yasui keisuke

ABSTRACT The patient setup using the surface‐guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system differs from conventional surface marker procedures. Owing to the abundance of three‐dimensional information, there may be operator variability in where to focus during the patient setup. This study aimed to clarify the differences between expert and novice operators in SGRT positioning for head and neck cases by tracking their eye movements, thereby providing data for developing efficient patient setup procedures. Six radiation therapists set up a simulated patient on the SGRT system while recording eye movements on the screen using the QG‐PLUS eye‐tracking system. The positioning time and number of gaze fixations on the screen were analysed, and the relationship between years of experience with SGRT, positioning time and number of gaze fixations was evaluated. No significant correlation was found between SGRT experience and positioning time ( r  = −0.67, p  = 0.15). However, more experienced radiation therapists exhibited fewer gaze fixations per positioning session ( r  = −0.81, p  < 0.05), indicating that they efficiently identified key positioning points. Additionally, experienced radiation therapists focused more intently on a specific screen during the latter half of positioning, suggesting a refined approach for final patient alignment verification. More experienced radiation therapists showed fewer gaze fixations and demonstrated increased attention to a specific screen during the latter half of the patient setup process, suggesting that eye‐tracking technology may provide useful data for standardising patient setup procedures in SGRT patient setups.

BACKGROUND: Accurate absolute dosimetry is essential for achieving high-precision proton beam therapy. Consequently, a comprehensive characterization of the ionization chamber's response properties is necessary. PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the average f Q using Monte Carlo (MC) code PHITS to assess uncertainties among different MC simulation tools. Additionally, P Q values for PTW 30013, NACP-02, and PTW 31013 ionization chambers are calculated using PHITS to provide new reference data for P Q . Furthermore, a new k Q factor for PTW 31013 chamber is established using MC method, contributing to advancements in proton beam dosimetry protocols. METHODS: Monoenergetic proton beams were employed to calculate f Q , k Q , and P Q for Farmer, Semiflex, and plane-parallel chambers. The absorbed dose deposited within the sensitive volume of each chamber was determined via simulations employing PHITS, thereby providing the basis for the estimation of these factors. Computed f Q values were compared with previous reports, while k Q and P Q were benchmarked against literature and Technical Reports Series No. 398 (TRS-398) Rev.1 guideline. RESULTS: Incorporating PHITS-derived f Q values reduced the uncertainty of f ¯ Q P H I T S compared to previous findings. The k Q factor for PTW 31013 followed trends observed in cylindrical chambers with varying sensitive volumes; notably, this study represents the first MC estimation of k Q for this chamber. P Q values for values deviated by up to 1.7% from unity. CONCLUSION: The data generated in this study provide important insights for refining proton beam dosimetry, contributing to the improvement of treatment precision.

BACKGROUND: Proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) is susceptible to dose degradation because of interplay effects on moving targets. For cases of unacceptable motion, respiratory-gated (RG) irradiation is an effective alternative to free breathing (FB) irradiation. However, the introduction of RG irradiation with larger gate widths (GW) is hindered by interplay effects, which are analogous to those observed with FB irradiation. Accurate estimation of interplay effects can be performed by recording spot timestamps. However, our machine lacks this feature, making it imperative to find an alternative approach. Thus, we developed an RG 4-dimensional dynamic dose (RG-4DDD) system without spot timestamps. PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of calculated doses from the RG-4DDD system for PBS plans with varying breathing curves, amplitudes, and periods for 10%-50% GW. METHODS: RG-4DDDs were reconstructed using in-house developed software that assigned timestamps to individual spots, integrated start times for spills with breathing curves, and utilized deformable registrations for dose accumulation. Three cubic verification plans were created using a heterogeneous phantom. Additionally, typical liver and lung cases were employed for patient plan validation. Single- and multi-field-optimized (SFO and IMPT) plans (ten beams in total) were created for the liver and lung cases in a homogeneous phantom. Lateral profile measurements were obtained under both motion and no-motion conditions using a 2D ionization chamber array (2D-array) and EBT3 Gafchromic films on the CIRS dynamic platform. Breathing curves from the cubic plans were used to assess nine patterns of sine curves, with amplitudes of 5.0-10.0 mm (10.0-20.0 mm target motions) and periods of 3-6 sec. Patient field verifications were conducted using a representative patient curve with an average amplitude of 6.4 mm and period of 3.2 sec. Additional simulations were performed assuming a ± 10% change in assigned timestamps for the dose rate (DR), spot spill (0.08-s), and gate time delay (0.1-s) to evaluate the effect of parameter selection on our 4DDD models. The 4DDDs were compared with measured values using the 2D gamma index and absolute doses over that required for dosing 95% of the target. RESULTS: The 2D-array measurements showed that average gamma scores for the reference (no motion) and 4DDD plans for all GWs were at least 99.9 ± 0.2% and 98.2 ± 2.4% at 3%/3 mm, respectively. The gamma scores of the 4DDDs in film measurements exceeded 95.4% and 92.9% at 2%/2 mm for the cubic and patient plans, respectively. The 4DDD calculations were acceptable under DR changes of ±10% and both spill and gate time delays of ±0.18 sec. For the 4DDD plan using all GWs for all measurement points, the absolute point differences for all validation plans were within ±5.0% for 99.1% of the points. CONCLUSIONS: The RG-4DDD calculations (less than 50% GW) of the heterogeneous and actual patient plans showed good agreement with measurements for various breathing curves in the amplitudes and periods described above. The proposed system allows us to evaluate actual RG irradiation without requiring the ability to record spot timestamps.

