The Investigation of Tissue Composition Effects on Dose Distributions Using Monte Carlo Method in Permanent Prostate Brachytherapy

Objective: Radiation dose calculations in the prostate brachytherapy practices have very high importance in terms of the success of treatment. The purpose of the present study is to determine whether there is a significant dose difference between the radiation dose calculations performed in water medium and prostate cancer-diagnosed patients by using the Monte Carlo method. Methods: The radiation dose calculations were performed on 20 prostate patients by using the BrachyDose Monte Carlo code. Phantom geometry derived from real patients computed tomography (CT) data was created to use in dose calculations. Water material was assigned to all voxels within the prostate volume for dose comparison with CT derived phantom. 125I (Amersham, OncoSeed, 6711), 103Pd (Theragenics Co., TheraSeed, 200) and 131Cs (IsoRay Medical) commercial brachytherapy seed models were used in dose calculations. Results: It was observed that there are significant dose differences between the water medium and the prostate tissue. The differences between D90 dose values in prostate tissue and water medium were calculated as 7.2-10.5%, 9.1-13.4% and 5.4-8.3% for 125I, 103Pd and 131Cs brachytherapy seed sources, respectively. Conclusions: It was concluded that material compositions of different organs and tissues in the human body should be considered for more accurate brachytherapy dose calculations.

Keywords:

