• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Medical Physics Conference
• /
• 2003.09a
• /
• pp.41-41
• /
• 2003

Purpose: Even if the wedge filter is widely used for the radiation therapy to modify the photon beam intensity, the wedged photon beam dose calculation is not so easy. Radiation therapy planning systems (RTPS) have been used the empirical or semi-analytical methods such as attenuation method using wedge filter parameters or wedge filter factor obtained from measurement. However, these methods can cause serious error in penumbra region as well as in edge region. In this study, we propose the dose calculation algorithm for wedged field to minimize the error especially in the outer beam region. Materials and Method: Modified intensity by wedge filter was calculated using tissue-maximum ratio (TMR) and scatter-maximum ratio (SMR) of wedged field. Profiles of wedged and non-wedged direction was also used. The result of new dose calculation was compared with measurement and the result from attenuation method. Results: Proposed algorithm showed the good agreement with measurement in the high dose-gradient region as well as in the inner beam region. The error was decreased comparing to attenuation method. Conclusion: Although necessary beam data for the RTPS commissioning was increased, new algorithm would guarantee the improved dose calculation accuracy for wedged field. In future, this algorithm could be adopted in RTPS.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.103-114
• /
• 1999

In this study, as a preliminary study for developing a full 3D photon dose calculation algorithm, We developed 2.5D photon dose calculation algorithm by extending 2D calculation algorithm to allow non-coplanar configurations of photon beams. For this purpose, we defined the 3d patient coordinate system and the 3d beam coordinate system, which are appropriate to 3d treatment planning and dose calculation. and then, calculate a transformation matrix between them. For dose calculation, we extended 2d "Clarkson-Cunningham" model to 3d one, which can calculate wedge fields as well as regular and irregular fields on arbitrary plane. The simple Batho's power-law method was implemented as an inhomogeneity correction. We evaluated the accuracy of our dose model following procedures of AAPM TG#23; radiation treatment planning dosimetry verifications for 4MV of Varian Clinac-4. As results, PDDs (percent depth dose) of cubic fields, the accuracy of calculation are within 1% except buildup region, and $\pm$3% for irregular fields and wedge fields. And for 45$^{\circ}$ oblique incident beam, the deviations between measurements and calculations are within $\pm$4%. In the case of inhomogeneity correction, the calculation underestimate 7% at the lung/water boundary and overestimate 3% at the bone/water boundary. At the conclusions, we found out our model can predict dose with 5% accuracy at the general condition. we expect our model can be used as a tool for educational and research purpose.. purpose..

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.54-62
• /
• 2020

Dose calculation algorithms play an important role in radiation therapy and are even the basis for optimizing treatment plans, an important feature in the development of complex treatment technologies such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy. We reviewed the past and current status of dose calculation algorithms used in the treatment planning system for radiation therapy. The radiation-calculating dose calculation algorithm can be broadly classified into three main groups based on the mechanisms used: (1) factor-based, (2) model-based, and (3) principle-based. Factor-based algorithms are a type of empirical dose calculation that interpolates or extrapolates the dose in some basic measurements. Model-based algorithms, represented by the pencil beam convolution, analytical anisotropic, and collapse cone convolution algorithms, use a simplified physical process by using a convolution equation that convolutes the primary photon energy fluence with a kernel. Model-based algorithms allowing side scattering when beams are transmitted to the heterogeneous media provide more precise dose calculation results than correction-based algorithms. Principle-based algorithms, represented by Monte Carlo dose calculations, simulate all real physical processes involving beam particles during transportation; therefore, dose calculations are accurate but time consuming. For approximately 70 years, through the development of dose calculation algorithms and computing technology, the accuracy of dose calculation seems close to our clinical needs. Next-generation dose calculation algorithms are expected to include biologically equivalent doses or biologically effective doses, and doctors expect to be able to use them to improve the quality of treatment in the near future.

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.1685-1689
• /
• 2016

Physical wedges still can be used as missing tissue compensators or filters to alter the shape of isodose curves in a target volume to reach an optimal radiotherapy plan without creating a hotspot. The aim of this study was to investigate the dosimetric properties of physical wedges filters such as off-axis photon fluence, photon spectrum, output factor and half value layer. The photon beam quality of a 6 MV Primus Siemens modified by 150 and 450 physical wedges was studied with BEAMnrc Monte Carlo (MC) code. The calculated present depth dose and dose profile curves for open and wedged photon beam were in good agreement with the measurements. Increase of wedge angle increased the beam hardening and this effect was more pronounced at the heal region. Using such an accurate MC model to determine of wedge factors and implementation of it as a calculation algorithm in the future treatment planning systems is recommended.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.138-147
• /
• 2005

The Monte Carlo method cannot have been used for routine treatment planning because of heavy time consumption for the acceptable accuracy. Since calculation time is proportional to particle histories, we can save time by decreasing the number of histories. However, a small number of histories can cause serious uncertainties. In this study, we proposed Monte Carlo dose computation time and uncertainty reduction method using specially designed filters and adaptive denoising process. Proposed algorithm was applied to 6 MV photon and 21 MeV electron dose calculations in homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms. Filtering time was negligible comparing to Monte Carlo simulation time. The accuracy was improved dramatically in all situations and the simulation of 1 $\%$ to 10$\%$ number of histories of benchmark in photon and electron dose calculation showed the most beneficial result. The empirical reduction of necessary histories was about a factor of ten to fifty from the result.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.38-46
• /
• 2001

Purpose : The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of tissue inhomogeneities when appling to contrast medium among Homogeneous, Batho and ETAR dose calculation method in RTP system. Method and Material : We made customized heterogeneous phantom it filled with water or contrast medium slab. Phantom scan data have taken PQ 5000 (CT scanner, Marconi, USA) and then dose was calculated in 3D RTP (AcQ-Plan, Marconi, USA) depends on dose calculation algorithm (Homogeneous, Batho, ETAR). The dose comparisons were described in terms of 2D isodose distribution, percent depth dose data, effective path length and monitor unit. Also dose distributions were calculated with homogeneous and inhomogeneous correction algorithm, Batho and ETAR, in each patients with different clinical sites. Results : Result indicated that Batho and ETAR method gave rise to percent depth dose deviation $1.5{\sim}2.7\%,\;2.3{\sim}3.5\%$ (6MV, field size $10{\times}10cm^2$) in each status with and without contrast medium. Also show that effective path lengths were more increase in contrast status (23.14 cm) than Non-contrast (22.07 cm) about $4.9\%$ or 10.7 mm (In case Hounsfield Unit 270) and these results were similary showned in each patient with different clinical site that was lung. prostate, liver and brain region. Concliusion : In conclusion we shown that the use of inhomogeneity correction algorithm for dose calculation in status of injected contrast medium can not represent exact dose at GTV region. These results mean that patients will be more irradiated photon beam during radiation therapy.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Medical Physics Conference
• /
• 2004.11a
• /
• pp.43-46
• /
• 2004

The commissioning of a treatment planning system of model-based dose calculation algorithm requires a lot of parameters to be selected to fit measured data, in which process physical insights for the parameters are often forgotten. We present the photon beam commissioning of Pinnacle$^3$ with the help of Monte Carlo (MC) simulation and evaluate the parameters Pinnacle$^3$ demands. Even though the MC calculation produces reasonable values for the commissioning, the thorough physical basis of the Pinnacles$^3$'s commissioning process is needed to use the MC derived parameters directly.

• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• v.42 no.1
• /
• pp.9-15
• /
• 2017

