The presence of a low-dose envelope, or 'halo', in the fluence profile of a proton spot can increase the output of a pencil beam scanning field by over 10%. This study evaluated whether the Monte Carlo simulation code, TOPAS 1.0-beta 8, based on Geant4.9.6 with its default physics list, can predict the spot halo at depth in phantom by incorporating a halo model within the proton source distribution. Proton sources were modelled using three 2D Gaussian functions, and optimized until simulated spot profiles matched measurements at the phantom surface out to a radius of 100 mm. Simulations were subsequently compared with profiles measured using EBT3 film in Solidwater® phantoms at various depths for 100, 115, 150, 180, 210 and 225 MeV proton beams. Simulations predict measured profiles within a 1 mm distance to agreement for 2D profiles extending to the 0.1% isodose, and within 1 mm/1% Gamma criteria over the integrated curve of spot profile as a function of radius. For isodose lines beyond 0.1% of the central spot dose, the simulated primary spot sigma is smaller than the measurement by up to 15%, and can differ by over 1 mm. The choice of particle interaction algorithm and phantom material were found to cause ~1 mm range uncertainty, a maximal 5% (0.3 mm) difference in spot sigma, and maximal 1 mm and ~2 mm distance to agreement in isodoses above and below the 0.1% level, respectively. Based on these observations, therefore, the selection of physics model and the application of Solidwater® as water replacement material in simulation and measurement should be used with caution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: