Out‐of‐field dosimetry using a validated PHITS model and computational phantom in clinical BNCT

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe out‐of‐field radiation dose for boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT), which results from both neutrons and γ‐rays, has not been extensively evaluated. To safely perform BNCT, the neutron and γ‐ray distributions inside the treatment room and the whole‐body dose should be evaluated during commissioning. Although, certain previous studies have evaluated the whole‐body dose in the clinical research phase, no institution providing BNCT covered by health insurance has yet validated the neutron distribution inside the room and the whole‐body dose.PurposeTo validate the Monte Carlo model of the BNCT irradiation room extended for the whole‐body region and evaluate organ‐at‐risk (OAR) doses using the validated model with a human‐body phantom.MethodsFirst, thermal neutron distribution inside the entire treatment room was measured by placing Au samples on the walls of the treatment room. Second, neutron and gamma‐ray dose‐rate distributions inside a human‐body water phantom were measured. Both lying and sitting positions were considered. Bare Au, Au covered by Cd (Au+Cd), In, Al, and thermoluminescent dosimeters were arranged at 11 points corresponding to locations of the OARs inside the phantom. After the irradiation, γ‐ray peaks emitted from the samples were measured by a high‐purity germanium detector. The measured counts were converted to the reaction rate per unit charge of the sample. These measurements were compared with results of simulations performed with the Particle and Heavy Ion Transport code System (PHITS). A male adult mesh‐type reference computational phantom was used to evaluate OAR doses in the whole‐body region. The relative biological effectiveness (RBE)‐weighted doses and dose‐volume histograms (DVHs) for each OAR were evaluated. The median dose (D50%) and near‐maximum dose (D2%) were evaluated for 14 OARs in a 1‐h‐irradiation process. The evaluated RBE‐weighted doses were converted to equivalent doses in 2 Gy fractions.ResultsExperimental results within 60 cm from the irradiation center agreed with simulation results within the error bars except at ±20, 30 cm, and those over 70 cm corresponded within one digit. The experimental results of reaction rates or γ‐ray dose rate for lying and sitting positions agreed well with the simulation results within the error bars at 8, 4, 11, 7 and 7, 4, 7, 6, 5, 6 out of 11 points, respectively, for Au, Au+Cd, In, Al, and TLD. Among the detectors, the discrepancies in reaction rates between experiment and simulation were most common for Au+Cd, but were observed randomly for measurement points (brain, lung, etc.). The experimental results of γ‐ray dose rates were systematically lower than simulation results at abdomen and waist regions for both positions. Extending the PHITS model to the whole‐body region resulted in higher doses for all OARs, especially 0.13 Gy‐eq increase for D50% of the left salivary gland.ConclusionThe PHITS model for clinical BNCT for the whole‐body region was validated, and the OAR doses were then evaluated. Clinicians and medical physicists should know that the out‐of‐field radiation increases the OAR dose in the whole‐body region.