Comparison of measured and Monte Carlo calculated dose distributions from the NRC linac

被引:78
作者
Sheikh-Bagheri, D [1 ]
Rogers, DWO
Ross, CK
Seuntjens, JP
机构
[1] Natl Res Council Canada, Inst Natl Measurement Stand, Ottawa, ON K1A 0R6, Canada
[2] Carleton Univ, Ottawa Carleton Inst Phys, Ottawa, ON, Canada
关键词
Monte Carlo; BEAM; EGS4; experimental benchmark data; photon accelerator; 10; MV; 20;
D O I
10.1118/1.1290714
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
We have benchmarked photon beam simulations with the EGS4 user code BEAM [Rogers et al., Med. Phys. 22, 503-524 (1995)] by comparing calculated and measured relative ionization distributions in water from the 10 and 20 MV photon beams of the NRC linac. Unlike previous calculations, the incident electron energy is known independently to 1%, the entire extra-focal radiation is simulated, and electron contamination is accounted for. The full Monte Carlo simulation of the linac includes the electron exit window, target, flattening filter, monitor chambers, collimators, as well as the PMMA walls of the water phantom. Dose distributions are calculated using a modified version of the EGS4 user code DOSXYZ which additionally allows scoring of average energy and energy fluence in the phantom. Dose is converted to ionization by accounting for the ((L) over bar/rho)(air)(water) variation in the phantom, calculated in an identical geometry for the realistic beams using a new EGS4 user code, SPRXYZ. The variation of ((L) over bar/rho)(air)(water) with depth is a 1.25% correction at 10 MV and a 2% correction at 20 MV. At both energies, the calculated and the measured values of ionization on the central axis in the buildup region agree within 1% of maximum ionization relative to the ionization at 10 cm depth. The agreement is well within statistics elsewhere. The electron contamination contributes 0.35(+/-0.02) to 1.37(+/-0.03)% of the maximum dose in the buildup region at 10 MV and 0.26(+/-0.03) to 3.14(+/-0.07)% of the maximum dose at 20 MV. The penumbrae at 3 depths in each beam (in g/cm(2)), 1.99 (d(max) 10 MV only), 3.29 (d(max), 20 MV only), 9.79 and 19.79, agree with ionization chamber measurements to better than 1 mm. Possible causes for the discrepancy between calculations and measurements are analyzed and discussed in detail. [S0094-2405(00)00810-5].
引用
收藏
页码:2256 / 2266
页数:11
相关论文
共 51 条
[31]  
MACPHERSON MS, 1998, 617 NRC PIRS
[32]   ENERGY AND ANGULAR-DISTRIBUTIONS OF PHOTONS FROM MEDICAL LINEAR ACCELERATORS [J].
MOHAN, R ;
CHUI, C ;
LIDOFSKY, L .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1985, 12 (05) :592-597
[33]   Monte Carlo simulation of a typical 60Co therapy source [J].
Mora, GM ;
Maio, A ;
Rogers, DWO .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1999, 26 (11) :2494-2502
[34]  
Nelson W., 1985, SLAC265
[35]  
Neuenschwander H, 1997, PROCEEDINGS OF THE XIITH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE USE OF COMPUTERS IN RADIATION THERAPY, P23
[36]   Absorbed dose beam quality correction factors kQ for the NE2571 chamber in a 5 MV and a 10 MV photon beam [J].
Palmans, H ;
Mondelaers, W ;
Thierens, H .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1999, 44 (03) :647-663
[37]   MEASUREMENTS OF DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS IN SMALL BEAMS OF 6 MV X-RAYS [J].
RICE, RK ;
HANSEN, JL ;
SVENSSON, GK ;
SIDDON, RL .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1987, 32 (09) :1087-1099
[38]   BEAM - A MONTE-CARLO CODE TO SIMULATE RADIOTHERAPY TREATMENT UNITS [J].
ROGERS, DWO ;
FADDEGON, BA ;
DING, GX ;
MA, CM ;
WE, J ;
MACKIE, TR .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1995, 22 (05) :503-524
[40]  
ROGERS DWO, 1998, BEAM98 USERS MANUAL