Beltran, Chris J

PurposeMicrodosimetry is a vital tool for assessing the microscopic patterns of energy deposition by radiation, which ultimately govern biological effect. Solid‐state, silicon‐on‐insulator microdosimeters offer an approach for making microdosimetric measurements with high spatial resolution (on the order of tens of micrometers). These high‐resolution, solid‐state microdosimeters may therefore play a useful role in characterizing proton radiotherapy fields, particularly for making highly resolved measurements within the Bragg peak region. In this work, we obtain microdosimetric measurements with a solid‐state microdosimeter (MicroPlus probe) in a clinical, spot‐scanning proton beam of small spot size.MethodsThe MicroPlus probe had a 3D single sensitive volume on top of silicon oxide. The sensitive volume had an active cross‐sectional area of 250 μm × 10 μm and thickness of 10 μm. The proton facility was a synchrotron‐based, spot‐scanning system with small spot size (σ ≈ 2 mm). We performed measurements with the clinical beam current (≈1 nA) and had no detected pulse pile‐up. Measurements were made in a water‐equivalent phantom in water‐equivalent depth (WED) increments of 0.25 mm or 1.0 mm along pristine Bragg peaks of energies 71.3 MeV and 159.9 MeV, respectively. For each depth, we measured lineal energy distributions and then calculated the dose‐weighted mean lineal energy, . The measurements were repeated for two field sizes: 4 × 4 cm2 and 20 × 20 cm2.ResultsFor both 71.3 MeV and 159.9 MeV and for both field sizes, increased with depth toward the distal edge of the Bragg peak, a result consistent with Monte Carlo calculations and measurements performed elsewhere. For the 71.3 MeV, 4 × 4 cm2 beam (range at 80% distal falloff, R80 = 3.99 cm), we measured keV/μm at WED = 2 cm, and keV/μm at WED = 3.95 cm. For the 71.3 MeV, 20 × 20 cm2 beam, we measured keV/μm at WED = 2.6 cm, and keV/μm at WED = 3 cm. For the 159.9 MeV, 4 × 4 cm2 beam (R80 = 17.7 cm), keV/μm at WED = 5 cm, and keV/μm at WED = 17.6 cm. For the 159.9 MeV, 20 × 20 cm2 beam, keV/μm at WED = 5 cm, and keV/μm at WED = 17.6 cm.ConclusionsWe performed microdosimetric measurements with a novel solid‐state, silicon‐on‐insulator microdosimeter in a clinical spot‐scanning proton beam of small spot size and unmodified beam current. For all of the proton field sizes and energies considered, the measurements of were in agreement with expected trends. Furthermore, we obtained measurements with a spatial resolution of 10 μm in the beam direction. This spatial resolution greatly exceeded that possible with a conventional gaseous tissue‐equivalent proportional counter and allowed us to perform a high‐resolution investigation within the Bragg peak region. The MicroPlus probe is therefore suitable for applications in proton radiotherapy.