Brachytherapy, prostate cancer, tissue composition, Monte Carlo brachydose,

PDF

___

Holm HH, Gammelgaard J. Ultrasonically guided precise needle placement in the prostate and the seminal vesicles. Journal of Urology [Internet]. 1981;125(3):385–7. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)55044-2.
Chibani O, Williamson JF, Todor D. Dosimetric effects of seed anisotropy and interseed attenuation for 103Pd and 125I prostate implants. Medical Physics. 2005;32(8):2557–66.
DeMarco JJ, Smathers JB, Burnison CM, Ncube QK, Solberg TD. CT-based dosimetry calculations for 125I prostate implants. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 1999;45(5):1347–53.
Rivard MJ, Coursey BM, DeWerd LA, Hanson WF, Huq MS, Ibbott GS, et al. Update of AAPM Task Group No. 43 Report: A revised AAPM protocol for brachytherapy dose calculations. Medical Physics. 2004;31(3):633–74.
Thomadsen BR, Williamson JF, Rivard MJ, Meigooni AS. Anniversary paper: Past and current issues, and trends in brachytherapy physics. Medical Physics. 2008;35(10):4708–23.
Mobit P, Badragan I. Dose perturbation effects in prostate seed implant brachytherapy with I-125. Physics in Medicine and Biology. 2004;49(14):3171–8.
Beaulieu L, Carlsson Tedgren Å, Carrier JF, Davis SD, Mourtada F, Rivard MJ, et al. Report of the Task Group 186 on model-based dose calculation methods in brachytherapy beyond the TG-43 formalism: Current status and recommendations for clinical implementation. Medical Physics. 2012;39(10):6208–36.
DeMarco JJ, Wallace RE, Boedecker K. An analysis of MCNP cross-sections and tally methods for low-energy photon emitters. Physics in Medicine and Biology. 2002;47(8):1321–32.
Kilby W, Sage J, Rabett V. Tolerance levels for quality assurance of electron density values generated from CT in radiotherapy treatment planning. Physics in Medicine and Biology. 2002;47(9):1485–92.
Carrier JF, D’Amours M, Verhaegen F, Reniers B, Martin AG, Vigneault É, et al. Postimplant Dosimetry Using a Monte Carlo Dose Calculation Engine: A New Clinical Standard. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2007;68(4):1190–8.
Yu Y, Anderson LL, Li Z, Mellenberg DE, Nath R, Schell MC, et al. TG 64 Permanent prostate seed implant brachytherapy. Medical physics. 1999;26(10):2054–76.
Oliveira SM, Teixeira NJ, Fernandes L, Teles P, Vieira G, Vaz P. Tissue composition and density impact on the clinical parameters for 125I prostate implants dosimetry. Physica Medica. 2014;30(7):799–808.
Bazalova M, Beaulieu L, Palefsky S, Verhaegen F. Correction of CT artifacts and its influence on Monte Carlo dose calculations. Medical Physics. 2007;34(6):2119–32.
Ghorbani M, Salahshour F, Haghparast A, Moghaddas TA, Knaup C. Effect of tissue composition on dose distribution in brachytherapy with various photon emitting sources. Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy. 2014;6(1):54–67.
Storm L, Israel HI. Photon cross sections from 1 keV to 100 MeV for elements Z=1 to Z=100. Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables. 1970;7(6):565–681.
Dolan J, Li Z, Williamson JF. Monte Carlo and experimental dosimetry of an I125 brachytherapy seed. Medical Physics. 2006;33(12):4675–84.
Monroe JI, Williamson JF. Monte Carlo-aided dosimetry of the Theragenics Theraseed® Model 200 103Pd interstitial brachytherapy seed. Medical Physics. 2002;29(4):609–21.
Wang J, Zhang H. Dosimetric characterization of model Cs-1 Rev2 cesium-131 brachytherapy source in water phantoms and human tissues with MCNP5 Monte Carlo simulation. Medical Physics. 2008;35(4):1571–9.
Yegin G. A new approach to geometry modeling for Monte Carlo particle transport: An application to the EGS code system. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms. 2003;211(3):331–8.
Taylor REP, Yegin G, Rogers DWO. Benchmarking BrachyDose: Voxel based EGSnrc Monte Carlo calculations of TG-43 dosimetry parameters. Medical Physics. 2007;34(2):445–57.
Sahgal A, Jabbari S, Chen J, Pickett B, Roach M, Weinberg V, et al. Comparison of Dosimetric and Biologic Effective Dose Parameters for Prostate and Urethra Using 131Cs and 125I for Prostate Permanent Implant Brachytherapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2008;72(1):247–54.
Oliveira SM, Teixeira NJ, Fernandes L, Teles P, Vaz P. Dosimetric effect of tissue heterogeneity for 125I prostate implants. Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy [Internet]. 2014;19(6):392–8. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rpor.2014.03.004.
Collins Fekete CA, Plamondon M, Martin AG, Vigneault É, Verhaegen F, Beaulieu L. Calcifications in low-dose rate prostate seed brachytherapy treatment: Post-planning dosimetry and predictive factors. Radiotherapy and Oncology [Internet]. 2015;114(3):339–44. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2015.01.014.
Sina S, Faghihi R, Meigooni AS. A comparison of the dosimetric parameters of Cs-137 brachytherapy source in different tissues with water using monte carlo simulation. Iranian Journal of Medical Physics. 2012;9(1 A):65–74.
Chibani O, Williamson JF. MCPI©: A sub-minute Monte Carlo dose calculation engine for prostate implants. Medical Physics. 2005;32(12):3688–98.
Carrier JF, Beaulieu L, Therriault-Proulx F, Roy R. Impact of interseed attenuation and tissue composition for permanent prostate implants. Medical Physics. 2006;33(3):595–604.
Landry G, Reniers B, Murrer L, Lutgens L, Bloemen-Van Gurp E, Pignol JP, et al. Sensitivity of low energy brachytherapy Monte Carlo dose calculations to uncertainties in human tissue composition. Medical Physics. 2010;37(10):5188–98.
Landry G, Reniers B, Pignol JP, Beaulieu L, Verhaegen F. The difference of scoring dose to water or tissues in Monte Carlo dose calculations for low energy brachytherapy photon sources. Medical Physics. 2011;38(3):1526–33.
Mashouf S, Safigholi H, Merino T, Soliman A, Ravi A, Morton G, et al. Sensitivity of clinically relevant dosimetric parameters to contouring uncertainty in postimplant dosimetry of low-dose-rate prostate permanent seed brachytherapy. Brachytherapy [Internet]. 2016;15(6):774–9. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brachy.2016.08.013.
Yang R, Wang J, Zhang H. Dosimetric study of Cs-131, I-125, and Pd-103 seeds for permanent prostate brachytherapy. Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals. 2009;24(6):701–5.
Ye AY, Conway J, Peacock M, Clarkson PW, Lee CH, Simmons C, et al. Secondary sarcoma of bone post-prostate brachytherapy: A case report. Journal of the Canadian Urological Association. 2014;8(5-6 JUNE):8–10.
Gershkevitsh E, Rosenberg I, Dearnaley DP, Trott KR. Bone marrow doses and leukaemia risk in radiotherapy of prostate cancer. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 1999;53(3):189–97.