and validated during commissioning of the treatment planning system, and therefore is of great concern for accurate delivery of proton scanning beam doses.

[en] Purpose: To describe a summary of the clinical commissioning of the discrete spot scanning proton beam at the Proton Therapy Center, Houston (PTC-H). Methods: Discrete spot scanning system is composed of a delivery system (Hitachi ProBeat), an electronic medical record (Mosaiq V 1.5), and a treatment planning system (TPS) (Eclipse V 8.1). Discrete proton pencil beams (spots) are used to deposit dose spot by spot and layer by layer for the proton distal ranges spanning from 4.0 to 30.6 g/cm² and over a maximum scan area at the isocenter of 30x30 cm². An arbitrarily chosen reference calibration condition has been selected to define the monitor units (MUs). Using radiochromic film and ion chambers, the authors have measured spot positions, the spot sizes in air, depth dose curves, and profiles for proton beams with various energies in water, and studied the linearity of the dose monitors. In addition to dosimetric measurements and TPS modeling, significant efforts were spent in testing information flow and recovery of the delivery system from treatment interruptions. Results: The main dose monitors have been adjusted such that a specific amount of charge is collected in the monitor chamber corresponding to a single MU, following the IAEA TRS 398 protocol under a specific reference condition. The dose monitor calibration method is based on the absolute dose per MU, which is equivalent to the absolute dose per particle, the approach used by other scanning beam institutions. The full width at half maximum for the spot size in air varies from approximately 1.2 cm for 221.8 MeV to 3.4 cm for 72.5 MeV. The measured versus requested 90% depth dose in water agrees to within 1 mm over ranges of 4.0-30.6 cm. The beam delivery interlocks perform as expected, guarantying the safe and accurate delivery of the planned dose. Conclusions: The dosimetric parameters of the discrete spot scanning proton beam have been measured as part of the clinical commissioning program, and the machine is found to function in a safe manner, making it suitable for patient treatment.

[en] The number of proton and carbon ion therapy centers is increasing; however, since the publication of the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements report, there has been no dedicated report dealing with proton therapy quality assurance. The purpose of this article is to describe the quality assurance procedures performed on the passively scattered proton therapy beams at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Proton Therapy Center in Houston. The majorities of these procedures are either adopted from procedures outlined in the American Association of Physicists in Medical Task Group (TG) 40 report or are a modified version of the TG 40 procedures. In addition, new procedures, which were designed specifically to be applicable to the synchrotron at the author's center, have been implemented. The authors' procedures were developed and customized to ensure patient safety and accurate operation of synchrotron to within explicit limits. This article describes these procedures and can be used by others as a guideline for developing QA procedures based on particle accelerator specific parameters and local regulations pertinent to any new facility.

[en] In scanned proton beam radiotherapy, multiple pencil beams are used to deliver the total dose to the target volume. Because the number of such beams can be very large, an accurate dosimetric characterization of every single pencil beam is important to provide adequate input data for the configuration of the treatment planning system. In this work, we present a method to measure the low-dose envelope of single pencil beams, known to play a meaningful role in the dose computation for scanned proton beams. We measured the low-dose proton beam envelope, which extends several centimeters outwards from the center of each single pencil beam, by acquiring lateral dose profile data, down to relative dose levels that were a factor of 10⁴ lower than the central axis dose. The overall effect of the low-dose envelope on the total dose delivered by multiple pencil beams was determined by measuring the dose output as a function of field size. We determined that the low-dose envelope can be influential even for fields as large as 20 cm x 20 cm.

