Advertisement

Investigation of the Properties of the Heavy Scintillating Fibers for Their Potential Use in Hadron Therapy Monitoring

  • K. RusieckaEmail author
  • J. Kasper
  • A. Magiera
  • A. Stahl
  • A. Wrońska
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Physics book series (SPPHY, volume 227)

Abstract

Recent development in the production of inorganic scintillators resulted in a variety of materials, many of which show excellent timing properties and large light yield. Due to large densities and effective atomic numbers, those materials are well suited for detection of a-few-MeV prompt gamma radiation, which is emitted during hadron therapy. Additionally, when combined with modern silicon photomultipliers (SiPM), they allow compact and granular detector designs. Therefore, heavy scintillators seem to be promising candidates for prompt gamma imaging (PGI) detectors, such as Compton cameras. Under the SiFi-CC (SiPM and Fiber based Compton Camera) project the investigation of heavy scintillating materials for their application in hadron therapy monitoring has been carried out. The study was focused on lutetium based crystals, including LuAG:Ce and LYSO:Ce as well as recently developed GAGG:Ce,Mg. Examined samples had an elongated, fiber-like shape, with 100 mm length and 1 × 1 mm2 square cross section. The following features of such fibers were investigated: attenuation length of the optical photons, light yield, energy resolution and timing characteristics. The study has shown that out of the materials chosen for the study LYSO:Ce is the most promising candidate for applications in PGI. Additionally, in order to optimize performance of scintillators an influence of wrapping was investigated. It has been observed that aluminum wrapping causes an increase in the light yield, but decreases the attenuation length.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to express their gratitude to T. Kołodziej and Z. Baster (Department of Molecular and Interfacial Biophysics, Jagiellonian University), K. Kamada, A. Yoshikawa and Y. Ugaji (C&A Corporation).

The research has been founded under the Sonata Bis grant by Polish National Science Center (2017/26/E/ST2/00618) and the DSC 2017 and DSC 2018 grants for young researchers at the Faculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science of the Jagiellonian University (7150/E-338/M/2017 and 7150/E-338/M/2018).

