E-Brachy: New dosimetry package for electronic brachytherapy sources.
dosimetry
electronic brachytherapy
monte carlo simulations
Journal
Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Oct 2024
26 Oct 2024
Historique:
revised:
06
08
2024
received:
28
02
2024
accepted:
18
09
2024
medline:
26
10
2024
pubmed:
26
10
2024
entrez:
26
10
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Large reported variability in the material composition and geometrical components of the Xoft electronic high-dose-rate brachytherapy Causes inter-source discrepancy in the source output. This variability is due to the manual manufacturing and assembly of the sources. This study aimed to develop a dosimetry software tool called E-Brachy to characterize the Xoft source and quantify the discrepancies in its photon spectrum and dosimetric properties. E-Brachy is based on the Geant4 Monte Carlo toolkit and consists of two parts. In part one, the geometry and material composition for the source received in the computer-aided design format from the vendor were converted to the geometry description markup language format using the GUIMesh Python tool and integrated into the E-Brachy software. There was a large variation in material composition and thickness for some of the tube components. The simulation started from electrons and resulted in x-ray generations in the anode region. Multithreading, a track length estimation, and the uniform bremsstrahlung splitting variance reduction techniques were used to decrease the simulation time and increase the x-ray production. The photon energy, position, and momentum were saved into a phase space file as the photon exited the source, but before interacting with the external environment. The obtained x-ray energy spectrum was compared with measurements from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). In part two, by sampling from the generated photons, the dose rates and dosimetric parameters according to the TG-43 protocol were calculated for model S7500 and compared to the ones previously calculated for model S700 source, which were deemed identical by the manufacturer. The material composition that resulted in the most similar spectrum as the measured NIST spectrum with Pearson's correlation coefficient of 0.99 and a calculated Euclidean difference of A software package called E-Brachy was successfully developed for the characterization and dosimetry of Xoft electronic brachytherapy sources. E-Brachy can be combined with spectral measurements to investigate the inter- and intra-source variability. The software package was tested by comparing the simulated spectra from the S7500 Xoft source model with NIST measurements and its TG-43 parameters with the S700 model. The TG-43 parameters between the two sources significantly exceed the recommendations of TG-56.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Large reported variability in the material composition and geometrical components of the Xoft electronic high-dose-rate brachytherapy Causes inter-source discrepancy in the source output. This variability is due to the manual manufacturing and assembly of the sources.
PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to develop a dosimetry software tool called E-Brachy to characterize the Xoft source and quantify the discrepancies in its photon spectrum and dosimetric properties.
METHODS
METHODS
E-Brachy is based on the Geant4 Monte Carlo toolkit and consists of two parts. In part one, the geometry and material composition for the source received in the computer-aided design format from the vendor were converted to the geometry description markup language format using the GUIMesh Python tool and integrated into the E-Brachy software. There was a large variation in material composition and thickness for some of the tube components. The simulation started from electrons and resulted in x-ray generations in the anode region. Multithreading, a track length estimation, and the uniform bremsstrahlung splitting variance reduction techniques were used to decrease the simulation time and increase the x-ray production. The photon energy, position, and momentum were saved into a phase space file as the photon exited the source, but before interacting with the external environment. The obtained x-ray energy spectrum was compared with measurements from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). In part two, by sampling from the generated photons, the dose rates and dosimetric parameters according to the TG-43 protocol were calculated for model S7500 and compared to the ones previously calculated for model S700 source, which were deemed identical by the manufacturer.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The material composition that resulted in the most similar spectrum as the measured NIST spectrum with Pearson's correlation coefficient of 0.99 and a calculated Euclidean difference of
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
A software package called E-Brachy was successfully developed for the characterization and dosimetry of Xoft electronic brachytherapy sources. E-Brachy can be combined with spectral measurements to investigate the inter- and intra-source variability. The software package was tested by comparing the simulated spectra from the S7500 Xoft source model with NIST measurements and its TG-43 parameters with the S700 model. The TG-43 parameters between the two sources significantly exceed the recommendations of TG-56.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Jewish General Hospital Foundation, and the TransMedTech Institute's activities
Organisme : Canada Research Chairs Program
ID : 252135
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
Ramachandran P. New era of electronic brachytherapy. World J Radiol. 2017;9:148‐154.
Wuu C, Kliauga P, Zaider M, Amols H. Microdosimetric evaluation of relative biological effectiveness for 103Pd, 125I, 241Am, and 192Ir brachytherapy sources. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;36:689‐697.
Rava P, Dvorak T, Markelewicz J, et al. A comparison of the biological effective dose of 50‐kV electronic brachytherapy with 192Ir high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy for vaginal cuff irradiation. Brachytherapy. 2012;11:402‐407.
Orton C, Seyedsadr M, Somnay A. Comparison of high and low dose rate remote afterloading for cervix cancer and the importance of fractionation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:1425‐1434.