PurposeThis work aims to characterize a proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) and passive double scattering (DS) systems as well as to measure parameters relevant to the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of the beam using a silicon on insulator (SOI) microdosimeter with well‐defined 3D sensitive volumes (SV). The dose equivalent downstream and laterally outside of a clinical PBS treatment field was assessed and compared to that of a DS beam.MethodsA novel silicon microdosimeter with well‐defined 3D SVs was used in this study. It was connected to low noise electronics, allowing for detection of lineal energies as low as 0.15 keV/μm. The microdosimeter was placed at various depths in a water phantom along the central axis of the proton beam, and at the distal part of the spread‐out Bragg peak (SOBP) in 0.5 mm increments. The RBE values of the pristine Bragg peak (BP) and SOBP were derived using the measured microdosimetric lineal energy spectra as inputs to the modified microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM). Geant4 simulations were performed in order to verify the calculated depth‐dose distribution from the treatment planning system (TPS) and to compare the simulated dose‐mean lineal energy to the experimental results.ResultsFor a 131 MeV PBS spot (124.6 mm R90 range in water), the measured dose‐mean lineal energy increased from 2 keV/μm at the entrance to 8 keV/μm in the BP, with a maximum value of 10 keV/μm at the distal edge. The derived RBE distribution for the PBS beam slowly increased from 0.97 ± 0.14 at the entrance to 1.04 ± 0.09 proximal to the BP, then to 1.1 ± 0.08 in the BP, and steeply rose to 1.57 ± 0.19 at the distal part of the BP. The RBE distribution for the DS SOBP beam was approximately 0.96 ± 0.16 to 1.01 ± 0.16 at shallow depths, and 1.01 ± 0.16 to 1.28 ± 0.17 within the SOBP. The RBE significantly increased from 1.29 ± 0.17 to 1.43 ± 0.18 at the distal edge of the SOBP.ConclusionsThe SOI microdosimeter with its well‐defined 3D SV has applicability in characterizing proton radiation fields and can measure relevant physical parameters to model the RBE with submillimeter spatial resolution. It has been shown that for a physical dose of 1.82 Gy at the BP, the derived RBE based on the MKM model increased from 1.14 to 1.6 in the BP and its distal part. Good agreement was observed between the experimental and simulation results, confirming the potential application of SOI microdosimeter with 3D SV for quality assurance in proton therapy.

ABSTRACT Various types of radiation are utilized in the treatment of cancer. Equal physical doses of different radiation types do not always result in the same amount of biological damage. In order to account for these differences, a scaling factor known as the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) can be used. 137Cesium (137Cs) has been used as a source of radiation in a significant body of radiation therapy research. However, high-energy X-rays, such as 6 MV X-rays, are currently used clinically to treat patients. To date, there is a gap in the literature regarding the RBE comparison of these two types of radiation. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the RBE of 137Cs relative to that of 6 MV X-rays. To determine the RBE, five cell lines were irradiated [Chinese hamster ovary (CHO); human lung adenocarcinoma (A549); human glioma (U251); human glioma (T98); and human osteosarcoma (U2OS)] by both types of radiation and assessed for cell survival using a clonogenic assay. Three of the five cell lines resulted in RBE values of ~1.00 to within 11% for all survival fractions, showing the physical and biological dose for these two types of radiation were equivalent. The other two cell lines gave RBE values differing from 1.00 by up to 36%. In conclusion, the results show the range in biological effect seen between cell lines, and therefore cell type must be considered when characterizing RBE.

The purpose of this study was to develop a simplified methodology that will produce Monte Carlo (MC) dose distribution for proton therapy which can be used as a clinical aid in determining the adequacy of proton plans produced from the treatment planning system (TPS). The Geant4 Monte Carlo toolkit was used for all simulations. The geometry of the double scatter nozzle in the simulation was a simplification of the treatment nozzle. The proton source was modeled as discrete energy layers, each with a unique energy distribution and weighting factor. The simplified MC system was designed to give the same dose distribution as the measured data used to commission the TPS. After the simplified MC system was finalized, a series of verification comparisons were made between it, measurements, and the clinically used TPS. Comparisons included the lateral profile of a stair‐shaped compensator that simulated a sharp lateral heterogeneity and depth‐dose measurements through heterogeneous materials. The simplified MC system matched measurements to within 2% or 2 mm for all commissioning data under investigation; moreover, the distal edge and lateral penumbra was within 1 mm of the measurements. The simplified MC system was able to better reproduce the measured profiles for a stair‐shaped compensator than the TPS. Both MC and TPS matched the measured depth dose through heterogeneous materials to within 2% or 2 mm. The simplified MC system was straightforward to implement, and produced accurate results when compared to measurements. Therefore, it holds promise as a clinically useful methodology to validate the relative dose distribution of patient treatment plans produced by the treatment planning systems.PACS number: 87.55.K‐, 87.55.ne