Abstract Background Accurate dosimetry is important in radiotherapy, and all equipment used for radiotherapy shoud be audited by an independent external dose audit. Radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeter (RPLD) has excellent characteristics and is widely used for postal dose audit; however, postal dose audit for proton therapy using RPLD has not been established. Purpose This study aims to develop a postal dose audit procedure for scanning proton beams using RPLD, estimate uncertainties, and conduct a multicenter pilot study to validate the methodology. Methods A postal toolkit was developed and a postal dose audit procedure for RPLD measurements of scanning proton beams was established in cooperation with several facilities that employ various accelerators, irradiation equipment, and treatment planning systems (TPS) for clinical use. Based on basic and previous studies, an uncertainty budget was developed for estimating relative uncertainty and pilot studies were conducted at each site. A method for postal dose audits was developed in a multicenter collaboration to develop an approach suitable for implementation across multiple facilities. Results The relative response of 60 RPLDs for scanning proton beam examined in this study was 1.00 ± 1.28% mean ± standard deviation. The combined relative standard uncertainty of postal dosimetry for scanning proton beams using the RPLD was 2.97% (k = 1). Under the reference condition, the maximum differences between the ionization chamber measurement (IC) and TPS, RPLD and TPS, and RPLD and IC were 0.97, 1.88, and 2.12%, respectively. The maximum differences between the RPLD and ionization chamber for plateau measurements at 3 cm depth using single‐energy and non‐reference conditions were 11.31 and 4.02%, respectively. Conclusion We established a procedure for the postal dose audits of proton beams using RPLD and presented the results of a multicenter pilot study. By standardizing the reference conditions, the dosimetry uncertainty was estimated at 2.92%. The results demonstrated the feasibility of performing an independent third‐party dose audit of scanning proton beams using RPLD, and for such postal dose audits for proton beams, the irradiation conditions should be standardized to reduce uncertainties. These results are expected to contribute to the development of proton beams.

The current research on staffing models is primarily focused on conventional external photon beam therapy, which predominantly involves using linear accelerators. This emphasizes the need for comprehensive studies to understand better and define specific particle therapy facilities' staffing requirements. In a 2022 survey of 25 particle therapy facilities in Japan with an 84% response rate, significant insights were obtained regarding workload distribution, defined as the product of personnel count and task time (person-minutes), for patient-related tasks and equipment quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC). The survey revealed that machinery QA/QC tasks were particularly demanding, with an average monthly workload of 376.9 min and weekly tasks averaging 162.1 min. In comparison, patient-related workloads focused on treatment planning, exhibiting substantial time commitments, particularly for scanning and passive scattering techniques. The average workloads for treatment planning per patient were 291.3 and 195.4 min, respectively. In addition, specific patient scenarios such as pre-treatment sedation in pediatric cases require longer durations (averaging 84.5 min), which likely include the workloads of not only the physician responsible for sedation but also the radiotherapy technology and medical physics specialists providing support during sedation and the nursing staff involved in sedation care. These findings underscore the significant time investments required for machinery QA/QC and patient-specific treatment planning in particle therapy facilities, along with the need for specialized care procedures in pediatric cases. The results of this survey also emphasized the challenges and staffing requirements to ensure QA/QC in high-precision medical environments.

