Nuclear Engineering and Technology

  • 제52권9호
  • /
  • Pages.2064-2071
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1738-5733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-358X(eISSN)
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of the effect of mechanical deformation on beam isocenter properties of the SC200 scanning beam delivery system

  • Wang, Ming (Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Zheng, Jinxing (Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Song, Yuntao (Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Li, Ming (Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences) ;
  • Zeng, Xianhu (Institute of Plasma Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences)
  • 투고 : 2019.07.31
  • 심사 : 2020.02.14
  • 발행 : 2020.09.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

For proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) technology, the accuracy of the dose distribution in a patient is sensitive to the properties of the incident beam. However, mechanical deformation of the proton therapy facility may occur, and this could be an important factor affecting the proton dose distribution in patients. In this paper, we investigated the effect of deformation on an SC200 proton facility's beam isocenter properties. First, mechanical deformation of the PBS nozzle, L-shape plate, and gantry were simulated using a Finite Element code, ANSYS. Then, the impact of the mechanical deformation on the beam's isocenter properties was evaluated using empirical formulas. In addition, we considered the simplest case that could affect the properties of the incident beam (i.e. if only the bending magnet (BG3) has an error in its mounting alignment), and the effect of the beam optics offset on the isocenter characteristics was evaluated. The results showed that the deformation of the beam position in the X and Y direction was less than 0.27 mm, which meets the structural design requirements. Compared to the mechanical deformation of the L-shape plate, the deformation of the gantry had more influence on the beam's isocenter properties. When the error in the mounting alignment of the BG3 is equal to or more than 0.3 mm, the beam deformation at the isocenter exceeds the maximum accepted deformation limits. Generally speaking, for the current design of the SC200 scanning beam delivery system, the effects of mechanical deformation meet the maximum accepted beam deformation limits. In order to further study the effect of the incident beam optics on the isocenter properties, a fine-scale Monte Carlo model including factors relating to the PBS nozzle and the BG3 should be developed in future research.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. R.R. Wilson, Radiological use of fast protons, Radiology 47 (5) (1946) 487-491. https://doi.org/10.1148/47.5.487
  2. H. Paganetti, Range uncertainties in proton therapy and the role of Monte Carlo simulations, Phys. Med. Biol. 57 (11) (2012) R99. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/57/11/R99
  3. T.A. van de Water, A.J. Lomax, H.P. Bijl, et al., Potential benefits of scanned intensity-modulated proton therapy versus advanced photon therapy with regard to sparing of the salivary glands in oropharyngeal cancer, Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 79 (4) (2011) 1216-1224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.05.012
  4. U. Mock, D. Georg, J. Bogner, et al., Treatment planning comparison of conventional, 3D conformal, and intensity-modulated photon (IMRT) and proton therapy for paranasal sinus carcinoma, Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 58 (1) (2004) 147-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(03)01452-4
  5. P.M. Rosenschold, S. Engelholm, L. Ohlhues, et al., Photon and proton therapy planning comparison for malignant glioma based on CT, FDG-PET, DTI-MRI and fiber tracking, Acta Oncol. 50 (6) (2011) 777-783. https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2011.584555
  6. https://www.ptcog.ch/index.php/facilities-in-operation.
  7. T. Bortfeld, H. Paganetti, H. Kooy, MO-A-T-6B-01: proton beam radiotherapydthe state of the art, Med. Phys. 32 (2005) 2048-2049, https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1999671.
  8. A. Smith, M. Gillin, M. Bues, et al., The MD Anderson proton therapy system, Med. Phys. 36 (9Part1) (2009) 4068-4083. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3187229
  9. C. Courtois, G. Boissonnat, C. Brusasco, et al., Characterization and performances of a monitoring ionization chamber dedicated to IBA-universal irradiation head for Pencil Beam Scanning, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sect. A Accel. Spectrom. Detect. Assoc. Equip. 736 (2014) 112-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2013.10.014
  10. Y. Jongen, W. Beeckman, P. Cohilis, The proton therapy system for MGH's NPTC: equipment description and progress report, Bull. Canc. Radiother. 83 (1996) 219s-222s. https://doi.org/10.1016/0924-4212(96)84917-6
  11. H. Paganetti, Monte Carlo calculations for absolute dosimetry to determine machine outputs for proton therapy fields, Phys. Med. Biol. 51 (11) (2006) 2801. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/51/11/008
  12. H. Bouchard, J. Seuntjens, Ionization chamber-based reference dosimetry of intensity modulated radiation beams, Med. Phys. 31 (9) (2004) 2454-2465. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1781333
  13. B. Marchand, D. Prieels, B. Bauvir, et al., IBA proton pencil beam scanning: an innovative solution for cancer treatment, Proc. EPAC (2000) 2539-2541.
  14. J. Flanz, T. Bortfeld, Evolution of technology to optimize the delivery of proton therapy: the third generation, Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 23 (2) (2013) 142-148. WB Saunders. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semradonc.2012.11.006
  15. J. Shen, W. Liu, A. Anand, et al., Impact of range shifter material on proton pencil beam spot characteristics, Med. Phys. 42 (3) (2015) 1335-1340, https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4908208.
  16. Y. Lin, B. Clasie, H.M. Lu, et al., Impacts of gantry angle dependent scanning beam properties on proton PBS treatment, Phys. Med. Biol. 62 (2) (2017) 344-357. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/62/2/344
  17. M. Li, J.X. Zheng, Y.T. Song, et al., Beam optics and isocenter property of SC200 proton therapy gantry, Nucl. Sci. Tech. 29 (8) (2018) 112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-018-0446-5
  18. X. Liu, Design of the Gantry Beamline for a Proton Therapy Facilty, Huazhong University Of Science and Technology, Hubei, 1952.
  19. G. Karamysheva, Y. Bi, G. Chen, et al., Compact superconducting cyclotron SC200 for proton therapy, in: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference, 2016, pp. 371-373.
  20. D. Meer, Medical Physics Commissioning, 2018. 1804.08983.
  21. M. Wang, J. Zheng, Y. Song, et al., Monte Carlo simulation using TOPAS for gas chamber design of PBS nozzle in superconducting proton therapy facility, Nucl. Technol. (2019) 1-12.