Investigation of the Effect of Different Voxel Sizes and Beam Fields on Dose Distribution in Small-Field Radiotherapy Treatment

Abstract

This study investigates the influence of voxel size and small photon beam fields on dose distribution to determine optimal dosimetric parameters for accurate calculations in radiotherapy. Dose distributions were computed in a homogeneous water phantom using the Monte Carlo–based EGSnrc/DOSXYZnrc system with a 1 MeV photon source and beam sizes from 0.5 × 0.5 to 3 × 3 cm². Analyses at clinically relevant surface depths (0.007–0.1 cm) showed that a voxel size of 0.01 cm provides optimal accuracy across all field sizes. Beyond 0.1 cm depth, the ideal voxel size increased proportionally with both depth and beam field, ranging from 0.05 to 0.25 cm. Larger voxels caused substantial errors, reaching 5–34% in dose calculations. These findings highlight voxel size as a critical factor in small-field dosimetry and emphasize that selecting depth- and field-specific voxel dimensions can enhance dose accuracy and potentially reduce radiation-induced skin toxicity in precision radiotherapy.

Keywords

• Radiotherapy
• Monte Carlo
• DOSXYZnrc
• Small Field Dosimetry
• Skin Dose
• Voxel Size Effect

Ethical Statement

Because this study was conducted entirely on a virtual phantom and did not involve the use of any patient data or medical images, ethical committee approval was not required prior to the initiation of the research.

Thanks

The author gratefully acknowledges Dr. Gültekin Yeğin of Manisa Celal Bayar University for his valuable guidance throughout this study. The calculations reported in this article were performed entirely at the TUBITAK ULAKBIM, High Performance and Grid Computing Center (TRUBA resources).

References

1. [1]. Attix, F. H. 1986. Introduction to Radiological Physics and Radiation Dosimetry. Wiley & Sons, New York, 607 s.
2. [2]. Das, I. J, Ding, G. X, Ahnesjö, A. 2008. Small fields: Nonequilibrium radiation dosimetry. Medical Physics; 35(1): 206-215.
3. [3]. Demir, H, Aras, S, Büyükcizmeci, N, Benli Yavuz, B. 2022. The dosimetric comparison and evaluation of helical tomotherapy, volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT), step-and-shoot and sliding-window radiotherapy techniques in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Radiation Physics and Chemistry; Article ID: 109987.
4. [4]. Aras, S, Ozkanli, S, Erdem, E, Gokalp, S, Erdogan, C. E. 2023. Investigation of low and high dose rate X-ray effects on histopathological changes and prognostic importance of Ki-67 in laryngeal cancer radiotherapy. Applied Radiation and Isotopes; 197: 110823.
5. [5]. Zhu, T. C, Bjarngard, B. E. 1994. The head-scatter factor for small field sizes. Medical Physics; 21(1): 65-68.
6. [6]. Palmans, H, Andreo, P, Hug, M. S, Seuntjens, J, Christaki, K. 2017. Dosimetry of Small Static Fields used in External Beam Radiotherapy: An IAEA-AAPM International Code of Practice for Reference and Relative Dose Determination. Technical Report Series No. 483, IAEA, Vienna, 211 s.
7. [7]. Sharma, S. D. 2014. Challenges of small photon field dosimetry are still challenging. Journal of Medical Physics; 39(3): 131-132.
8. [8]. Derreumaux, S, Boisserie, G, Brunet, G, Buchheit, I, Sarrazin, T. 2011. Concerns in France about the dose delivered to the patients in stereotactic radiation therapy. In: Standards, Applications and Quality Assurance in Medical Radiation Dosimetry (Proc. Int. Symp. Vienna), Vol. 1, IAEA, Vienna, pp 273-286.

