Wojnecki C, Green S
JRC of European Commission, HFR Unit, Petten, The Netherlands.
Med Phys. 2002 Aug;29(8):1710-5. doi: 10.1118/1.1485058.
Two treatment planning systems have been specifically developed for BNCT: MacNCTPlan by the Harvard-MIT group and the SERA system developed by the INEEL/Montana State University group. In order to compare the dose components computed by the treatment planning systems, and therefore the clinical results available, it is important to first compare the basic features of the codes. This study investigated the effect of the reconstruction techniques and the form of the cross-section libraries used by the two treatment planning systems on the thermal neutron fluence distributions. Six mono-directional neutron sources of 0.0253 eV, 1 keV, 5 keV, 10 keV, 100 keV, and 1 MeV were directed onto simple geometric phantoms filled with water. The general-purpose Monte Carlo radiation transport code MCNP was used as a reference tool in this study. For the examples studied, it is found that the methods used for geometry representation (in MacNCTPlan) and for cross-section representation (in SERA) were found to impact directly on the accuracy of the calculated results.
已经专门为硼中子俘获治疗（BNCT）开发了两种治疗计划系统：哈佛-麻省理工学院团队开发的MacNCTPlan和爱达荷国家工程与环境实验室/蒙大拿州立大学团队开发的SERA系统。为了比较治疗计划系统计算出的剂量成分，进而比较可得的临床结果，首先比较代码的基本特征很重要。本研究调查了两种治疗计划系统所使用的重建技术和截面库形式对热中子注量分布的影响。将六个能量分别为0.0253 eV、1 keV、5 keV、10 keV、100 keV和1 MeV的单向中子源对准充满水的简单几何体模。在本研究中，通用蒙特卡罗辐射输运代码MCNP被用作参考工具。对于所研究的示例，发现用于几何表示（在MacNCTPlan中）和截面表示（在SERA中）的方法直接影响计算结果的准确性。