Homs M, Steyerberg E, Eijkenboom W, et al,. Single‐dose brachytherapy versus metal stent placement for the palliation of dysphagia from esophageal cancer: multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2004;364:1497‐1504.
Mohanti B, Bansal M, Bahadur S, et al,. Interstitial brachytherapy with or without external beam irradiation in head and neck cancer: institute rotary cancer hospital experience. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2001;13:345‐352.
Radek A, Grochal M, Gasiński P, et al,. Stereotactic biopsy and brachytherapy in the diagnostics and treatment of brain tumors‐preliminary report. Neurol Neurochir Pol. 2001;35(5):5‐11.
Myint AS, Smith FM, Gollins SW, et al,. Dose escalation using contact x‐ray brachytherapy (Papillon) for rectal cancer: does it improve the chance of organ preservation? Br J Radiol. 2017;90:20170175.
Gerard J, Myint A, Barbet N, et al,. Targeted radiotherapy using contact x‐ray brachytherapy 50 kV. Cancers. 2022;14:1313.
Hiatt J, Davis S, Rivard M. A revised dosimetric characterization of the model S700 electronic brachytherapy source containing an anode‐centering plastic insert and other components not included in the 2006 model. Med Phys. 2015;42:2764‐2776.
Rivard M, Davis S, DeWerd L, Rusch T, Axelrod S. Calculated and measured brachytherapy dosimetry parameters in water for the Xoft Axxent x‐ray source: an electronic brachytherapy source. Med Phys. 2006;33:4020‐4032.
Nath R, Anderson L, Meli J, Olch A, Stitt J, Williamson J. Code of practice for brachytherapy physics: report of the AAPM radiation therapy committee task group no. 56. Med Phys. 1998;25:611‐634.
Simiele S, Palmer B, DeWerd L. SU‐G‐201‐10: Experimental determination of modified TG‐43 dosimetry parameters for the Xoft Axxent electronic brachytherapy source. Med Phys. 2016;43:3625‐3625.
Walter A, Khan A, DeWerd L. Measurement of the modified TG43 parameters for the bare S7600 Xoft Axxent source model. Brachytherapy. 2023;22:260‐268.
Walter A, DeWerd L. Determination of an air kerma‐rate correction coefficient for the S7600 Xoft Axxent source model. Brachytherapy. 2023;22(4):512‐517.
Pinto M, Gonçalves P. GUIMesh: a tool to import STEP geometries into Geant4 via GDML. Comput Phys Commun. 2019;239:150‐156.
Agostinelli S, Allison J, Amako K, et al,. Geant4‐A simulation toolkit. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res, Sect A. 2003;506:250‐303.
Rivard M, Coursey B, DeWerd L, et al,. Update of AAPM task group no. 43 report: a revised AAPM protocol for brachytherapy dose calculations. Med Phys. 2004;31:633‐674.
Sechopoulos I, Rogers D, Bazalova‐Carter M, et al,. RECORDS: improved reporting of Monte Carlo Radiation transport studies: report of the AAPM research committee task group 268. Med Phys. 2018;45:e1‐e5.
Kalinowski J, Enger S. RapidBrachyTG43: A Geant4‐based TG‐43 parameter and dose calculation module for brachytherapy dosimetry. Med Phys. 2024;51(5):3746‐3757.
Famulari G, Renaud M, Poole C, Evans M, Seuntjens J, Enger S. RapidBrachyMCTPS: a Monte Carlo‐based treatment planning system for brachytherapy applications. Phys Med Biol. 2018;63:175007.
Seltzer S, O'Brien M, Mitch M. New national air‐kerma standard for low‐energy electronic brachytherapy sources. J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol. 2014;119:619‐628.
Taylor R, Yegin G, Rogers D. Benchmarking brachydose: voxel based EGSnrc Monte Carlo calculations of TG‐43 dosimetry parameters. Med Phys. 2007;34:445‐457.
Apostolakis J, Giani S, Maire M, Nieminen P, Pia M, Urban L. GEANT4 Low Energy Electromagnetic Models for Electrons and Photons. INFN/AE‐99/18.1999.
Chauvie S, Guatelli S, Ivanchenko V et al,. Geant4 low energy electromagnetic physics. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record. 2004;3:1881‐1885.
Cullen D, Hubbell J, Kissel L. EPDL97: The Evaluated Photo Data Library97 Version. Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL); 1997.
Perkins S, Cullen D, Chen M, Rathkopf J, Scofield J, Hubbell J. Tables and graphs of atomic subshell and relaxation data derived from the LLNL evaluated atomic data library (EADL), Z= 1‐100. Lawrence Livermore National Lab(LLNL); 1991.
Perkins S, Cullen D, Seltzer S. Tables and graphs of electron‐interaction cross‐sections from 10 eV to 100 GeV derived from the LLNL evaluated electron data library (EEDL), Z= 1‐100. UCRL‐50400. 1991;31:21‐24.
