Materials and Methods: Oxygen ions have the advantage of a higher relative biological effectiveness (RBE) and better conformality to the tumor target. This work describes the mixed radiation field produced by an oxygen beam in water and compares it to the one produced by a therapeutic carbon ion beam. The study has been performed using Geant4 simulations. The dose is calculated for incident carbon ions with energies of 162 MeV/u and 290 MeV/u, and oxygen ions with energies of 192 MeV/u and 245 MeV/u, and hence that the range of the primary oxygen ions projectiles in water was located at the same depth as the carbon ions.
Results: The results show that the benefits of oxygen ions are more pronounced when using lower energies because of a slightly higher peak-to-entrance ratio, which allows either providing higher dose in tumor target or reducing it in the surrounding healthy tissues. It is observed that, per incident particle, oxygen ions deliver higher doses than carbon ions.
Conclusions: This result coupled with the higher RBE shows that it may be possible to use a lower fluence of oxygen ions to achieve the same therapeutic dose in the patient as that obtained with carbon ion therapy.
METHODS: In this article, the steps involved in importing, segmenting, and registering tomographic images using 3D Slicer were thoroughly described, before importing them into GATE for MC simulation. The absorbed doses estimated using GATE were then compared with that of PM. SlicerRT, a 3D Slicer extension, was then used to visualize the isodose from the MC simulation.
RESULTS: A workflow diagram consisting of all the steps taken in the utilization of 3D Slicer for personalized dosimetry in 90 Y radioembolization has been presented in this article. In comparison to the MC simulation, the absorbed doses to the tumor and normal liver were overestimated by PM by 105.55% and 20.23%, respectively, whereas for lungs, the absorbed dose estimated by PM was underestimated by 25.32%. These values were supported by the isodose distribution obtained via SlicerRT, suggesting the presence of beta particles outside the volumes of interest. These findings demonstrate the importance of personalized dosimetry for a more accurate absorbed dose estimation compared to PM.
CONCLUSION: The methodology provided in this study can assist users (especially students or researchers who are new to MC simulation) in navigating intricate steps required in the importation of tomographic data for MC simulation. These steps can also be utilized for other radiation therapy related applications, not necessarily limited to internal dosimetry.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The particleboard was fabricated using a hot pressing technique at target density of 1.0 g·cm-3 and the elemental fraction was recorded for the simulation. The PDD was simulated in the GATE simulation using the linear accelerator Elekta Synergy model for the water phantom and Rhizophora phantom, and the results were compared with the experimental PDD performed by several studies. Beam flatness and beam symmetry were also measured in this study.
RESULTS: The simulated PDD for Rhizophora and water was in agreement with the experimental PDD of water with overall discrepancies of 0% to 8.7% at depth ranging from 1.0 to 15.0 cm. In the GATE simulation, all the points passed the clinical 3%/3 mm criterion in comparison with water, with the final percentage of 2.34% for Rhizophora phantom and 2.49% for the water phantom simulated in GATE. Both the symmetries are all within the range of an acceptable value of 2.0% according to the recommendation, with the beam symmetry of the water phantom and Rhizophora phantom at 0.58% and 0.28%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study provide the necessary foundation to confidently use the phantom for radiotherapy purposes, especially in treatment planning.