dosimetry and qa of proton and heavier ion beams
Post on 20-Oct-2021
7 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Dosimetry and QA of proton and heavier ion beams
Stanislav VatnitskiyEBG MedAustron GmbH
Wiener Neustadt, Austria
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Content
• Introduction• Reference dosimetry
Methods, detectors, protocols• Dosimetry in non-reference conditions and QA
measurements Methods, detectors
• Recommendations
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
about 25 treatment facilities are established
another 20 proton and light-ion beam centers
are planned to be open in next 5 years
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
• Acceptance testing and commissioning of delivery beam lines
• Reference calibration of clinical beams
• Commissioning of treatment planning systems
• Periodic QA checks
• Verification of dose delivery
Dosimetry tasks in proton and heavier ion beam radiotherapy
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Consistent andharmonized
dosimetry guidelines
Accurate beam calibration
Perform planning of high-precision conformal therapy
Provide interchangeof clinical experience
and treatment protocols between facilities
Ensure exact delivery of prescribed dose
Provide standardizationof dosimetry in radiobiology
experiments
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
• Basic output calibration of a clinical beam, is a direct determination of absorbed dose per MU in water under specific reference conditions
• Reference dosimetry techniques • Faraday Cup • Calorimetry• Ionization chamber
Reference dosimetry
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Absorbed dosedeterminationin reference
conditions for proton and heavier
ion beamsCalorimeter
Thimble air-filled
ionizationchamber
Faraday Cup
Lack of national andinternational
dosimetry standards
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Dw = (N/A) (S/ρ)w * 1.602 x 10 -10
N : number of protons per MU collected in the FCA : effective area of the beam (S/ρ)w : stopping power for water at the incident proton energy
FC-based calibration of the ionization chamber
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
FC-based calibration of the ionization chamber
ICFC
10( , ) ( / ) 1.602 10w wND Q FC SA
ρ −= × × ×, ,
( , )wD w FC corr
D Q FCNM
=
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
0.920
0.930
0.940
0.950
0.960
0.970
0.980
0.990
1.000
1.010
1.020
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Institution
ratio
to th
e m
ean
1995 PTCOG Dosimetry intercomparison
Institution’s statement of proton dose
FC calibration
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Main characteristics of calorimetry dosimetry:
• Energy imparted to matter by radiation causes an increase in temperature
• Dose absorbed in the sensitive volume is proportional to
• is measured with thermocouples or thermistors.
• Calorimetric dosimetry is the most precise of all absolute dosimetry techniques.
∆T.
∆T.
∆T
Calorimetry-based calibration of the ionization chamber
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
• Two types of absorbed dose calorimeter are used in charged particle beams:
In graphite calorimetersthe average temperaturerise is measured in a graphite body that is thermally insulated from surrounding bodies (jackets) by evacuated vacuum gaps.
Calorimetry-based calibrationof the ionization chamber
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
In sealed water calorimeters low thermal diffusivity of water enables the temperature rise to be measured directly at a point in continuous water.
Calorimetry-based calibrationof the ionization chamber
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
( , ) (1 )w TD Q cal c V D= ×Θ×∆ × +
Calorimetry-based calibrationof the ionization chamber
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
( , ) (1 )w TD Q cal c V D= ×Θ×∆ × + , ,( , )w
D w c corr
D Q calNM
=
Calorimetry-based calibrationof the ionization chamber
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Water calorimeteryin a 250 MeV proton beam at LLUMC
Water Calorimeter
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Ion chamber measurements (dummy calorimeter) in a 250 MeV proton beam
Dummy calorimeter with IC
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Graphite calorimetry protons at CCO carbon ions at NIRS
Palmans et al 2004
Sakama et al 2008
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Absorbed dosedeterminationin reference
conditions for light ionbeams
Calorimeter
Thimble air-filled
ionizationchamber
Faraday Cup
Lack of national andinternational
dosimetry standards
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Protocols/Code of Practice for proton and heavier ion beam dosimetry
Only a Protocol based on standards of absorbed dose to water is being recommended by ICRU/IAEA Reports for protons and heavier ions
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
ND,w - based formalism - IAEA TRS-398
Dw(zref) at any user quality Q(photons, electrons, protons, heavier ions)
Dw,Q= MQ ND,w,Qo kQ,Qo
beamqualityfactor
calibrationcoefficientat Qo
corrected instrument reading at Q
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
• Both cylindrical and parallel platechambers are recommended for reference dosimetry
• Parallel plate chambers yield higher uc in absolute Dw, though are better suited for relative dosimetry
• cylindrical chambers recommended for SOBP width>2 cm
• For SOBP widths < 2 cm parallel plate chambers must be used
Ionization chambers
ICRU/IAEA Report 78:dosimetry equipment
• Versatile electrometer with cable and connectors fitting to the electrometer and all chambers
• thermometer, barometer
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Water phantoms for reference dosimetry
Water is the only standard and most universal phantom
material for proton and heavier ions dosimetry measurements
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Reference calibration of protonand heavier ion beams: reference conditions
Passive Scatteringprotons,
carbon ions
Carbon ions spot scanning
Calibration at SOBP
Calibration at plateau
Plateau versus SOBP:• superposition of beams with
different intensities• not continuous and reproducible• mix of particles with high and low LET• fluence corrections are small
Goitein, Lomax and Pedroni, 2002
Calibration at SOBP
Protonsspot scanning
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
phantomprotons
ion chamber
depth, cm0 10 20 30 40
rela
tive
dose
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
off-axis distance, cm-12 -8 -4 0 4 8 12
rela
tive
dose
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Reference geometrypassive beam delivery
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Proton spot scanning calibration at PSI
( Pedroni et al)
• dose model predictsthe number of protons/Gy
• 10x10x10 cm3 box is filled inwith homogeneous dose distribution to a dose of 1Gy
10x10x10
IC
• ion chamber is placedat a residual range 5g/cm2
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
• A solid phantom rather than a water phantom is used in scanned ion beam
• A field of 5 cm x 5 cm rather than 10 cm x 10 cm is used
• The reference depth is in the plateau region of a monoenergeticBragg peak (depth of 7 mm) instead of the center of a SOBP
• The calibration is dependent on the initial particles energy and several energy points are selected
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Lack of standards => Qo = 60Co
( )( )
( )( ) 606060
,
,
w air airQ Q Q
Qairw air CoCoCo
s W pk
W ps=
Q dis wall cav celp p p p p=≈ 1 for protons
≈ 1 for heavier ions
≠ 1 for 60Co
This approach would ultimately lead to a dosimetry system, where the dose applied to a patient is traceable to the dosimetry standards of the national PSDL.
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Stopping powers for proton beams
• Basic proton stopping powers from ICRU 49
• Calculation using MC code PETRA following Spencer-Attix cavity theory
• Transport included secondary electrons and nuclear inelastic process
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Ratio of stopping powers water/air for heavy ions calculated using the computer codes developed by Salamon (for C, Ne, Ar and He) and by Hiraoka and Bichsel (for C). Data for protons and He from ICRU 49.
0 5 10 15 20 25 301.120
1.125
1.130
1.135
1.140
protonsalpha particles
carbon ions
C (Salamon) Ne (Salamon) Ar (Salamon) He (Salamon) p (ICRU-49) He (ICRU-49) C (H and B)
wat
er/a
ir st
oppi
ng-p
ower
ratio
residual range (g cm-2)
1.13
A constant value of sw,air = 1.13 adopted in TRS 398 (ignores fragments)
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Geitner et al 2006
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Values of w/e for protons and carbon ions deduced from comparison of ionization
chamber and calorimeter measurements
33
34
35
36
0 50 100 150 200
Proton energy / MeV
(wai
r/e) p
/ (J
C-1
)
Delacroix et al., 1997Palmans et al., 2004Palmans et al., 1996Hashemian et al., 2003Siebers et al., 1995Schulz et al., 1992Brede et al., 2006Medin et al., 2006
Sakama et al 2008ICRU 78
Proton beam
34.2 J C-1
35.7 J C-1
34.5 J C-1
TRS 398
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Proton perturbation factors
Palmans et al. 2000
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
recombination
initial(columnar)
general(volume)
-++
-
“intra-track”one single track
dose or dose-rate independent
“inter-tracks”multiple tracks
dose or dose-rate dependent
Courtesy of P. Andreo
The user should verify recombination corrections against independent method
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Kanai t. et al., Phys. Med. Biol. (1998) 43, 3549-3558
Initial recombination in pp chamber in different LET beams
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Issues to be resolved in upcoming ICRU report on light-ion beams
• TRS 398 may be adopted for light-ion beam dosimetry with beam-line specific adjustments
• The currently recommended values of sw,air (and Wair) for absolute dosimetry should be re-considered
• Uncertainties in stopping powers, including those of the I-values for different tissues (5-10%), must be taken into account to re-estimate what “precision” is really achievable in clinical practice
The proposed approach in upcoming ICRU Report on light-ion beamswould ultimately lead to a dosimetry system, where the dose applied to a patient is traceable to the dosimetry standards of the national PSDL.