PURPOSE: Radiotherapy devices with multiple image-guidance systems, such as surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT), have been widely used in recent years. However, in the case of SGRT devices using the light-section method, coordinate coincidence evaluation using a phantom for SGRT devices with patterned light projection is not appropriate. Hence, this study aims to develop a dedicated phantom able to evaluate both the detection accuracy and coordinate coincidence of multiple IGRT configurations, including light-section-based SGRT devices. MATERIALS AND METHOD: First, we developed an end-to-end (E2E) phantom that can be scanned by CT and detected by a light-section-method-based SGRT device. Second, the detection accuracy of the phantom under three reference data acquisition conditions was evaluated using the E2E phantom. The three conditions were a body surface image detected by VOXELAN in the simulation CT room, a body surface image reconstructed from the volume data of the simulation CT room, and a body surface image acquired by VOXELAN in the radiotherapy room. Finally, the coordinate coincidence of the image-guidance system was evaluated using the E2E phantom. RESULT: Upon comparing detection accuracy among the three reference data acquisition methods, we found that the reference data generated in the CT room had the largest error (0.58 mm at maximum). The coordinate coincidences of the multiple image-guidance systems were within 1 mm for all components after the maintenance of VOXELAN using E2E phantom. Furthermore, the long-term direction stability was worse in the longitudinal direction. CONCLUSION: The new E2E phantom can be used to evaluate the detection accuracy of a light-section-based SGRT system and the coordinate coincidence using a Winston-Lutz-based method in multiple image-guided configurations. The detection accuracy in the three different reference images of VOXELAN using this phantom improved to within 1 mm in all directions.

This study aimed to evaluate the performance for answering the Japanese medical physicist examination and providing the benchmark of knowledge about medical physics in language-generative AI with large language model. We used questions from Japan's 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 medical physicist board examinations, which covered various question types, including multiple-choice questions, and mainly focused on general medicine and medical physics. ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0 (OpenAI) were used. We compared the AI-based answers with the correct ones. The average accuracy rates were 42.2 ± 2.5% (ChatGPT-3.5) and 72.7 ± 2.6% (ChatGPT-4), showing that ChatGPT-4 was more accurate than ChatGPT-3.5 [all categories (except for radiation-related laws and recommendations/medical ethics): p value < 0.05]. Even with the ChatGPT model with higher accuracy, the accuracy rates were less than 60% in two categories; radiation metrology (55.6%), and radiation-related laws and recommendations/medical ethics (40.0%). These data provide the benchmark for knowledge about medical physics in ChatGPT and can be utilized as basic data for the development of various medical physics tools using ChatGPT (e.g., radiation therapy support tools with Japanese input).

Background This study evaluates dose perturbations caused by nonradioactive seeds in clinical cases by employing treatment planning system-based Monte Carlo (TPS-MC) simulation. Methodology We investigated dose perturbation using a water-equivalent phantom and 20 clinical cases of prostate cancer (10 cases with seeds and 10 cases without seeds) treated at Fujita Health University Hospital, Japan. First, dose calculations for a simple geometry were performed using the RayStation MC algorithm for a water-equivalent phantom with and without a seed. TPS-independent Monte Carlo (full-MC) simulations and film measurements were conducted to verify the accuracy of TPS-MC simulation. Subsequently, dose calculations using TPS-MC were performed on CT images of clinical cases of prostate cancer with and without seeds, and the dose distributions were compared. Results In clinical cases, dose calculations using MC simulations revealed hotspots around the seeds. However, the size of the hotspot was not correlated with the number of seeds. The maximum difference in dose perturbation between TPS-MC simulations and film measurements was 3.9%, whereas that between TPS-MC simulations and full-MC simulations was 3.7%. The dose error of TPS-MC was negligible for multiple beams or rotational irradiation. Conclusions Hotspots were observed in dose calculations using TPS-MC performed on CT images of clinical cases with seeds. The dose calculation accuracy around the seeds using TPS-MC simulations was comparable to that of film measurements and full-MC simulations, with differences within 3.9%. Although the clinical impact of hotspots occurring around the seeds is minimal, utilizing MC simulations on TPSs can be beneficial to verify their presence.