9. [9]. Palmans, H, Andreo, P, Hug, M. S, Seuntjens, J, Christaki, A, Meghzifene, K. E. 2018. Dosimetry of small static fields used in external photon beam radiotherapy: Summary of TRS-483. Medical Physics; 45(11): 1123-1145.
10. [10]. Bogdanich, W, Ruiz, R. R. 2010. Radiation errors reported in Missouri. The New York Times; p. 17.
11. [11]. Das, I. J, Francescon, P, Moran, J. M, Ahnesjö, A, Aspradakis, M. M, Cheng, C. W, Ding, G. X, Fenwick, J. D, Huq, M. S, Oldham, M, Reft, C. S, Sauer, O. A. 2021. Report of AAPM Task Group 155: Megavoltage photon beam dosimetry in small fields and non-equilibrium conditions. Medical Physics; 48(10): e886-e921.
12. [12]. Yu, P. K. N, Cheung, T, Butson, M. J. 2003. Variations in skin dose using 6 MV or 18 MV X-ray beams. Australas Phys. Eng. Sci. Med; 26(2): 79-81.
13. [13]. Taylor, R. E. P, Yegin, G, Rogers, D. W. O. 2007. Benchmarking Brachydose: Voxel-based EGSnrc Monte Carlo calculations of TG-43 dosimetry parameters. Medical Physics; 34(2): 445-457.
14. [14]. TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TRUBA. 2022. https://www.truba.gov.tr/ (accessed at 19.05.2022).
15. [15]. ICRU. 1985. Determination of Dose Equivalents Resulting from External Radiation Sources. ICRU Report 39, Washington DC.
16. [16]. Kry, S. F, Smith, S. A, Weathers, R, Stovall, M. 2012. Skin dose during radiotherapy: A summary and general estimation technique. Medical Physics; 13(3): 20-34.
17. [17]. Butson, M. J, Mathur, J. N, Metcalfe, P. E. 1997. Skin dose from radiotherapy X-ray beams: the influence of energy. Australas Radiol; 41(2): 148-150.
18. [18]. Rogers, D. W. O., Mohan, R. 2000. Questions for comparison of clinical Monte Carlo codes. In: Schlegel, W., Bortfeld, T. (eds) The Use of Computers in Radiation Therapy. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 120–122.
19. [19]. Carrier, J-F, Archambault, L, Beaulieu, L, Roy, R. 2004. Validation of GEANT4, an object-oriented Monte Carlo toolkit, for simulations in medical physics. Medical Physics; 31(3): 484-492.
20. [20]. Chen, Z, Ma, C, Li, J, Paskalev, K, Price, R, Luo, W, Fan, J, Stathakis, S, Chen, Y, Lin, T, Chen, L. 2006. Effect of voxel size on Monte Carlo dose calculation for intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment planning. Medical Physics; 33(6): 2095-2095.
21. [21]. Chetty, I. J, Curran, B, Cygler, J. E, DeMarco, J. J, Ezzell, G, Faddegon, B. A, Kawrakow, I, Keall, P. J, Liu, H, Ma, C-M, Rogers, D. W. O, Seuntjens, J, Sheikh-Bagheri, D, Siebers, J. V. 2007. Report of the AAPM Task Group No. 105: Issues associated with clinical implementation of Monte Carlo-based photon and electron external beam treatment planning. Medical Physics; 34(12): 4818-4853.
22. [22]. Elekta. 2015. Monaco User Guide, Version 5.10. Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
23. [23]. Simon, K, Ebert, A. M. 2020. Recommended dose voxel size and statistical uncertainty parameters for precision of Monte Carlo dose calculation in stereotactic radiotherapy. Radiation Oncology Physics, Medical Physics; 21(12): 120-130.
24. [24]. Price, R. A, Koren, S, Veltchev, I, Hossain, M, Lin, M. H, Galloway, T, Ma, C. M. 2014. Planning target volume-to-skin proximity for head-and-neck intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment planning. Practical Radiation Oncology; 4(1): e21-e29.
25. [25]. Benedict, S. H, Yenice, K. M, Followill, D. 2010. Stereotactic body radiation therapy: AAPM Task Group 101 report. Medical Physics; 37: 4078-4041.
26. [26]. ICRU. 2017. Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting of Stereotactic Treatments with Small Photon Beams. ICRU Report 91, Bethesda, MD.
27. [27]. Lindsay, P, Rink, A, Ruschin, M, Jaffray, D. 2010. Investigation of energy dependence of EBT and EBT-2 gafchromic film. Medical Physics; 37: 571-576.
28. [28]. Gul, A, Kakakhel, M. B, Mirza, S. M. 2021. Assessment of skin doses in small field radiotherapy for 6 MV photons and beam spectral analysis at skin surface: An EGSnrc-based Monte Carlo study. Radiation and Environmental Biophysics; 60: 299-308.