Background: The purpose of this study is to assign an appropriate density to virtual phantom for 2D diode array detector with different dose calculation algorithms to guarantee the accuracy of patient-specific QA. Materials and Methods: Ten VMAT plans with 6 MV photon beam and ten VMAT plans with 15 MV photon beam were selected retrospectively. The computed tomography (CT) images of MapCHECK2 with MapPHAN were acquired to design the virtual phantom images. For all plans, dose distributions were calculated for the virtual phantoms with four different materials by AAA and AXB algorithms. The four materials were polystyrene, 455 HU, Jursinic phantom, and PVC. Passing rates for several gamma criteria were calculated by comparing the measured dose distribution with calculated dose distributions of four materials. Results and Discussion: For validation of AXB modeling in clinic, the mean percentages of agreement in the cases of dose difference criteria of 1.0% and 2.0% for 6 MV were $97.2%{\pm}2.3%$, and $99.4%{\pm}1.1%$, respectively while those for 15 MV were $98.5%{\pm}0.85%$ and $99.8%{\pm}0.2%$, respectively. In the case of 2%/2 mm, all mean passing rates were more than 96.0% and 97.2% for 6 MV and 15 MV, respectively, regardless of the virtual phantoms of different materials and dose calculation algorithms. The passing rates in all criteria slightly increased for AXB as well as AAA when using 455 HU rather than polystyrene. Conclusion: The virtual phantom which had a 455 HU values showed high passing rates for all gamma criteria. To guarantee the accuracy of patent-specific VMAT QA, each institution should fine-tune the mass density or HU values of this device.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Medical Physics Conference
• /
• 2002.09a
• /
• pp.291-293
• /
• 2002

Accurate dose calculation in radiation treatment planning is most important for successful treatment. Since human body is composed of various materials and not an ideal shape, it is not easy to calculate the accurate effective dose in the patients. Many methods have been proposed to solve the inhomogeneity and surface contour problems. Monte Carlo simulations are regarded as the most accurate method, but it is not appropriate for routine planning because it takes so much time. Pencil beam kernel based convolution/superposition methods were also proposed to correct those effects. Nowadays, many commercial treatment planning systems, including Pinnacle and Helax-TMS, have adopted this algorithm as a dose calculation engine. The purpose of this study is to verify the accuracy of the dose calculated from pencil beam kernel based treatment planning system Helax-TMS comparing to Monte Carlo simulations and measurements especially in inhomogeneous region. Home-made inhomogeneous phantom, Helax-TMS ver. 6.0 and Monte Carlo code BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc were used in this study. Dose calculation results from TPS and Monte Carlo simulation were verified by measurements. In homogeneous media, the accuracy was acceptable but in inhomogeneous media, the errors were more significant.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Medical Physics Conference
• /
• 2002.09a
• /
• pp.119-120
• /
• 2002

The aim is to urge the need of elaborate commissioning of 3D RTP system from the firsthand experience. A 3D RTP system requires so much data such as beam data and patient data. Most data of radiation beam are directly transferred from a 3D dose scanning system, and some other data are input by editing. In the process inputting parameters and/or data, no error should occur. For RTP system using algorithm-bas ed-on beam-modeling, careless beam-data processing could also cause the treatment error. Beam data of 3 different qualities of photon from two linear accelerators, patient data and calculated results were commissioned. For PDD, the doses by Clarkson, convolution, superposition and fast superposition methods at 10 cm for 10${\times}$10 cm field, 100 cm SSD were compared with the measured. An error in the SCD for one quality was input by the service engineer. Whole SCD defined by a physicist is SAD plus d$\sub$max/, the value was just SAD. That resulted in increase of MU by 100${\times}$((1_d$\sub$max//SAD)$^2$-1)%. For 10${\times}$10 cm open field, 1 m SSD and at 10 cm depth in uniform medium of relative electron density (RED) 1, PDDs for 4 algorithms of dose calculation, Clarkson, convolution, superposition and fast-superposition, were compared with the measured. The calculated PDD were similar to the measured. For 10${\times}$10 cm open field, 1 m SSD and at 10 cm depth with 5 cm thick inhomogeneity of RED 0.2 under 2 cm thick RED 1 medium, PDDs for 4 algorithms were compared. PDDs ranged from 72.2% to 77.0% for 4 MV X-ray and from 90.9% to 95.6% for 6 MV X-ray. PDDs were of maximum for convolution and of minimum for superposition. For 15${\times}$15 cm symmetric wedged field, wedge factor was not constant for calculation mode, even though same geometry. The reason is that their wedge factor is considering beam hardness and ray path. Their definition requires their users to change the concept of wedge factor. RTP user should elaborately review beam data and calculation algorithm in commissioning.