Deep learning-based CT image reconstruction (DLR) is a state-of-the-art method for obtaining CT images. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of DLR in radiotherapy. Data were acquired using a large-bore CT system and an electron density phantom for radiotherapy. We compared the CT values, image noise, and CT value-to-electron density conversion table of DLR and hybrid iterative reconstruction (H-IR) for various doses. Further, we evaluated three DLR reconstruction strength patterns (Mild, Standard, and Strong). The variations of CT values of DLR and H-IR were large at low doses, and the difference in average CT values was insignificant with less than 10 HU at doses of 100 mAs and above. DLR showed less change in CT values and smaller image noise relative to H-IR. The noise-reduction effect was particularly large in the low-dose region. The difference in image noise between DLR Mild and Standard/Strong was large, suggesting the usefulness of reconstruction intensities higher than Mild. DLR showed stable CT values and low image noise for various materials, even at low doses; particularly for Standard or Strong, the reduction in image noise was significant. These findings indicate the usefulness of DLR in treatment planning using large-bore CT systems.

In single-isocenter multiple-target stereotactic radiotherapy (SIMT-SRT), it is difficult to evaluate both the geometrical accuracy and absorbed dose measurement when irradiating off-isocenter targets. This study aimed to develop a simple quality assurance (QA) method to evaluate off-isocenter irradiation position accuracy in SIMT-SRT and compare its feasibility with that of a commercial device. First, we created two types of inserts and metallic balls with a diameter of 5 mm to be inserted into a commercially available phantom (SIMT phantom). Second, we developed a dedicated analysis software using Python for the Winston-Lutz test (WLT). Third, an image processing software, including the filtered back-projection algorithm, was developed to analyze the images obtained using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID). Fourth, the feasibility of our method was evaluated by comparing it with the results of WLT using two commercially available phantoms: WL-QA and MultiMet-WL cubes. Notably, 92% of the results in one-dimensional deviations were within 0.26 mm (EPID pixel width). The correlation coefficients were 0.52, 0.92, and 0.96 in the left-right, superior-inferior, and anterior-posterior directions, respectively. In the WLT, a maximum two-dimensional deviation of 0.70 mm was detected in our method, while the deviation in the other method was within 0.5 mm. The advantage of our method is that it can evaluate the geometrical accuracy at any gantry angle during dynamic rotation irradiation using a filtered back-projection algorithm, even if the target is located off the isocenter. Our method can perform WLT at arbitrary positions and is suitable for the QA of dynamic rotation irradiation using an EPID.

PURPOSE: Accurate calculation of the proton beam range inside a patient is an important topic in proton therapy. In recent times, a computed tomography (CT) image reconstruction algorithm was developed for treatment planning to reduce the impact of the variation of the CT number with changes in imaging conditions. In this study, we investigated the usefulness of this new reconstruction algorithm (DirectDensity™: DD) in proton therapy based on its comparison with filtered back projection (FBP). METHODS: We evaluated the effects of variations in the X-ray tube potential and target size on the FBP- and DD-image values and investigated the usefulness of the DD algorithm based on the range variations and dosimetric quantity variations. RESULTS: For X-ray tube potential variations, the range variation in the case of FBP was up to 12.5 mm (20.8%), whereas that of DD was up to 3.3 mm (5.6%). Meanwhile, for target size variations, the range variation in the case of FBP was up to 2.2 mm (2.5%), whereas that of DD was up to 0.9 mm (1.4%). Moreover, the variations observed in the case of DD were smaller than those of FBP for all dosimetric quantities. CONCLUSION: The dose distributions obtained using DD were more robust against variations in the CT imaging conditions (X-ray tube potential and target size) than those obtained using FBP, and the range variations were often less than the dose calculation grid (2 mm). Therefore, the DD algorithm is effective in a robust workflow and reduces uncertainty in range calculations.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of quality assurance (QA)-related setup errors in passive proton therapy for prostate cancer with and without a hydrogel spacer. We used 20 typical computed tomography (CT) images of prostate cancer: 10 patients with and 10 patients without spacers. The following 12 model errors were assumed: output error ± 2%, range error ± 1 mm, setup error ± 1 mm for three directions, and multileaf collimator (MLC) position error ± 1 mm. We created verification plans with model errors and compared the prostate-rectal (PR) distance and dose indices with and without the spacer. The mean PR distance at the isocenter was 1.1 ± 1.3 mm without the spacer and 12.9 ± 2.9 mm with the spacer (P < 0.001). The mean rectum V53.5 GyE, V50 GyE, and V34.5 GyE in the original plan were 2.3%, 4.1%, and 12.1% without the spacer and 0.1%, 0.4%, and 3.3% with the spacer (P = 0.0011, < 0.001, and < 0.001). The effects of the range and lateral setup errors were small; however, the effects of the vertical/long setup and MLC error were significant in the cases without the spacer. The means of the maximum absolute change from original plans across all scenarios in the rectum V53.5 GyE, V50 GyE, and V34.5 GyE were 1.3%, 1.5%, and 2.3% without the spacer, and 0.2%, 0.4%, and 1.3% with the spacer (P < 0.001, < 0.001, and = 0.0019). This study indicated that spacer injections were also effective in reducing the change in the rectal dose due to setup errors.

