Monte Carlo dosimetry for 125I and 103Pd eye plaque brachytherapy with various seed models

ArticleinMedical Physics 37(1):368-76 · January 2010with11 Reads
DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2009.03.066 · Source: PubMed
Dose distributions are calculated for various models of 125I and 103Pd seeds in the standardized plaques of the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS). The sensitivity to seed model of dose distributions and dose distributions relative to TG-43 are investigated. Monte Carlo simulations are carried out with the EGSnrc user-code BrachyDose. Brachytherapy seeds and eye plaques are fully modeled. Simulations of one seed in the central slot of a 20 mm Modulay (gold alloy) plaque backing with and without the Silastic (silicone polymer) insert and of a 16 mm fully loaded Modulay/Silastic plaque are performed. Dose distributions are compared to those calculated under TG-43 assumptions, i.e., ignoring the effects of the plaque backing and insert and interseed attenuation. Three-dimensional dose distributions for different 125I and 103Pd seed models are compared via depth-dose curves, isodose contours, and tabulation of doses at points of interest in the eye. Results are compared to those of our recent BrachyDose study for COMS plaques containing model 6711 (125I) or 200 (103Pd) seeds [R. M. Thomson et al., Med. Phys. 35, 5530-5543 (2008)]. Along the central axis of a plaque containing one seed, variations of less than 1% are seen in the effect of the Modulay backing alone for different seed models; for the Modulay/Silastic combination, variations are 2%. For a 16 mm plaque fully loaded with 125I (103Pd) seeds, dose decreases relative to TG-43 doses are 11%-12% (19%-20%) and 14%-15% (20%) at distances of 0.5 and 1 cm from the inner sclera along the plaque's central axis, respectively. For the same prescription dose, doses at points of interest vary by up to 8% with seed model. Doses to critical normal structures are lower for all 103Pd seed models than for 125I with the possible exception of the sclera adjacent to the plaque; scleral doses vary with seed model and are not always higher for 103Pd than for 125I. Dose decreases relative to doses calculated under TG-43 assumptions vary slightly with seed model (for each radionuclide). Dose distributions are sensitive to seed model; however, variations are generally no larger than the magnitudes of other systematic uncertainties in eye plaque therapy.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Novel plaques are used to treat iris melanoma at the Mayo Clinic Rochester. The plaques are a modification of the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) 22 mm plaque design with a gold alloy backing, outer lip, and silicone polymer insert. An inner lip surrounds a 10 mm diameter cutout region at the plaque center. Plaques span 360°, 270°, and 180° arcs. This article describes dosimetry for these plaques and others used in the treatment of anterior eye melanomas. The EGSnrc user-code BrachyDose is used to perform Monte Carlo simulations. Plaques and seeds are fully modeled. Three-dimensional dose distributions for different plaque models, TG-43 calculations, and (125)I (model 6711) and (103)Pd (model 200) seeds are compared via depth-dose curves, tabulation of doses at points of interest, and isodose contours. Doses at points of interest differ by up to 70% from TG-43 calculations. The inner lip reduces corneal doses. Matching plaque arc length to tumor extent reduces doses to eye regions outside the treatment area. Maintaining the same prescription dose, (103)Pd offers lower doses to critical structures than (125)I, with the exception of the sclera adjacent to the plaque. The Mayo Clinic plaques offer several advantages for anterior eye tumor treatments. Doses to regions outside the treatment area are significantly reduced. Doses differ considerably from TG-43 predictions, illustrating the importance of complete Monte Carlo simulations. Calculations take a few minutes on a single CPU, making BrachyDose sufficiently fast for routine clinical treatment planning.
    Full-text · Article · Nov 2010
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To investigate dosimetric differences among several clinical treatment planning systems (TPS) and Monte Carlo (MC) codes for brachytherapy of intraocular tumors using 125I or 103Pd plaques, and to evaluate the impact on the prescription dose of the adoption of MC codes and certain versions of a TPS (Plaque Simulator with optional modules). Three clinical brachytherapy TPS capable of intraocular brachytherapy treatment planning and two MC codes were compared. The TPS investigated were Pinnacle v8.0dp1, BrachyVision v8.1, and Plaque Simulator v5.3.9, all of which use the AAPM TG-43 formalism in water. The Plaque Simulator software can also handle some correction factors from MC simulations. The MC codes used are MCNP5 v1.40 and BrachyDose/EGSnrc. Using these TPS and MC codes, three types of calculations were performed: homogeneous medium with point sources (for the TPS only, using the 1D TG-43 dose calculation formalism); homogeneous medium with line sources (TPS with 2D TG-43 dose calculation formalism and MC codes); and plaque heterogeneity-corrected line sources (Plaque Simulator with modified 2D TG-43 dose calculation formalism and MC codes). Comparisons were made of doses calculated at points-of-interest on the plaque central-axis and at off-axis points of clinical interest within a standardized model of the right eye. For the homogeneous water medium case, agreement was within approximately 2% for the point- and line-source models when comparing between TPS and between TPS and MC codes, respectively. For the heterogeneous medium case, dose differences (as calculated using the MC codes and Plaque Simulator) differ by up to 37% on the central-axis in comparison to the homogeneous water calculations. A prescription dose of 85 Gy at 5 mm depth based on calculations in a homogeneous medium delivers 76 Gy and 67 Gy for specific 125I and 103Pd sources, respectively, when accounting for COMS-plaque heterogeneities. For off-axis points-of-interest, dose differences approached factors of 7 and 12 at some positions for 125I and 103Pd, respectively. There was good agreement (approximately 3%) among MC codes and Plaque Simulator results when appropriate parameters calculated using MC codes were input into Plaque Simulator. Plaque Simulator and MC users are perhaps at risk of overdosing patients up to 20% if heterogeneity corrections are used and the prescribed dose is not modified appropriately. Agreement within 2% was observed among conventional brachytherapy TPS and MC codes for intraocular brachytherapy dose calculations in a homogeneous water environment. In general, the magnitude of dose errors incurred by ignoring the effect of the plaque backing and Silastic insert (i.e., by using the TG-43 approach) increased with distance from the plaque's central-axis. Considering the presence of material heterogeneities in a typical eye plaque, the best method in this study for dose calculations is a verified MC simulation.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2011
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In this study version 5 of the MCNP photon transport simulation was used to calculate the dosimetric parameters for new palladium brachytherapy source design following AAPM Task Group No. 43U1 report. The internal source components include four resin beads of 0.6 mm diameters with (103)Pd uniformly absorbed inside and one cylindrical copper marker with 1.5 mm length. The resin beads and marker are then encapsulated within 0.8 mm in diameter and 4.5 mm long cylindrical capsule of titanium. The dose rate constant, Λ, line and point-source radial dose function, g(L)(r) and g(P)(r), and the anisotropy function, F(r,θ) of the IR01-(103)Pd seed have been calculated at distances from 0.25 to 5 cm. All the results are in good agreement with previously published thermoluminescence-dosimeter measured values [3] for the source. The dosimetric parameters calculated in this work showed that in dosimetry point of view, the IR01-(103)Pd seed is suitable for use in brachytherapy of prostate cancer.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2011
Show more