UK Guidelines for the Safe Delivery of Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy

Investigation of the effects of spinal surgical implants on radiotherapy dosimetry: A study of 3D printed phantoms

PURPOSE

The use of three-dimensional (3D) printing to develop custom phantoms for dosimetric studies in radiotherapy is increasing. The process allows production of phantoms designed to evaluated specific geometries, patients, or patient groups with a defining feature. The ability to print bone-equivalent phantoms has, however, proved challenging. The purpose of this work was to 3D print a series of three similar spine phantoms containing no surgical implants, implants made of titanium, and implants made of carbon fiber, for future dosimetric and imaging studies. Phantoms were evaluated for (a) tissue and bone equivalence, (b) geometric accuracy compared to design, and (c) similarity to one another.

METHODS

Sample blocks of PLA, HIPS, and StoneFil PLA-concrete with different infill densities were printed to evaluate tissue and bone equivalence. The samples were used to develop CT to physical (PD) and effective relative electron density (RED_eff ) conversion curves and define the settings for printing the phantoms. CT scans of the printed phantoms were obtained to assess the geometry and densities achieved. Mean distance to agreement (MDA) and DICE coefficient (DSC) values were calculated between contours defining the different materials, obtained from design and like phantom modules. HU values were used to determine PD and RED_eff and subsequently evaluate tissue and bone equivalence.

RESULTS

Sample objects showed linear relationships between HU and both PD and RED_eff for both PLA and StoneFil. The PD and RED_eff of the objects calculated using clinical CT conversion curves were not accurate and custom conversion curves were required. PLA printed with 90% infill density was found to have a PD of 1.11 ± 0.03 g.cm^-3 and RED_eff of 1.04 ± 0.02 and selected for tissue- equivalent phantom elements. StoneFil printed with 100% infill density showed a PD of 1.35 ± 0.03 g.cm^-3 and RED_eff of 1.24 ± 0.04 and was selected for bone-equivalent elements. Upon evaluation of the final phantoms, the PLA elements displayed PD in the range of 1.10 ± 0.03 g.cm^-3 -1.13 ± 0.03 g.cm^-3 and RED_eff in the range of 1.02 ± 0.03-1.06 ± 0.03. The StoneFil elements showed PD in the range of 1.43 ± 0.04 g.cm^-3 -1.46 ± 0.04 g.cm^-3 and RED_eff in the range of 1.31 ± 0.04-1.33 ± 0.04. The PLA phantom elements were shown to have MDA of ≤1.00 mm and DSC of ≥0.95 compared to design, and ≤0.48 mm and ≥0.91 compared like modules. The StoneFil elements displayed MDA values of ≤0.44 mm and DSC of ≥0.98 compared to design and ≤0.43 mm and ≥0.92 compared like modules.

CONCLUSIONS

Phantoms which were radiologically equivalent to tissue and bone were produced with a high level of similarity to design and even higher level of similarity of one another. When used in conjunction with the derived CT to PD or RED_eff conversion curves they are suitable for evaluating the effects of spinal surgical implants of varying material of construction.

Dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy and VMAT for anal cancer: A single institutional experience

To compare the dosimetric results of helical tomotherapy (HT) and volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) in the treatment of anal cancer. Plans were created for 20 (n = 20) patients treated for anal cancer using HT and 2 arc VMAT. Dosimetric comparison was assessed for doses to targets and organs at risk (small bowel, bladder, external genitalia, and femoral heads). Delivery time and dosimetric verification results were also compared. HT showed a higher V95% for both primary and nodal targets (V95% increase by 0.5% to 1.3%; p = ≤0.05). No differences were seen in V105%, V107%, or V110 % between techniques. HT provided better sparing of the small bowel for dose levels V30, V35, and V40 (p = 0.005, 0.001, and 0.030), but was similar at higher doses. Similarly HT provided better bladder dose at V35 only (p = 0.020). Doses to femoral heads and genitalia were similar. Delivery time was higher for the HT plans (4.58 ± 1.1 min) than VMAT (3.13 ± 0.2 minutes) (p = 0.011). Dose verification results were 99.5 ± 0.9% and 100 ± 0% (HT, n = 6) vs 95.0 ± 3.1% and 99.2 ± 0.8% (VMAT, n = 20) for global gamma criteria 3%/3 mm and 4%/4 mm, respectively. Both HT and VMAT produced high quality plans that frequently met most of the dose objectives apart from genitalia V20, V40, bladder V35, and V50. Although absolute dose differences were small, the PTV V95%, small bowel V30, V35, and V40 and bladder V35 were statistically better in the HT plans. VMAT provided a shorter delivery time by 1.45 minutes; however, our HT plans were more likely to pass tighter plan dose verification criteria than VMAT.

