Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Cancer Biotherapy & ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Cancer Biotherapy & Radiopharmaceuticals
Article . 2009 . Peer-reviewed
License: Mary Ann Liebert TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Comparison of Electron Dose-Point Kernels in Water Generated by the Monte Carlo Codes, PENELOPE, GEANT4, MCNPX, and ETRAN

Authors: Helena, Uusijärvi; Nicolas, Chouin; Peter, Bernhardt; Ludovic, Ferrer; Manuel, Bardiès; Eva, Forssell-Aronsson;

Comparison of Electron Dose-Point Kernels in Water Generated by the Monte Carlo Codes, PENELOPE, GEANT4, MCNPX, and ETRAN

Abstract

Point kernels describe the energy deposited at a certain distance from an isotropic point source and are useful for nuclear medicine dosimetry. They can be used for absorbed-dose calculations for sources of various shapes and are also a useful tool when comparing different Monte Carlo (MC) codes. The aim of this study was to compare point kernels calculated by using the mixed MC code, PENELOPE (v. 2006), with point kernels calculated by using the condensed-history MC codes, ETRAN, GEANT4 (v. 8.2), and MCNPX (v. 2.5.0). Point kernels for electrons with initial energies of 10, 100, 500, and 1 MeV were simulated with PENELOPE. Spherical shells were placed around an isotropic point source at distances from 0 to 1.2 times the continuous-slowing-down-approximation range (R(CSDA)). Detailed (event-by-event) simulations were performed for electrons with initial energies of less than 1 MeV. For 1-MeV electrons, multiple scattering was included for energy losses less than 10 keV. Energy losses greater than 10 keV were simulated in a detailed way. The point kernels generated were used to calculate cellular S-values for monoenergetic electron sources. The point kernels obtained by using PENELOPE and ETRAN were also used to calculate cellular S-values for the high-energy beta-emitter, 90Y, the medium-energy beta-emitter, 177Lu, and the low-energy electron emitter, 103mRh. These S-values were also compared with the Medical Internal Radiation Dose (MIRD) cellular S-values. The greatest differences between the point kernels (mean difference calculated for distances, <0.9 r/R(CSDA)), using PENELOPE and those from ETRAN, GEANT4, and MCNPX, were 3.6%, 6.2%, and 14%, respectively. The greatest difference between the cellular S-values for monoenergetic electrons was 1.4%, 2.5%, and 6.9% for ETRAN, GEANT4, and MCNPX, respectively, compared to PENELOPE, if omitting the S-values when the activity was distributed on the cell surface for 10-keV electrons. The largest difference between the cellular S-values for the radionuclides, between PENELOPE and ETRAN, was seen for 177Lu (1.2%). There were large differences between the MIRD cellular S-values and those obtained from PENELOPE: up to 420% for monoenergetic electrons and <22% for the radionuclides, with the largest difference for 103mRh. In conclusion, differences were found between the point kernels generated by different MC codes, but these differences decreased when cellular S-values were calculated, and decreased even further when the energy spectra of the radionuclides were taken into consideration.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Electron Transport, Radioisotopes, Neoplasms, Water, Computer Simulation, Electrons, Radiopharmaceuticals, Radiation Dosage, Radiometry, Radionuclide Imaging, Monte Carlo Method

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    35
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
35
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!