A radiophotoluminescent glass dosimeter (RGD) is used for a postal audit of a photon beam because of its various excellent characteristics. However, it has not been used for scanning proton beams because its response characteristics have not been verified. In this study, the response of RGD to scanning protons was investigated to develop a dosimetry protocol using the linear energy transfer (LET)-based correction factor. The responses of RGD to four maximum-range-energy-pattern proton beams were verified by comparing it with ionization chamber (IC) dosimetry. The LET at each measurement depth was calculated via Monte Carlo (MC) simulation. The LET correction factor ( k LET RGD ) was the ratio between the uncorrected RGD dose ( D raw RGD ) and the IC dose at each measurement depth. k LET RGD can be represented as a function of LET using the following equation: k LET RGD LET = - 0.035 LET + 1.090 . D raw RGD showed a linear under-response with increasing LET, and the maximum dose difference between the IC dose and D raw RGD was 15.2% at an LET of 6.07 keV/μm. The LET-based correction dose ( D LET RGD ) conformed within 3.6% of the IC dose. The mean dose difference (±SD) of D raw RGD and D LET RGD was -2.5 ± 6.9% and 0.0 ± 1.6%, respectively. To achieve accurate dose verification for scanning proton beams using RGD, we derived a linear regression equation based on LET. The results show that with appropriate LET correction, RGD can be used for dose verification of scanning proton beams.

<title>Abstract</title> To understand the current state of flattening filter-free (FFF) beam implementation in C-arm linear accelerators (LINAC) in Japan, the quality assurance (QA)/quality control (QC) 2018–2019 Committee of the Japan Society of Medical Physics (JSMP) conducted a 37-question survey, designed to investigate facility information and specifications regarding FFF beam adoption and usage. The survey comprised six sections: facility information, devices, clinical usage, standard calibration protocols, modeling for treatment planning (TPS) systems and commissioning and QA/QC. A web-based questionnaire was developed. Responses were collected between 18 June and 18 September 2019. Of the 846 institutions implementing external radiotherapy, 323 replied. Of these institutions, 92 had adopted FFF beams and 66 had treated patients using them. FFF beams were used in stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) for almost all disease sites, especially for the lungs using 6 MV and liver using 10 MV in 51 and 32 institutions, respectively. The number of institutions using FFF beams for treatment increased yearly, from eight before 2015 to 60 in 2018. Farmer-type ionization chambers were used as the standard calibration protocol in 66 (72%) institutions. In 73 (80%) institutions, the beam-quality conversion factor for FFF beams was calculated from TPR20,10, via the same protocol used for beams with flattening filter (WFF). Commissioning, periodic QA and patient-specific QA for FFF beams also followed the procedures used for WFF beams. FFF beams were primarily used in high-volume centers for SRT. In most institutions, measurement and QA was conducted via the procedures used for WFF beams.