Multi-institutional evaluation using the end-to-end test for implementation of dynamic techniques of radiation therapy in Thailand

AIM

In this study, an accuracy survey of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric arc radiation therapy (VMAT) implementation in radiotherapy centers in Thailand was conducted.

BACKGROUND

It is well recognized that there is a need for radiotherapy centers to evaluate the accuracy levels of their current practices, and use the related information to identify opportunities for future development.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An end-to-end test using a CIRS thorax phantom was carried out at 8 participating centers. Based on each center's protocol for simulation and planning, linac-based IMRT or VMAT plans were generated following the IAEA (CRP E24017) guidelines. Point doses in the region of PTVs and OARs were obtained from 5 ionization chamber readings and the dose distribution from the radiochromic films. The global gamma indices of the measurement doses and the treatment planning system calculation doses were compared.

RESULTS

The large majority of the RT centers (6/8) fulfilled the dosimetric goals, with the measured and calculated doses at the specification points agreeing within ±3% for PTV and ±5% for OARS. At 2 centers, TPS underestimated the lung doses by about 6% and spinal cord doses by 8%. The mean percentage gamma pass rates for the 8 centers were 98.29 ± 0.67% (for the 3%/3 mm criterion) and 96.72 ± 0.84% (for the 2%/2 mm criterion).

CONCLUSIONS

The 8 participating RT centers achieved a satisfactory quality level of IMRT/VMAT clinical implementation.

Implementation of intensity modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer in a private radiotherapy service in Mexico

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) allows physicians to deliver higher conformal doses to the tumour, while avoiding adjacent structures. As a result the probability of tumour control is higher and toxicity may be reduced. However, implementation of IMRT is highly complex and requires a rigorous quality assurance (QA) program both before and during treatment. The present article describes the process of implementing IMRT for localized prostate cancer in a radiation therapy department. In our experience, IMRT implementation requires careful planning due to the need to simultaneously implement specialized software, multifaceted QA programs, and training of the multidisciplinary team. Establishing standardized protocols and ensuring close collaboration between a multidisciplinary team is challenging but essential.

Monitoring daily MLC positional errors using trajectory log files and EPID measurements for IMRT and VMAT deliveries

This work investigated the differences between multileaf collimator (MLC) positioning accuracy determined using either log files or electronic portal imaging devices (EPID) and then assessed the possibility of reducing patient specific quality control (QC) via phantom-less methodologies. In-house software was developed, and validated, to track MLC positional accuracy with the rotational and static gantry picket fence tests using an integrated electronic portal image. This software was used to monitor MLC daily performance over a 1 year period for two Varian TrueBeam linear accelerators, with the results directly compared with MLC positions determined using leaf trajectory log files. This software was validated by introducing known shifts and collimator errors. Skewness of the MLCs was found to be 0.03 ± 0.06° (mean ±1 standard deviation (SD)) and was dependent on whether the collimator was rotated manually or automatically. Trajectory log files, analysed using in-house software, showed average MLC positioning errors with a magnitude of 0.004 ± 0.003 mm (rotational) and 0.004 ± 0.011 mm (static) across two TrueBeam units over 1 year (mean ±1 SD). These ranges, as indicated by the SD, were lower than the related average MLC positioning errors of 0.000 ± 0.025 mm (rotational) and 0.000 ± 0.039 mm (static) that were obtained using the in-house EPID based software. The range of EPID measured MLC positional errors was larger due to the inherent uncertainties of the procedure. Over the duration of the study, multiple MLC positional errors were detected using the EPID based software but these same errors were not detected using the trajectory log files. This work shows the importance of increasing linac specific QC when phantom-less methodologies, such as the use of log files, are used to reduce patient specific QC. Tolerances of 0.25 mm have been created for the MLC positional errors using the EPID-based automated picket fence test. The software allows diagnosis of any specific leaf that needs repair and gives an indication as to the course of action that is required.

Japanese structure survey of high-precision radiotherapy in 2012 based on institutional questionnaire about the patterns of care

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to clarify operational situations, treatment planning and processes, quality assurance and quality control with relevance to stereotactic radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and image-guided radiotherapy in Japan.

METHODS

We adopted 109 items as the quality indicators of high-precision radiotherapy to prepare a questionnaire. In April 2012, we started to publicly open the questionnaire on the website, requesting every institution with radiotherapy machines for response. The response ratio was 62.1% (490 out of 789 institutions responded).

