
Optimizing calibration settings for accurate water equivalent path length assessment using flat panel proton radiography
Author(s) -
Carmen Seller Oria,
Gabriel Guterres Marmitt,
Jeffrey Free,
Johannes A. Langendijk,
Stefan Both,
Antje Knopf,
Artūrs Meijers
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
physics in medicine and biology/physics in medicine and biology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1361-6560
pISSN - 0031-9155
DOI - 10.1088/1361-6560/ac2c4f
Subject(s) - imaging phantom , calibration , proton therapy , path length , proton , standard deviation , nuclear medicine , range (aeronautics) , detector , materials science , physics , mathematics , optics , nuclear physics , statistics , medicine , composite material
Objective: Proton range uncertainties can compromise the effectiveness of proton therapy treatments. Water equivalent path length (WEPL) assessment by flat panel detector proton radiography (FP-PR) can provide means of range uncertainty detection. Since WEPL accuracy intrinsically relies on the FP-PR calibration parameters, the purpose of this study is to establish an optimal calibration procedure that ensures high accuracy of WEPL measurements. To that end, several calibration settings were investigated. Approach: FP-PR calibration datasets were obtained simulating PR fields with different proton energies, directed towards water-equivalent material slabs of increasing thickness. The parameters investigated were the spacing between energy layers (Δ E ) and the increment in thickness of the water-equivalent material slabs (Δ X ) used for calibration. 30 calibrations were simulated, as a result of combining Δ E = 9, 7, 5, 3, 1 MeV and Δ X = 10, 8, 5, 3, 2, 1 mm. FP-PRs through a CIRS electron density phantom were simulated, and WEPL images corresponding to each calibration were obtained. Ground truth WEPL values were provided by range probing multi-layer ionization chamber simulations on each insert of the phantom. Relative WEPL errors between FP-PR simulations and ground truth were calculated for each insert. Mean relative WEPL errors and standard deviations across all inserts were computed for WEPL images obtained with each calibration. Main results: Large mean and standard deviations were found in WEPL images obtained with large Δ E values (Δ E = 9 or 7 MeV), for any Δ X . WEPL images obtained with Δ E ≤ 5 MeV and Δ X ≤ 5 mm resulted in a WEPL accuracy with mean values within ±0.5% and standard deviations around 1%. Significance: An optimal FP calibration in the framework of this study was established, characterized by 3 MeV ≤ Δ E ≤ 5 MeV and 2 mm ≤ Δ X ≤ 5 mm. Within these boundaries, highly accurate WEPL acquisitions using FP-PR are feasible and practical, holding the potential to assist future online range verification quality control procedures.