A radiophotoluminescent glass dosimeter (RGD) is widely used in postal audit system for photon beams in Japan. However, proton dosimetry in RGDs is scarcely used owing to a lack of clarity in their response to beam quality. In this study, we investigated RGD response to beam quality for establishing a suitable linear energy transfer (LET)-corrected dosimetry protocol in a therapeutic proton beam. The RGD response was compared with ionization chamber measurement for a 100-225 MeV passive proton beam. LET of the measurement points was calculated by the Monte Carlo method. An LET-correction factor, defined as a ratio between the non-corrected RGD dose and ionization chamber dose, of 1.226×(LET)-0.171 was derived for the RGD response. The magnitude of the LET-dependence of RGD increased with LET; for an LET of 8.2 keV/μm, the RGD under-response was up to 16%. The coefficient of determination, mean difference ± SD of non-corrected RGD dose, residual range-corrected RGD dose, and LET-corrected RGD dose to the ionization chamber are 0.923, 3.7 ± 4.2%, -2.4 ± 7.5%, and 0.04 ± 2.1%, respectively. The LET-corrected RGD dose was within 5% of the corresponding ionization chamber dose at all energies until 200 MeV, where it was 5.3% lower than the ionization chamber dose. A corrected LET-dependence of RGD using a correction factor based on a power function of LET and precise dosimetric verification close to the maximum LET were realized here. We further confirmed establishment of an accurate postal audit under various irradiation conditions.

PURPOSE: The conventional weighted computed tomography dose index (CTDIw) may not be suitable for cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) dosimetry because a cross-sectional dose distribution is angularly inhomogeneous owing to partial angle irradiations. This study was conducted to develop a new dose metric (f(0)CBw) for CBCT dosimetry to determine a more accurate average dose in the central cross-sectional plane of a cylindrical phantom using Monte Carlo simulations. METHODS: First, cross-sectional dose distributions of cylindrical polymethyl methacrylate phantoms over a wide range of phantom diameters (8-40 cm) were calculated for various CBCT scan protocols. Then, by obtaining linear least-squares fits of the full datasets of the cross-sectional dose distributions, the optimal radial positions, which represented measurement positions for the average phantom dose, were determined. Finally, the f(0)CBw method was developed by averaging point doses at the optimal radial positions of the phantoms. To demonstrate its validity, the relative differences between the average doses and each dose index value were estimated for the devised f(0)CBw, conventional CTDIw, and Haba's CTDIw methods, respectively. RESULTS: The relative differences between the average doses and each dose index value were within 4.1%, 16.7%, and 11.9% for the devised, conventional CTDIw, and Haba's CTDIw methods, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The devised f(0)CBw value was calculated by averaging four "point doses" at 90° intervals and the optimal radial positions of the cylindrical phantom. The devised method can estimate the average dose more accurately than the previously developed CTDIw methods for CBCT dosimetry.

The purpose of this study was to propose a verification method and results of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), using a commercially available heterogeneous phantom. We used a simple simulated head and neck and prostate phantom. An ionization chamber and radiochromic film were used for measurements of absolute dose and relative dose distribution. The measured doses were compared with calculated doses using a treatment planning system. We defined the uncertainty of the measurement point of the ionization chamber due to the effective point of the chamber and mechanical setup error as 2 mm and estimated the dose variation base on a 2 mm error. We prepared a HU-relative stopping power conversion table and fluence correction factor that were specific to the heterogeneous phantom. The fluence correction factor was determined as a function of depth and was obtained from the ratio of the doses in water and in the phantom at the same effective depths. In the simulated prostate plan, composite doses of measurements and calculations agreed within ±1.3% and the maximum local dose differences of each field were 10.0%. Composite doses in the simulated head and neck plan agreed within 4.0% and the maximum local dose difference for each field was 12.0%. The dose difference for each field came within 2% when taking the measurement uncertainty into consideration. In the composite plan, the maximum dose uncertainty was estimated as 4.0% in the simulated prostate plan and 5.8% in the simulated head and neck plan. Film measurements showed good agreement, with more than 92.5% of points passing a gamma value (3%/3 mm). From these results, the heterogeneous phantom should be useful for verification of IMPT by using a phantom-specific HU-relative stopping power conversion, fluence correction factor, and dose error estimation due to the effective point of the chamber.

