4.6 Article

Investigation of systematic uncertainties in Monte Carlo-calculated beam quality correction factors

Journal

PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY
Volume 55, Issue 16, Pages 4481-4493

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/55/16/S04

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Modern Monte Carlo codes allow for the calculation of ion chamber specific beam quality correction factors k(Q), which are needed for dosimetry in radiotherapy. While statistical (type A) uncertainties of the calculated data can be minimized sufficiently, the influence of systematic (type B) uncertainties is mostly unknown. This study presents an investigation of systematic uncertainties of Monte Carlo-based k(Q) values for a NE2571 thimble ion chamber, calculated with the EGSnrc system. Starting with some general investigation on transport parameter settings, the influence of geometry and source variations is studied. Furthermore, a systematic examination of uncertainties due to cross section is introduced by determining the sensitivity of k(Q) results to changes in cross section data. For this purpose, single components of the photon cross sections and the mean excitation energy I in the electron stopping powers are varied. The corresponding sensitivities are subsequently applied with information of standard uncertainties for the cross section data found in the literature. It turns out that the calculation of k(Q) factors with EGSnrc is mostly insensitive to transport settings within the statistical uncertainties of similar to 0.1%. Severe changes in the dimensions of the chamber lead to comparatively small, insignificant changes. Further, the inclusion of realistic beam models, delivering a complete phase space instead of simple photon spectra, does not significantly influence the result. However, the uncertainties in electron cross sections have an impact on the final uncertainty of k(Q) to a comparatively large degree. For the NE2571 chamber investigated in this work, this uncertainty amounts to 0.4% at 24 MV, decreasing to 0.2% at 6 MV.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available