[en] Purpose: Planar integral spot dose (PISD) of proton pencil beam spots (PPBSs) is a required input parameter for beam modeling in some treatment planning systems used in proton therapy clinics. The measurement of PISD by using commercially available large area ionization chambers, like the PTW Bragg peak chamber (BPC), can have large uncertainties due to the size limitation of these chambers. This paper reports the results of our study of a novel method to determine PISD values from the measured lateral dose profiles and peak dose of the PPBS. Methods: The PISDs of 72.5, 89.6, 146.9, 181.1, and 221.8 MeV energy PPBSs were determined by area integration of their planar dose distributions at different depths in water. The lateral relative dose profiles of the PPBSs at selected depths were measured by using small volume ion chambers and were investigated for their angular anisotropies using Kodak XV films. The peak spot dose along the beam's central axis (D₀) was determined by placing a small volume ion chamber at the center of a broad field created by the superposition of spots at different locations. This method allows eliminating positioning uncertainties and the detector size effect that could occur when measuring it in single PPBS. The PISD was then calculated by integrating the measured lateral relative dose profiles for two different upper limits of integration and then multiplying it with corresponding D₀. The first limit of integration was set to radius of the BPC, namely 4.08 cm, giving PISD_RBPC. The second limit was set to a value of the radial distance where the profile dose falls below 0.1% of the peak giving the PISD_full. The calculated values of PISD_RBPC obtained from area integration method were compared with the BPC measured values. Long tail dose correction factors (LTDCFs) were determined from the ratio of PISD_full/PISD_RBPC at different depths for PPBSs of different energies. Results: The spot profiles were found to have angular anisotropy. This anisotropy in PPBS dose distribution could be accounted in a reasonable approximate manner by taking the average of PISD values obtained using the in-line and cross-line profiles. The PISD_RBPC values fall within 3.5% of those measured by BPC. Due to inherent dosimetry challenges associated with PPBS dosimetry, which can lead to large experimental uncertainties, such an agreement is considered to be satisfactory for validation purposes. The PISD_full values show differences ranging from 1 to 11% from BPC measured values, which are mainly due to the size limitation of the BPC to account for the dose in the long tail regions of the spots extending beyond its 4.08 cm radius. The dose in long tail regions occur both for high energy beams such as 221.8 MeV PPBS due to the contributions of nuclear interactions products in the medium, and for low energy PPBS because of their larger spot sizes. The calculated LTDCF values agree within 1% with those determined by the Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. Conclusions: The area integration method to compute the PISD from PPBS lateral dose profiles is found to be useful both to determine the correction factors for the values measured by the BPC and to validate the results from MC simulations.

[en] Purpose: The purposes of this study were to validate a discrete spot scanning proton beam nozzle using the Monte Carlo (MC) code MCNPX and use the MC validated model to investigate the effects of a low-dose envelope, which surrounds the beam's central axis, on measurements of integral depth dose (IDD) profiles. Methods: An accurate model of the discrete spot scanning beam nozzle from The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, Texas) was developed on the basis of blueprints provided by the manufacturer of the nozzle. The authors performed simulations of single proton pencil beams of various energies using the standard multiple Coulomb scattering (MCS) algorithm within the MCNPX source code and a new MCS algorithm, which was implemented in the MCNPX source code. The MC models were validated by comparing calculated in-air and in-water lateral profiles and percentage depth dose profiles for single pencil beams with their corresponding measured values. The models were then further tested by comparing the calculated and measured three-dimensional (3-D) dose distributions. Finally, an IDD profile was calculated with different scoring radii to determine the limitations on the use of commercially available plane-parallel ionization chambers to measure IDD. Results: The distance to agreement, defined as the distance between the nearest positions of two equivalent distributions with the same value of dose, between measured and simulated ranges was within 0.13 cm for both MCS algorithms. For low and intermediate pencil beam energies, the MC simulations using the standard MCS algorithm were in better agreement with measurements. Conversely, the new MCS algorithm produced better results for high-energy single pencil beams. The IDD profile calculated with cylindrical tallies with an area equivalent to the area of the largest commercially available ionization chamber showed up to 7.8% underestimation of the integral dose in certain depths of the IDD profile. Conclusions: The authors conclude that a combination of MCS algorithms is required to accurately reproduce experimental data of single pencil beams and 3-D dose distributions for the scanning beam nozzle. In addition, the MC simulations showed that because of the low-dose envelope, ionization chambers with radii as large as 4.08 cm are insufficient to accurately measure IDD profiles for a 221.8 MeV pencil beam in the scanning beam nozzle.