DEVELOPMENT AND OPTIMIZATION OF TUNGSTEN MATRIX COLLIMATORS FOR SPATIALLY FRACTIONATED RADIATION THERAPY

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17721/3041-1491/2024.11-32

Keywords:

spatially fractionated radiation therapy, Monte Carlo simulation, CERN Fluka, radiation therapy, mini beam therapy, metal matrix collimators, PVDR

Abstract

Introduction. This study investigates the effectiveness of tungsten matrix collimators for spatially fractionated radiation therapy (SFRT). The research combines experimental studies and Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the fractionation of gamma-ray and electron beams. The results demonstrate the possibility of achieving high fractionation indicators (PVDR over 10) for irradiation of shallow tumors.

Methods. The experiments were conducted using a Varian Clinac iX medical accelerator with 6 MeV gamma-rays. Two types of collimators were tested: brass and lead. Monte Carlo simulations were performed using GEANT4 and CERN Fluka software packages, modeling a 10×10×10 cm plexiglass phantom and a tungsten collimator with a 5×5 matrix of 1 mm diameter holes.

Results. The study examined the effects of collimator thickness and radiation energy on fractionation efficiency. For 25 MeV gamma-rays, the optimal tungsten collimator thickness was found to be 12 cm, achieving a PVDR of about 12 at the phantom entrance. For 18 MeV electrons, a 9 cm thick collimator provided a PVDR of about 20. However, the fractionation effect rapidly diminished with depth for both radiation types. The role of secondary particles in dose distribution formation was also investigated. For gamma-rays, high-energy secondary electrons significantly contributed to the dose at depth. For electron beams, secondary gamma-rays from bremsstrahlung were less significant compared to primary electrons.

Conclusions. Based on these results, three versions of modular tungsten collimator designs were developed. These collimators consist of separate 3 mm thick plates, allowing flexible adjustment of parameters for different energies and beam types. The study concludes that while SFRT shows promise for treating surface neoplasms, the rapid decay of the fractionation effect with depth limits its application for deep-seated tumors. The proposed modular collimator design offers flexibility for further research and potential clinical applications in adaptive irradiation systems.

 

References

Anokhin, I., & Ramazanov, D. (2023). Matrix metal collimators studies for the spatially fractionated radiation therapy. Computer-integrated technologies: education, science, production, 53, 5–8. https://doi.org/10.36910/6775-2524-0560-2023-53-01

 

Pugatch, V., Campbell, M., Chaus, A., Kovalchuk, O., Llopart, X., Okhrimenko, O., ... & Tlustos, L. (2012). Metal micro-detector TimePix imaging synchrotron radiation beams at the ESRF Bio-Medical Beamline ID17. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment, 682, 8–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2012.03.049

 

Ramazanov, D.M., & Anokhin, I.E. (2023a). Monte Carlo simulations of tungsten array collimators for spatially fractionated radiation therapy. Scientific Bulletin of UNFU, 33(5), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.36930/40330509

 

Ramazanov, D.M., & Anokhin, I.E. (2023b). Development of a tungsten matrix collimator for electronic spatially fractionated therapy. Science and Technology Today, 12(26), 626–636. https://doi.org/10.52058/2786-6025-2023-12(26)-626-636

 

Yan, W., Khan, M.K., Wu, X., Simone II, C.B., Fan, J., Gressen, E., ... & Mourad, W.F. (2020). Spatially fractionated radiation therapy: History, present and the future. Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 20, 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2019.10.004

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Published

2025-01-26

How to Cite

RAMAZANOV, D. ., ANOKHIN, I., PUGATCH, V., & KOVALCHUK, O. (2025). DEVELOPMENT AND OPTIMIZATION OF TUNGSTEN MATRIX COLLIMATORS FOR SPATIALLY FRACTIONATED RADIATION THERAPY. The Conference Proceedings “Medical Physics – the Current Status, Problems, the Way of Development. Innovation technologies”, 1(1), 248-254. https://doi.org/10.17721/3041-1491/2024.11-32