Investigation of the Effect of Proton Energy on the Depth-dose Distribution in the Proton Therapy of the Eye Tumor Using MCNPX Code

Sharifi, Mahdieh; Tatari, Mansoureh; Shirmardi, Seyed Pezhman

Volume 25, Issue 5 (Jul-Aug 2017) JSSU 2017, 25(5): 347-360 | Back to browse issues page

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

Sharifi M, Tatari M, Shirmardi S P. Investigation of the Effect of Proton Energy on the Depth-dose Distribution in the Proton Therapy of the Eye Tumor Using MCNPX Code. JSSU 2017; 25 (5) :347-360
URL: http://jssu.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-3991-en.html

Investigation of the Effect of Proton Energy on the Depth-dose Distribution in the Proton Therapy of the Eye Tumor Using MCNPX Code

Mahdieh Sharifi

, Mansoureh Tatari ^*

, Seyed Pezhman Shirmardi

Abstract: (5340 Views)

Introduction: Depth-dose distribution curve of protons in the matter has a maximum is called Bragg peak. Bragg peak of a monoenergetic proton beam is too narrow. The spread out Bragg peak should be created for full coverage of the tumor. The spread out Bragg peak is obtained in the depth of the tumor with superposition of the several Bragg peaks. The aim of this study was coverage of an eye tumor in the proton therapy while healthy eye tissue absorbs less radiation.
Methods: In this analytical study, the simulations were performed using MCNPX code. A tumor in the eye phantom was considered. The eye phantom has been irradiated with different proton beam energy. A Polystyrene modulator wheel was used for creating the spread out Bragg peak in the tumor region.
Results: Bragg peaks were created in different depths of the tumor, by varying the proton beam energies from 20 MeV to 38 MeV. Bragg peak of the 32.85 MeV proton beam energy was precisely placed at the end of the tumor. Different pristine Bragg peaks were produced using a Polystyrene modulator wheel with different thicknesses and 32.85 MeV proton beam energy. The spread out Bragg peak was created in the tumor region by modulation of the pristine Bragg peaks. Neutrons and photons are produced by the inelastic nuclear interactions of protons with the nuclei of different tissues of eyes. The flux and absorbed dose of secondary neutrons and photons were considerably small compared to the depth-dose distribution of protons and the total absorbed dose in the tumor was more than other tissues of eyes.
Conclusion: Using a modulator wheel the tumor can be treated, so that the minimal damage reaches the surrounding tissues. The results show that more than 92% of the total dose of secondary particles and protons is absorbed in the tumor.

Keywords: Proton therapy, Spread Out Bragg Peak, Eye tumor, MCNPX Code

Full-Text [PDF 1090 kb] (2079 Downloads)

Type of Study: Original article | Subject: other
Received: 2016/12/6 | Accepted: 2017/07/29 | Published: 2017/09/27

References

1. Newhauser W.D, Zhang R. The physics of proton therapy. Phys Med Biol 2015; 60: 155-209.

2. Constable I. J, Koehler A. M. Experimental ocular irradiation with accelerated protons. Invest Ophthalmol 1974; 280–287.

3. Paganetti H. Proton Therapy: History and Rationale. in Proton Therapy Physics, New York, CRC Press; 2012: 5.

4. Wilson M.V, Hungerford J.L. Comparison of episcleral plaque and proton beam radiation therapy for the treatment of choroidal melanoma. Ophthalmology 1999; 1579-1587.

5. Bernhardt D. Proton Dose Assessment to the Human Eye Using Monte Carlo N Particle Transport Code (MCNPX). Health Physics, Texas A&M University 2006; 1-73.

6. Swakon J, Olko P, Adamczyk D, Cywicka-Jakiel T, Dabrowska J, Dulny B, Grzanka L, Horwacik T, Kajdrowicz T, Michalec B, Nowaka T, Ptaszkiewicz M, Sowa U, Stolarczyk L, Waligorski M. P. R. Facility for proton radiotherapy of eye cancer at IFJ PAN in Krakow. Radiat Meas 2010; 1469-1471.

7. Damato B, Kacperek A, Errington D, Heimann H. Proton beam radiotherapy of uveal melanoma. Ophthalmology 2013; 151-157.

8. Rasouli S.F, Masoudi S.F, Keshazare Sh, Jette D. Effect of elemental compositions on Monte Carlo dose calculations in proton therapy of eye tumors. Radiat Phys Chem 2015; 112-115.

9. Bakaev V. A, Ivanov N. A, Lebedeva Z. S. Methods for reducing patient radiation exposure during proton therapy for eye disease. St. Petersburg Polytechnical University Journal: Physics and Mathematics 2017; 114–118.

10. Khan F.M, Gibbons J.P. Khan’s The Physics of Radiation Therapy. Asare Sobhan Publisher, Tehran: Jabbari, Tavakoli, Rostampour, Almasi, Baradaran Mohsenian, Pashaee, Rostampour, Salehnia, Abedi; 2014. (Persian)

11. Dehghannia Rostami Z, Masoudi S.F, Asadi S. Dosimetry Comparison of Water Phantom and Complete Eye Definition for 125I and 103Pd Brachytherapy Plaques. IJMP 2011; 8(2):19-26. (Persian)

12. Park S.H, Jung W.G, Suh T.S, Jang H.S, Choi B.O, Rah J.E, Park S and Lee B. Variation of Bragg Curve Characteristic Induced by Changing the Position of Inhomogeneous Material: Geant4 Simulation Study. J Korean Phys Soc 2011; 58: 187-197.

13. Pelowitz D. B, Durkee J. W, Elson J. S, Fensin M. L, Hendricks J. S, James M. R, Johns R. C, McKinney G. W, Mashnik S. G, Verbeke J. M, Waters L. S, Wilcox T. A. MCNPX 2.7.E Extensions LA-UR-11-01502, 2011.

14. Newhauser W.D, Burns J, Smith A.R. Dosimetry for ocular proton beam therapy at the Harvard Cyclotron Laboratory based on the ICRU Report 59. Med Phys 2002; 29:1953-1961.

15. Herman C. Introduction Health Physics. Tehran: Abukazemy, Sepehry, Binesh; 1992: 133-149. [Persian]

16. Lesprance M, Inglis-Whalen M, Thomson R.M. Model-based dose calculations for COMS eye plaque brachytherapy using an anatomically realistic eye phantom. Med Phys 2014; 41:021717.

17. Jia S. B, Romano F, Cirrone G. A, Cuttone G, Hadizadeh M. H, Mowlavi A, Raffaele L. Designing a range modulator wheel to spread-out the Bragg peak for a passive proton therapy facility. Nucl Instr Meth Phys Res A 2016; 101-108.

18. Tavakol M, Karimian A, Mostajab Aldaavati S. M. Dose Assessment of Eye and Its Components in Proton Therapy by Monte Carlo Method. IJMP 2013; 205-214.

19. Mahdipour S. A, Mowlavi A. A. Ion therapy for uveal melanoma in new human eyephantom based on GEANT4 toolkit. Med Dosim 2016; 1-8.