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Standard uncertainties in Dw (TRS 398, ICRU 78)
u(ND,wSSDL) = 0.6 kQ calc
Co-60 gamma-rays 0.9High-energy photons 1.5High-energy electrons 1.4-2.1
Proton beams 2.0-2.3Heavier ions 3.0-3.4
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Dosimetry in non-reference conditions
Relative dose measurements require no detector calibration other than verification of linearity of response within assumed dynamic range of measurement conditions
Dosimetry tasks• Routine daily clinical physics
activity• Beam line commissioning• Collecting data for TPS• Periodic QA
Beam characteristicsDepth doseLateral profilesOutput factors
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Active detectors:Ion chambers, diodes, diamond detector, scintillators(single and multiple)
Passive detectors:Destructive – TLDNon-destructive –Films, alanine
Direct display of the current dose rate or the accumulating dose
Probe accumulates the dose during irradiation. The value of dose is obtained after irradiation with read-out device
Detectors for measurements in non-reference conditions
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Detectors for measurements in non-reference conditions
Active detectors
Passive detectors
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Because of their small size silicon diodes are convenient for profile measurements and characterization of small proton beams.
The response of diodes must always be checkedagainst ionometric measurements before use.
Ionization chamber Diode
Diodes for characterization of small beams
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Diodes for characterization of small proton beams
Newhauser et al, 2003
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Depth in water, mm
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Rel
ativ
e do
se
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
Markus chamberDiode DEB 50Diamond detectorPinPoint chamber
126 MeV protons, collimator 30 mm, no modulation
Characterization of small proton beams
Characterization of scanned proton pencil beams
Gillin et al, 2010
Depth dose distribution Beam monitor calibration
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Multi-detector systemsfor characterization and QA of proton and carbon beams
Cirio et al, 2004
courtesy by PTW
courtesy by IBANichiporov et al. 2007
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Palmans, 2003
Advantages:
• Signal is preserved after readout• Exhibits long term stability• Near tissue equivalent• Linear dose response
Disadvantages:
• Low sensitivity• Reduction of Bragg Peak• ESR technique is quite
elaborous
Alanine ESR proton dosimetry
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
2-D dosimetry and QA with fluorescent screen and CCD camera
Boon et al, 2000
Courtesy of J. Heese
E. Pedroni et al 2005
2-D dosimetry and QA with fluorescent screen and CCD camera
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Rosenthal et al, 2004
2-D dosimetry and QA with fluorescent screen and CCD camera
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
TLD film for 2-D characterization of clinical proton beams
Olko et al, 2004
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
off-axis data, mm
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
rela
tive
dose
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0 MD- 55 filmKodak XV-2 film
A. Entrance B. SOBP region
Radiochromic film for characterization of clinical proton beams
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
155 MeV, modulation 3 cm, normalized at 11 cm
water equivalent depth, cm
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
rela
tive
dose
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1parallel plate ionization chamber
MD-55 film, 70 Gy
Radiochromic film for characterization of clinical proton beams
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
3-D Gel dosimetry for characterization of clinical proton beams
Heufelder et al, 2003
Magic Gel
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Heufelder et al, 2003
3-D Gel dosimetry for characterization of clinical proton beams
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Implementation of ICRU Report 78IAEA TRS 398
provide a level of accuracycomparable to that
in calibration of photon and electron beams
harmonize clinical dosimetryat proton and heavier
ion beam facilities
Current status of proton and heavier ion beam dosimetry
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
PROTONSStereotactic radiosurgery
CARBON IONSActive beam delivery
PROTONS Passive beam deliveryActive beam delivery
Current status of proton and light-ion beam dosimetry:
ICRU Report 78IAEA TRS 398(center of SOBP)
IAEA TRS 398(Plateau or center
SOPB)
MC
PTCOG 49 Educational WH 17-19 May 2010, NIRS Japan S. Vatnitskiy
Acknowledgements
• Members of ICRU/IAEA Committee Report 78• O. Jäkel and colleagues at DKFZ• E. Pedroni and colleagues at PSI • H. Palmans
top related