References

  1. 1.
    Nuclear Physics European Collaboration Committee, Nuclear Physics for Medicine (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Paganetti et al., Range uncertainties in proton therapy and the role of Monte Carlo simulations. Phys. Med. Biol. 57, R99–R117 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Parodi, Vision 20/20: Positron emission tomography in radiation therapy planning, delivery, and monitoring. Med. Phys. 42, 7153–7168 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P.C. Lopes et al., First in situ TOF-PET study using digital photon counters for proton range verification. Phys Med Biol. 61, 6203–6230 (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    V. Ferrero et al., Online proton therapy monitoring: clinical test of a silicon-photodetector-based in-beam PET. Sci Rep. 8, 4100 (2018)ADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Pinto et al., Absolute prompt-gamma yield measurements for ion beam therapy monitoring. Phys. Med. Biol. 60, 565–594 (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. Kelleter et al., Spectroscopic study of prompt-gamma emission for range verification in proton therapy. Phys Med. 34, 7–17 (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    C.H. Min et al., Prompt gamma measurements for locating the dose falloff region in the proton therapy. Appl. Phys. Lett. 89, 183517 (2006)ADSGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.M. Verburg et at., Proton range verification through prompt gamma-ray spectroscopy. Phys Med Biol. 59, 7089–7106 (2014)ADSGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Smeets et al., Prompt gamma imaging with a slit camera for real-time range control in proton therapy. Phys. Med. Biol. 57, 3371–3405 (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    V. Bom, L. Joulaeizadeh, F. Beekman, Real-time prompt gamma monitoring in spot-scanning proton therapy using imaging through a knife-edge-shaped slit. Phys. Med. Biol. 57, 297–308 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. Richter et al., First clinical application of a prompt gamma based in vivo proton range verification system. Radiother. Oncol. 118, 232–237 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C.H. Min et al., Development of array-type prompt gamma measurement system for in vivo range verification in proton therapy. Med. Phys. 39, 2100–2107 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    M. Pinto et al., Design optimisation of a TOF-based collimated camera prototype for online hadrontherapy monitoring. Phys. Med. Biol. 59, 7653–7674 (2014)ADSGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. Krimmer et al., Collimated prompt gamma TOF measurements with multi-slit multi-detector configurations. J. Instrum. 10, P01011–P01011 (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    F. Hueso-González et al., A full-scale clinical prototype for proton range verification using prompt gamma-ray spectroscopy. Phys. Med. Biol. 63, 185019 (2018)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    F. Hueso-González et al., First test of the prompt gamma ray timing method with heterogeneous targets at a clinical proton therapy facility. Phys. Med. Biol. 60, 6247–6272 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. Golnik et al., Range assessment in particle therapy based on prompt γ-ray timing measurements. Phys. Med. Biol. 59, 5399–5422 (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Petzoldt et al., Characterization of the microbunch time structure of proton pencil beams at a clinical treatment facility. Phys. Med. Biol. 61, 2432–2456 (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    T. Kormoll et al., A Compton imager for in-vivo dosimetry of proton beams—a design study. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. A 626–627, 114–119 (2011)ADSGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    M.H. Richard et al., Design study of the absorber detector of a Compton camera for on-line control in ion beam therapy. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 59, 1850–1855 (2012)ADSGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    S. Aldawood et al., Development of a Compton camera for prompt-gamma medical imaging. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 140, 190–197 (2017)ADSGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    J.C. Polf et al., Imaging of prompt gamma rays emitted during delivery of clinical proton beams with a Compton camera: feasibility studies for range verification. Phys. Med. Biol. 60, 7085–7099 (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    G. Llosá et al., First images of a three-layer Compton Telescope prototype for treatment monitoring in Hadron Therapy. Front. Oncol. 6, 14 (2016)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    F. Hueso-Gonzalez et al., in Prompt gamma imaging of a pencil beam with a high efficiency Compton camera at a clinical proton therapy facility. 2015 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical imaging Conference (NSS/MIC 2015) (2016), pp. 6–9Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    H. Rohling et al., Requirements for a Compton camera for in vivo range verification of proton therapy. Phys. Med. Biol. 62, 2795–2811 (2017)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    E. Draeger et al., 3D prompt gamma imaging for proton beam range verification. Phys. Med. Biol. 63, 035019 (2018)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    K. Lebbou, Single crystals fiber technology design. Where we are today? Opt Mat. 63, 13–18 (2017)ADSGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    M.T. Lucchini et al., Test beam results with LuAG fibers for next-generation calorimeters. J. Inst. 8, P10017–P10017 (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    A. Benaglia et al., Test beam results of a high granularity LuAG fibre calorimeter prototype. J. Inst. 11, P05004–P05004 (2016)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    J. Kataoka et al., Recent progress of MPPC-based scintillation detectors in high precision X-ray and gamma-ray imaging. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. A 784, 248–254 (2015)ADSGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    A. Kishimoto et al., Development of a compact scintillator-based high-resolution Compton camera for molecular imaging. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. A 845, 656–659 (2017)ADSGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    P. Lecoq, Development of new scintillators for medical applications. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. A 809, 130–139 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    K. Kamada et al., Large size Czochralski growth and scintillation properties of Mg2+ co-doped Ce: Gd3Ga3Al2O12. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 63, 443–447 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    K. Kamada et al., Alkali earth co-doping effects on luminescence and scintillation properties of Ce doped Gd3Al2Ga3O12 scintillator. Opt. Mater. 41, 63–66 (2015)ADSGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    M.T. Lucchini et al., Effect of Mg2+ ions co-doping on timing performance and radiation tolerance of cerium doped Gd3Al2Ga3O12 crystals. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. A 816, 176–183 (2016)ADSGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    S. Gaundacker et al., Measurement of intrinsic rise times for various L(Y)SO and LuAG scintillators with a general study of prompt photons to achieve 10 ps in TOF-PET. Phys. Med. Biol. 61, 2802 (2016)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    K. Pauwels et al., Single crystalline LuAG fibers for homogeneous dual-readout calorimeters. J. Instrum. 8, P09019–P09019 (2013)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    I. Vilardi et al., Optimization of the effective light attenuation length of YAP:Ce and LYSO:Ce crystals for a novel geometrical PET concept. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. A 564, 506–514 (2006)ADSGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    P. Anfré et al., Evaluation of fiber-shaped LYSO for double readout gamma photon detection. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 54, 391–397 (2007)ADSGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Y. Shao et al., Dual APD array readout of LSO crystals: optimization of crystal surface treatment. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 49, 649–654 (2002)ADSGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    J. Iwanowska et al., Performance of cerium-doped Gd3Al2Ga3O12 (GAGG:Ce) scintillator in gamma-ray spectroscopy. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. A 712, 34–40 (2013)ADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Rusiecka
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. Kasper
    • 2
  • A. Magiera
    • 1
  • A. Stahl
    • 2
  • A. Wrońska
    • 1
  1. 1.Marian Smoluchowski Institute of Physics, Jagiellonian UniversityKrakówPoland
  2. 2.Physics Institute III. B, RWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations