Monte Carlo simulation of the Varian TrueBeam flattened-filtered beams using a surrogate geometry in PRIMO
Background. Monte Carlo simulation of radiation transport for medical linear accelerators (linacs) requires accurate knowledge of the geometrical description of the linac head. Since the geometry of Varian TrueBeam machines has not been disclosed, the manufacturer distributes phase-space files of th...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) |
| Repositorio: | UPCommons. Portal del coneixement obert de la UPC |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:upcommons.upc.edu:2117/401792 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/2117/401792 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-024-02405-w |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Monte Carlo method Radiotherapy Monte Carlo Phase space PRIMO Linear accelerator Montecarlo, Mètode de Radioteràpia Àrees temàtiques de la UPC::Enginyeria biomèdica::Electrònica biomèdica::Radioteràpia |
| Sumario: | Background. Monte Carlo simulation of radiation transport for medical linear accelerators (linacs) requires accurate knowledge of the geometrical description of the linac head. Since the geometry of Varian TrueBeam machines has not been disclosed, the manufacturer distributes phase-space files of the linac patient-independent part to allow researchers to compute absorbed dose distributions using the Monte Carlo method. This approach limits the possibility of achieving an arbitrarily small statistical uncertainty. This work investigates the use of the geometry of the Varian Clinac 2100, which is included in the Monte Carlo system PRIMO, as a surrogate. Methods. Energy, radial and angular distributions extracted from the TrueBeam phase space files published by the manufacturer and from phase spaces tallied with PRIMO for the Clinac 2100 were compared for the 6, 8, 10 and 15 MV flattened-filtered beams. Dose distributions in water computed for the two sets of PSFs were compared with the Varian Representative Beam Data (RBD) for square fields with sides ranging from 3 to 30 cm. Output factors were calculated for square fields with sides ranging from 2 to 40 cm. Results. Excellent agreement with the RBD was obtained for the simulations that employed the phase spaces distributed by Varian as well as for those that used the surrogate geometry, reaching in both cases Gamma ( , 2 mm) pass rates larger than , except for the 15 MV surrogate. This result supports previous investigations that suggest a change in the material composition of the TrueBeam 15 MV flattening filter. In order to get the said agreement, PRIMO simulations were run using enlarged transport parameters to compensate the discrepancies between the actual and surrogate geometries. Conclusions. This work sustains the claim that the simulation of the 6, 8 and 10 MV flattening-filtered beams of the TrueBeam linac can be performed using the Clinac 2100 model of PRIMO without significant loss of accuracy. |
|---|