Application of retrospective data analysis to clinical protocol design: can the potential benefits of breath-hold techniques for breast radiotherapy be assessed without testing on patients?

Prone versus supine free-breathing for right-sided whole breast radiotherapy

Prone setup has been advocated to improve organ sparing in whole breast radiotherapy without impairing breast coverage. We evaluate the dosimetric advantage of prone setup for the right breast and look for predictors of the gain. Right breast cancer patients treated in 2010–2013 who had a dual supine and prone planning were retrospectively identified. A penalty score was computed from the mean absolute dose deviation to heart, lungs, breasts, and tumor bed for each patient's supine and prone plan. Dosimetric advantage of prone was assessed by the reduction of penalty score from supine to prone. The effect of patients' characteristics on the reduction of penalty was analyzed using robust linear regression. A total of 146 patients with right breast dual plans were identified. Prone compared to supine reduced the penalty score in 119 patients (81.5%). Lung doses were reduced by 70.8%, from 4.8 Gy supine to 1.4 Gy prone. Among patient's characteristics, the only significant predictors were the breast volumes, but no cutoff could identify when prone would be less advantageous than supine. Prone was associated with a dosimetric advantage in most patients. It sets a benchmark of achievable lung dose reduction.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02237469, HUGProne, September 11, 2014, retrospectively registered.

The new Scopus CiteScore formula and the Journal Impact Factor: a look at top ranking journals and middle ranking journals in the Scopus categories of General Physics and Astronomy, Materials Science, General Medicine and Social Sciences

In June 2020 Elsevier announced that the CiteScore metric of journals underwent a change. This work examines the effect of these changes for 40 journals, chosen from the top five and middle five (ranked by CiteScore) journals in the subject areas of General Physics and Astronomy, Materials Science, Medicine, Social Sciences) and compares to the Journal Impact Factor. It is shown that in the data studied here, the new methodology is less susceptible to influence of the proportion of editorial material in a journal, but tends to favour journals in research fields that publish articles which get cited more quickly.

Monte Carlo calculations of radiotherapy dose in "homogeneous" anatomy

Given the substantial literature on the use of Monte Carlo (MC) simulations to verify treatment planning system (TPS) calculations of radiotherapy dose in heterogeneous regions, such as head and neck and lung, this study investigated the potential value of running MC simulations of radiotherapy treatments of nominally homogeneous pelvic anatomy. A pre-existing in-house MC job submission and analysis system, built around BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc, was used to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of a sample of 12 pelvic volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) treatments, planned using the Varian Eclipse TPS, where dose was calculated with both the Analytical Anisotropic Algorithm (AAA) and the Acuros (AXB) algorithm. In-house TADA (Treatment And Dose Assessor) software was used to evaluate treatment plan complexity, in terms of the small aperture score (SAS), modulation index (MI) and a novel exposed leaf score (ELS/ELA). Results showed that the TPS generally achieved closer agreement with the MC dose distribution when treatments were planned for smaller (single-organ) targets rather than larger targets that included nodes or metastases. Analysis of these MC results with reference to the complexity metrics indicated that while AXB was useful for reducing dosimetric uncertainties associated with density heterogeneity, the residual TPS dose calculation uncertainties resulted from treatment plan complexity and TPS model simplicity. The results of this study demonstrate the value of using MC methods to recalculate and check the dose calculations provided by commercial radiotherapy TPSs, even when the treated anatomy is assumed to be comparatively homogeneous, such as in the pelvic region.

Retrospective analysis of breast radiotherapy treatment plans: Curating the 'non-curated'

INTRODUCTION

This paper provides a demonstration of how non-curated data can be retrospectively cleaned, so that existing repositories of radiotherapy treatment planning data can be used to complete bulk retrospective analyses of dosimetric trends and other plan characteristics.

METHODS

A non curated archive of 1137 radiotherapy treatment plans accumulated over a 12-month period, from five radiotherapy centres operated by one institution, was used to investigate and demonstrate a process of clinical data cleansing, by: identifying and translating inconsistent structure names; correcting inconsistent lung contouring; excluding plans for treatments other than breast tangents and plans without identifiable PTV, lung and heart structures; and identifying but not excluding plans that deviated from the local planning protocol. PTV, heart and lung dose-volume metrics were evaluated, in addition to a sample of personnel and linac load indicators.

RESULTS

Data cleansing reduced the number of treatment plans in the sample by 35.7%. Inconsistent structure names were successfully identified and translated (e.g. 35 different names for lung). Automatically separating whole lung structures into left and right lung structures allowed the effect of contralateral and ipsilateral lung dose to be evaluated, while introducing some small uncertainties, compared to manual contouring. PTV doses were indicative of prescription doses. Breast treatment work was unevenly distributed between oncologists and between metropolitan and regional centres.

CONCLUSION

This paper exemplifies the data cleansing and data analysis steps that may be completed using existing treatment planning data, to provide individual radiation oncology departments with access to information on their own patient populations. Clearly, the well-planned and systematic recording of new, high quality data is the preferred solution, but the retrospective curation of non-curated data may be a useful interim solution, for radiation oncology departments where the systems for recording of new data have yet to be designed and agreed.