Gavin Cranmer-Sargison

The goal of this work was to examine the use of simplified diode detector models within a recently proposed Monte Carlo (MC) based small field dosimetry formalism and to investigate the influence of electron source parameterization has on MC calculated correction factors. BEAMnrc was used to model Varian 6 MV jaw-collimated square field sizes down to 0.5 cm. The IBA stereotactic field diode (SFD), PTW T60016 (shielded) and PTW T60017 (un-shielded) diodes were modelled in DOSRZnrc and isocentric output ratios (OR(fclin)(detMC)) calculated at depths of d = 1.5, 5.0 and 10.0 cm. Simplified detector models were then tested by evaluating the percent difference in (OR(fclin)(detMC)) between the simplified and complete detector models. The influence of active volume dimension on simulated output ratio and response factor was also investigated. The sensitivity of each MC calculated replacement correction factor (k(fclin,fmsr)(Qclin,Qmsr)), as a function of electron FWHM between 0.100 and 0.150 cm and energy between 5.5 and 6.5 MeV, was investigated for the same set of small field sizes using the simplified detector models. The SFD diode can be approximated simply as a silicon chip in water, the T60016 shielded diode can be modelled as a chip in water plus the entire shielding geometry and the T60017 unshielded diode as a chip in water plus the filter plate located upstream. The detector-specific (k(fclin,fmsr)(Qclin,Qmsr)), required to correct measured output ratios using the SFD, T60016 and T60017 diode detectors are insensitive to incident electron energy between 5.5 and 6.5 MeV and spot size variation between FWHM = 0.100 and 0.150 cm. Three general conclusions come out of this work: (1) detector models can be simplified to produce OR(fclin)(detMC) to within 1.0% of those calculated using the complete geometry, where typically not only the silicon chip, but also any high density components close to the chip, such as scattering plates or shielding material is necessary to be included in the model, (2) diode detectors of smaller active radius require less of a correction and (3) (k(fclin,fmsr)(Qclin,Qmsr)) is insensitive to the incident the electron energy and spot size variations investigated. Therefore, simplified detector models can be used with acceptable accuracy within the recently proposed small field dosimetry formalism.

Purpose: The goal of this work was to implement a recently proposed small field dosimetry formalism [Alfonsoet al., Med. Phys. 35(12), 5179–5186 (2008)] for a comprehensive set of diode detectors and provide the required Monte Carlo generated factors to correct measurement.Methods: Jaw collimated square small field sizes of side 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, and 3.0 cm normalized to a reference field of 5.0 cm × 5.0 cm were used throughout this study. Initial linac modeling was performed with electron source parameters at 6.0, 6.1, and 6.2 MeV with the Gaussian FWHM decreased in steps of 0.010 cm from 0.150 to 0.100 cm. DOSRZnrc was used to develop models of the IBA stereotactic field diode (SFD) as well as the PTW T60008, T60012, T60016, and T60017 field diodes. Simulations were run and isocentric, detector specific, output ratios (OR_det) calculated at depths of 1.5, 5.0, and 10.0 cm. This was performed using the following source parameter subset: 6.1 and 6.2 MeV with a FWHM = 0.100, 0.110, and 0.120 cm. The source parameters were finalized by comparing experimental detector specific output ratios with simulation. Simulations were then run with the active volume and surrounding materials set to water and the replacement correction factors calculated according to the newly proposed formalism.Results: In all cases, the experimental field size widths (at the 50% level) were found to be smaller than the nominal, and therefore, the simulated field sizes were adjusted accordingly. At a FWHM = 0.150 cm simulation produced penumbral widths that were too broad. The fit improved as the FWHM was decreased, yet for all but the smallest field size worsened again at a FWHM = 0.100 cm. The simulated OR_det were found to be greater than, equivalent to and less than experiment for spot size FWHM = 0.100, 0.110, and 0.120 cm, respectively. This is due to the change in source occlusion as a function of FWHM and field size. The corrections required for the 0.5 cm field size were 0.95 (±1.0%) for the SFD, T60012 and T60017 diodes and 0.90 (±1.0%) for the T60008 and T60016 diodes—indicating measured output ratios to be 5% and 10% high, respectively. Our results also revealed the correction factors to be the same within statistical variation at all depths considered.Conclusions: A number of general conclusions are evident: (1) small field OR_det are very sensitive to the simulated source parameters, and therefore, rigorous Monte Carlo linac model commissioning, with respect to measurement, must be pursued prior to use, (2) backscattered dose to the monitor chamber should be included in simulated OR_det calculations, (3) the corrections required for diode detectors are design dependent and therefore detailed detector modeling is required, and (4) the reported detector specific correction factors may be applied to experimental small field OR_det consistent with those presented here.

The Monte Carlo code DOSXYZnrc is a valuable instrument for calculating absorbed dose within a three-dimensional Cartesian geometry. DOSXYZnrc includes several variance reduction techniques used to increase the efficiency of the Monte Carlo calculation. One such technique is HOWFARLESS which is used to increase the efficiency of beam commissioning calculations in homogeneous phantoms. The authors present an enhanced version of HOWFARLESS which extends the application to include phantoms inhomogeneous in one dimension. When the enhanced HOWFARLESS was used, efficiency increases as high as 14 times were observed without any loss in dose accuracy. The efficiency gains of an enhanced HOWFARLESS simulation was found to be dependent on both slab geometry and slab density. As the number of two-dimensional voxel layers per slab increases, so does the efficiency gain. Also, as the mass density of a slab is decreased, the efficiency gains increase.