RESULTS

Two or more radiotherapy technologists per linear accelerator managed linear accelerator operation in ∼90% of the responded institutions while medical physicists/radiotherapy quality managers were engaged in the operation in only 64.9% of the institutions. Radiotherapy certified nurses also worked in only 18.4% of the institutions. The ratios of the institutions equipped for stereotactic radiotherapy of lung tumor, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and image-guided radiotherapy were 43.3, 32.6 and 46.8%, respectively. In intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning, radiation oncologists were usually responsible for delineation while medical physicists/radiotherapy quality managers or radiotherapy technologists set up beam in 33.3% of the institutions. The median time required for quality assurance of intensity-modulated radiotherapy at any site of brain, head and neck and prostate was 4 h. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy quality assurance activity had to be started after clinical hours in >60% of the institutions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study clarified one major issue in the current high-precision radiotherapy in Japan. A manpower shortage should be corrected for high-precision radiotherapy, especially in the area relevant to quality assurance/quality control.

Survey of advanced radiation technologies used at designated cancer care hospitals in Japan

OBJECTIVE

Our survey assessed the use of advanced radiotherapy technologies at the designated cancer care hospitals in Japan, and we identified several issues to be addressed.

METHODS

We collected the data of 397 designated cancer care hospitals, including information on staffing in the department of radiation oncology (e.g. radiation oncologists, medical physicists and radiation therapists), the number of linear accelerators and the implementation of advanced radiotherapy technologies from the Center for Cancer Control and Information Services of the National Cancer Center, Japan.

RESULTS

Only 53% prefectural designated cancer care hospitals and 16% regional designated cancer care hospitals have implemented intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancers, and 62% prefectural designated cancer care hospitals and 23% regional designated cancer care hospitals use intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Seventy-four percent prefectural designated cancer care hospitals and 40% regional designated cancer care hospitals employ stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer. Our multivariate analysis of prefectural designated cancer care hospitals which satisfy the institute's qualifications for advanced technologies revealed the number of radiation oncologists (P = 0.01) and that of radiation therapists (P = 0.003) were significantly correlated with the implementation of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer, and the number of radiation oncologists (P = 0.02) was correlated with the implementation of stereotactic body radiotherapy. There was a trend to correlate the number of medical physicists with the implementation of stereotactic body radiotherapy (P = 0.07). Only 175 (51%) regional designated cancer care hospitals satisfy the institute's qualification of stereotactic body radiotherapy and 76 (22%) satisfy that of intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Seventeen percent prefectural designated cancer care hospitals and 13% regional designated cancer care hospitals had a quality assurance committee.

CONCLUSIONS

The numbers of radiation oncologists and other operating staff might be essential factors in the implementation of advanced radiotherapy technologies. Small proportions of regional designated cancer care hospitals satisfy the institute's qualifications of advanced technologies.

A multi-institutional study for tolerance and action levels of IMRT dose quality assurance measurements in Korea

The purpose of this study was to suggest tolerance levels for IMRT DQA measurements using confidence limits determined by a multi-institutional study in Korea. Ten institutions were grouped into LINAC (seven linear accelerators) and TOMO (three tomotherapy machines). The DQA processes consisted of point (high- and low-dose regions) and planar (per-field and composite-field) dose measurements using an ion chamber and films (or 2D detector array) inserted into a custom-made acryl phantom (LINAC) or a cheese phantom (TOMO). The five mock structures developed by AAPM TG-119 were employed, but the prostate as well as the H&N structures were modified according to Korean patients' anatomy. The point measurements were evaluated in a ratio of measured and planned doses, while the planar dose distributions were assessed using two gamma criteria of 2 mm/2% and 3 mm/3%. The confidence limit (|mean + 1.96 σ|) for point measurements was determined to be 3.0% in high-dose regions and 5.0% in low-dose regions. The average percentage of points passing the gamma criteria of 2 mm/2% and 3mm/3% for per-field measurements was 92.7 ± 6.5% and 98.2 ± 2.8%, respectively. Thus, the corresponding confidence limit was 79.1% and 92.7%, respectively. The gamma passing rate averaged over all mock tests and institutions for composite-field measurements was 86.1 ± 6.5% at 2 mm/2% and 95.3 ± 3.8% at 3 mm/3%, leading to the confidence limit of 73.3% and 87.9%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the tolerance levels of point dose measurements between LINAC and TOMO groups. In spite of the differences in mock structures and dosimetry tools, our tolerance levels were comparable to those of AAPM and ESTRO guidelines.