Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 9, 2026

Dosimetry for Cell Irradiation using Orthovoltage 40-300 kV X-Ray Facilities
Published on: February 20, 2021
Advanced Proton Beam Dosimetry Part I: review and performance evaluation of dose calculation algorithms
Jatinder Saini1, Erik Traneus2, Dominic Maes1
1Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
Abstract:
The accuracy of dose calculation is vital to the quality of care for patients undergoing proton beam therapy (PBT). Currently, the dose calculation algorithms available in commercial treatment planning systems (TPS) in PBT are classified into two classes: pencil beam (PB) and Monte-Carlo (MC) algorithms. PB algorithms are still regarded as the standard of practice in PBT, but they are analytical approximations whereas MC algorithms use random sampling of interaction cross-sections that represent the underlying physics to simulate individual particles trajectories. This article provides a brief review of PB and MC dose calculation algorithms employed in commercial treatment planning systems and their performance comparison in phantoms through simulations and measurements. Deficiencies of PB algorithms are first highlighted by a simplified simulation demonstrating the transport of a single sub-spot of proton beam that is incident at an oblique angle in a water phantom. Next, more typical cases of clinical beams in water phantom are presented and compared to measurements. The inability of PB to correctly predict the range and subsequently distal fall-off is emphasized. Through the presented examples, it is shown how dose errors as high as 30% can result with use of a PB algorithm. These dose errors can be minimized to clinically acceptable levels of less than 5%, if MC algorithm is employed in TPS. As a final illustration, comparison between PB and MC algorithm is made for a clinical beam that is use to deliver uniform dose to a target in a lung section of an anthropomorphic phantom. It is shown that MC algorithm is able to correctly predict the dose at all depths and matched with measurements. For PB algorithm, there is an increasing mismatch with the measured doses with increasing tissue heterogeneity. The findings of this article provide a foundation for the second article of this series to compare MC vs. PB based lung cancer treatment planning.
More Related Videos
06:20Irradiator Commissioning and Dosimetry for Assessment of LQ α and β Parameters, Radiation Dosing Schema, and in vivo Dose Deposition
Published on: March 11, 2021
07:31Characterization of Recombination Effects in a Liquid Ionization Chamber Used for the Dosimetry of a Radiosurgical Accelerator
Published on: May 9, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Review and Preview
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...
Review and Preview
Beams
Based on geometry, beams can be straight, tapered, or curved. Straight beams are the most common type and have a constant cross-section throughout their length. Tapered beams, on the other hand, have a varying cross-section along...
Calculating the Equilibrium Constant
For example, gaseous nitrogen dioxide forms dinitrogen tetroxide according to this equation:
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Calculating Standard Free Energy Changes