This framework demonstrates improved beam range verification in carbon-ion therapy, indicating substantial efficiency gains.
Accurate beam range verification is critical in carbon-ion radiotherapy, where the sharp Bragg peak and complex material-dependent nuclear interactions pose greater measurement challenges compared to proton therapy; however, conventional water phantom methods for frequent and comprehensive checks required for routine quality assurance (QA) are extremely time-consuming. This study proposes and validates a framework using a commercial multi-layer ionization chamber (MLIC) to enable efficient, accurate, and comprehensive range verification. The framework integrates three key innovations: (1) a beam-model-based fitting method that uses reference integral depth-dose curves to reduce range determination uncertainty for carbon ions, (2) a time-optimized, trigger-free acquisition process, and (3) a custom gantry-compatible mount for stable multi-angle measurements. The framework's measurement uncertainty was evaluated via range-shift experiments, and its clinical feasibility was tested through year-long stability and multi-angle consistency measurements. The proposed method demonstrated a low range-determination uncertainty, with an expanded uncertainty of 0.24 mm (k = 3), and showed excellent agreement with standard water phantom measurements (mean deviation of 0.03 ± 0.15 mm). The framework reduced the measurement time for all 600 energy levels from >50 h to approximately 15 min, representing >100-fold improvement. Clinical validation confirmed high stability, with long-term and multi-angle deviations of 0.17 mm and 0.05 mm (k = 1), respectively. The system also successfully identified machine-related beam range inconsistencies that were not detectable using conventional QA protocols. The proposed MLIC-based framework provides a reliable, accurate, and highly efficient solution for routine beam range QA in carbon-ion therapy. Its successful clinical application demonstrates its feasibility for frequent and comprehensive verification across all energy levels and gantry angles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Han et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: