title: Detecting prompt gamma emission during proton therapy: the effects of detector size and distance from the patient.
abstract: Recent studies have suggested that the characteristics of prompt gammas (PGs) emitted from excited nuclei during proton therapy are advantageous for determining beam range during treatment delivery. Since PGs are only emitted while the beam is on, the feasibility of using PGs for online treatment verification depends greatly on the design of highly efficient detectors. The purpose of this work is to characterize how PG detection changes as a function of distance from the patient as a means of guiding the design and usage of clinical PG imaging detectors. Using a Monte Carlo model (GEANT4.9.4) we studied the detection rate (PGs per incident proton) of a high purity germanium detector for both the total PG emission and the characteristic 6.13 MeV PG emission from (16)O emitted during proton irradiation. The PG detection rate was calculated as a function of distance from the isocenter of the proton treatment nozzle for: (1) a water phantom irradiated with a proton pencil beam and (2) a prostate patient irradiated with a scanning beam proton therapy treatment field (lateral field size: ∼6 cm × 6 cm, beam range: 23.5 cm). An analytical expression of the PG detection rate as a function of distance from isocenter, detector size, and proton beam energy was then developed. The detection rates were found to be 1.3 × 10(-6) for oxygen and 3.9 × 10(-4) for the total PG emission, respectively, with the detector placed 11 cm from isocenter for a 40 MeV pencil beam irradiating a water phantom. The total PG detection rate increased by ∼85 ± 3% for beam energies greater than 150 MeV. The detection rate was found to be approximately 2.1 × 10(-6) and 1.7 × 10(-3) for oxygen and total PG emission, respectively, during delivery of a single pencil beam during a scanning beam treatment for prostate cancer. The PG detection rate as a function of distance from isocenter during irradiation of a water phantom with a single proton pencil beam was described well by the model of a point source irradiating a cylindrical detector of a known diameter over the range of beam energies commonly used for proton therapy. For the patient studies, it was necessary to divide the point source equation by an exponential factor in order to correctly predict the falloff of the PG detection rate as a function of distance from isocenter.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 South Greene St., Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
authors.forename: Jerimy C
authors.initials: JC
authors.lastname: Polf
authors.forename: Dennis
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Mackin
authors.forename: Eunsin
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Stephen
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Avery
authors.forename: Sam
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Beddar
mesh_terms: D005720:Gamma Rays / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009010:Monte Carlo Method; D019047:Phantoms, Imaging; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000532:radiotherapy; D061766:Proton Therapy / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed; D014867:Water
chemical_list: D014867:Water
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2009 Feb 7;54(3):731-43
references.pmid: 19131673
references.citation: Phys Rev C Nucl Phys. 1985 Dec;32(6):1873-1881
references.pmid: 9953056
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2012 Jun 7;57(11):3371-405
references.pmid: 22572603
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2010 Nov 21;55(22):6841-56
references.pmid: 21048295
references.citation: Med Phys. 2012 Apr;39(4):2100-7
references.pmid: 22482631
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2009 Nov 21;54(22):N519-27
references.pmid: 19864704
references.citation: Med Phys. 2012 Jun;39(6Part7):3670
references.pmid: 28519827
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2012 Jan 21;57(2):297-308
references.pmid: 22156148
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2012 Jun 7;57(11):3537-53
references.pmid: 22588144
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2012 Jun 7;57(11):R99-117
references.pmid: 22571913
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2013 Aug 7;58(15):R131-60
references.pmid: 23863203
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2009 May 21;54(10):3217-29
references.pmid: 19420426
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2011 Feb 21;56(4):1063-82
references.pmid: 21263174
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2013 Jul 7;58(13):4563-77
references.pmid: 23771015
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2013 Oct 21;58(20):L37-49
references.pmid: 24077338
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2013 Sep 7;58(17):5821-31
references.pmid: 23920051