PURPOSE: In order to clarify the biological response of tumor cells to proton beam irradiation, sublethal damage recovery (SLDR) and potentially lethal damage recovery (PLDR) induced after proton beam irradiation at the center of a 10 cm spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) were compared with those seen after X‑ray irradiation. METHODS: Cell survival was determined by a colony assay using EMT6 and human salivary gland tumor (HSG) cells. First, two doses of 4 Gy/GyE (Gray equivalents, GyE) were given at an interfraction interval of 0-6 h. Second, five fractions of 1.6 Gy/GyE were administered at interfraction intervals of 0-5 min. Third, a delayed-plating assay involving cells in plateau-phase cultures was conducted. The cells were plated in plastic dishes immediately or 2-24 h after being irradiated with 8 Gy/GyE of X‑rays or proton beams. Furthermore, we investigated the degree of protection from the effects of X‑rays or proton beams afforded by the radical scavenger dimethyl sulfoxide to estimate the contribution of the indirect effect of radiation. RESULTS: In both the first and second experiments, SLDR was more suppressed after proton beam irradiation than after X‑ray irradiation. In the third experiment, there was no difference in PLDR between the proton beam and X‑ray irradiation conditions. The degree of protection tended to be higher after X‑ray irradiation than after proton beam irradiation. CONCLUSION: Compared with that seen after X‑ray irradiation, SLDR might take place to a lesser extent after proton beam irradiation at the center of a 10 cm SOBP, while the extent of PLDR does not differ significantly between these two conditions.

To measure the absorbed dose to water D w in proton beams using a radiophotoluminescent glass dosimeter (RGD), a method with the correction for the change of the mass stopping power ratio (SPR) and the linear energy transfer (LET) dependence of radiophotoluminescent efficiency [Formula: see text] is proposed. The calibration coefficient in terms of D w for RGDs (GD-302M, Asahi Techno Glass) was obtained using a 60Co γ-ray. The SPR of water to the RGD was calculated by Monte Carlo simulation, and [Formula: see text] was investigated experimentally using a 70 MeV proton beam. For clinical usage, the residual range R res was used as a quality index to determine the correction factor for the beam quality [Formula: see text] and the LET quenching effect of the RGD [Formula: see text]. The proposed method was evaluated by measuring D w at different depths in a 200 MeV proton beam. For both non-modulated and modulated proton beams, [Formula: see text] decreases rapidly where R res is less than 4 cm. The difference in [Formula: see text] between a non-modulated and a modulated proton beam is less than 0.5% for the R res range from 0 cm to 22 cm. [Formula: see text] decreases rapidly at a LET range from 1 to 2 keV µm-1. In the evaluation experiments, D w using RGDs, [Formula: see text] showed good agreement with that obtained using an ionization chamber and the relative difference was within 3% where R res was larger than 1 cm. The uncertainty budget for [Formula: see text] in a proton beam was estimated to investigate the potential of RGD postal dosimetry in proton therapy. These results demonstrate the feasibility of RGD dosimetry in a therapeutic proton beam and the general versatility of the proposed method. In conclusion, the proposed methodology for RGDs in proton dosimetry is applicable where R res  >  1 cm and the RGD is feasible as a postal audit dosimeter for proton therapy.

Image-guided radiation therapy using a gold marker-based tumor tracking technique provides precise patient setup and monitoring. However, the marker consists of high-Z material, and the resulting scattered rays tend to have adverse effects on the dose distribution of radiotherapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric perturbation due to the use of a gold marker for radiotherapy in the lungs. The relative dose distributions were compared with film measurement, Monte Carlo simulation, and XiO calculation with the multi grid superposition algorithm using two types of virtual lung phantoms, which were composed of tough water phantoms, tough lung phantoms, cork boards, and a 2.0-mm-diameter gold ball. No dose increase and decrease in the vicinity of the gold ball was seen in the XiO calculations, although it was seen in the film measurements and the Monte Carlo simulation. The dose perturbation due to a gold marker cannot be evaluated using XiO calculation with the superposition algorithm when the tumor is near a gold marker (especially within 0.5 cm). To rule out the presence of such dose perturbations due to a gold marker, the distance between the gold marker and the tumor must therefore be greater than 0.5 cm.