Sheikh‐Bagheri P, Kawrakow P, Walters M, Rogers P. Integrating new technologies into the clinic: Monte Carlo and image‐guided radiation therapy ‐ Proc. of 2006 AAPM Summer School; 2006.
Williamson J. Monte Carlo evaluation of kerma at a point for photon transport problems. Med Phys. 1987;14:567‐576.
Walters B, Kawrakow I, Rogers D. History by history statistical estimators in the BEAM code system. Med Phys. 2002;29:2745‐2752.
Kawrakow I, Rogers D, Walters B. Large efficiency improvements in BEAMnrc using directional bremsstrahlung splitting. Med Phys. 2004;31:2883‐2898.
Rogers D, Ma C, Ding G, Walters B, Sheikh‐Bagheri D, Zhang G. BEAM98 Users Manual. NRC Report PIRS; 1998.
Sheikh‐Bagheri D. Monte Carlo Study of Photon Beams from Medical Linear Accelerators: Optimization, Benchmark and Spectra. Carleton University; 1999.
Alvarez D, Watson P, Popovic M, Heng V, Evans M, Seuntjens J. Monte Carlo calculation of the relative TG‐43 dosimetry parameters for the INTRABEAM electronic brachytherapy source. Phys Med Biol. 2021;66:045026.
Alvarez D, Watson P, Popovic M, Heng V, Evans M, Seuntjens J. Monte Carlo calculation of the TG‐43 dosimetry parameters for the INTRABEAM source with spherical applicators. Phys Med Biol. 2021;66:215017.
Nath R, Anderson L, Luxton G, Weaver K, Williamson J, Meigooni A. Dosimetry of interstitial brachytherapy sources: recommendations of the AAPM radiation therapy committee task group no. 43. Med Phys. 1995;22:209‐234.
DeWerd L, Culberson W, Micka J, Simiele S. A modified dose calculation formalism for electronic brachytherapy sources. Brachytherapy. 2015;14:405‐408.
Davis S. Air‐Kerma Strength Determination of a Miniature X‐Ray Source for Brachytherapy Applications. University of Wisconsin‐Madison; 2009.
Andreo P, Burns D, Salvat F. On the uncertainties of photon mass energy‐absorption coefficients and their ratios for radiation dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57:2117‐2136.
White S, Landry G, Paiva Fonseca G, et al,. Comparison of TG‐43 and TG‐186 in breast irradiation using a low energy electronic brachytherapy source. Med Phys. 2014;41:061701.
Standards N. (NIST), T. X‐ray Mass Attenuation Coefficients. 2023.
Project L. Table of Isotopes. 2012. Last accessed: December 18, 2023
Hiatt J, Rivard M, Hughes H. Simulation evaluation of NIST air‐kerma rate calibration standard for electronic brachytherapy. Med Phys. 2016;43:1119‐1129.
Liu D, Poon E, Bazalova M, et al,. Spectroscopic characterization of a novel electronic brachytherapy system. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53:61‐75.
Mainegra‐Hing E. Can we use Monte Carlo calculated free‐air chamber attenuation corrections? International Symposium On Standards, Applications And Quality Assurance In Medical Radiation Dosimetry (IDOS 2019). 2019:66‐67.
Basaglia T, Pia M, Saracco P. Evolutions in photoelectric cross section calculations and their validation. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2020;67:492‐501.
Valdes‐Cortez C, Mansour I, Rivard M, et al,. A study of type B uncertainties associated with the photoelectric effect in low‐energy Monte Carlo simulations. Phys Med Biol. 2021;66:105014.
Salvat F, Fernández‐Varea JM, Sempau J. PENELOPE‐2006: a code system for Monte Carlo simulation of electron and photon transport. NEA Data Bank, Workshop Proceeding, Barcelona. 2007:4‐7.
Rajabpour S, Saberi H, Rasouli J, Jabbari N. Comparing Geant4 physics models for proton‐induced dose deposition and radiolysis enhancement from a gold nanoparticle. Sci Rep. 2022;12:1779.
Landry G, Reniers B, Pignol J, Beaulieu L, Verhaegen F. The difference of scoring dose to water or tissues in Monte Carlo dose calculations for low energy brachytherapy photon sources. Med Phys. 2011;38:1526‐1533.
Mann‐Krzisnik D, Verhaegen F, Enger S. The influence of tissue composition uncertainty on dose distributions in brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2018;126:394‐410.
Famulari G, Alfieri J, Duclos M, Vuong T, Enger S. Can intermediate‐energy sources lead to elevated bone doses for prostate and head & neck high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy? Brachytherapy. 2020;19:255‐263.
Glickman H, Antaki M, Deufel C, Enger S. RapidBrachyMCTPS 2.0: a comprehensive and flexible Monte Carlo‐based treatment planning system for brachytherapy applications. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2007.02902