Radiotherapy reference dose audit in the United Kingdom by the National Physical Laboratory: 20 years of consistency and improvements

Quantification of the uncertainties within the radiotherapy dosimetry chain and their impact on tumour control

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Dose delivered during radiotherapy has uncertainty arising from a number of sources including machine calibration, treatment planning and delivery and can impact outcomes. Any systematic uncertainties will impact all patients and can continue for extended periods. The impact on tumour control probability (TCP) of the uncertainties within the radiotherapy calibration process has been assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The linear-quadratic model was used to simulate the TCP from two prostate cancer and a head and neck (H&N) clinical trial. The uncertainty was separated into four components; 1) initial calibration, 2) systematic shift due to output drift, 3) drift during treatment and 4) daily fluctuations. Simulations were performed for each clinical case to model the variation in TCP present at the end of treatment arising from the different components.

RESULTS

Overall uncertainty in delivered dose was +/-2.1% (95% confidence interval (CI)), consisting of uncertainty standard deviations of 0.7% in initial calibration, 0.8% due to subsequent calibration shift due to output drift, 0.1% due to drift during treatment, and 0.2% from daily variations. The overall uncertainty of TCP (95% CI) for a population of patients treated on different machines was +/-3%, +/-5%, and +/-3% for simulations based on the two prostate trials and H&N trial respectively.

CONCLUSION

The greatest variation in delivered target volume dose arose from calibration shift due to output drift. Careful monitoring of beam output following initial calibration remains vital and may have a significant impact on clinical outcomes.

Remote beam output audits: a global assessment of results out of tolerance

Background and purpose

Remote beam output audits, which independently measure an institution’s machine calibration, are a common component of independent radiotherapy peer review. This work reviews the results and trends of these audit results across several organisations and geographical regions.

Materials and methods

Beam output audit results from the Australian Clinical Dosimetry Services, International Atomic Energy Agency, Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core, and Radiation Dosimetry Services were evaluated from 2010 to the present. The rate of audit results outside a ±5% tolerance was evaluated for photon and electron beams as a function of the year of irradiation and nominal beam energy. Additionally, examples of confirmed calibration errors were examined to provide guidance to clinical physicists and auditing bodies.

Results

Of the 210,167 audit results, 1323 (0.63%) were outside of tolerance. There was a clear trend of improved audit performance for more recent dates, and while all photon energies generally showed uniform rates of results out of tolerance, low (6 MeV) and high (≥18 MeV) energy electron beams showed significantly elevated rates. Twenty nine confirmed calibration errors were explored and attributed to a range of issues, such as equipment failures, errors in setup, and errors in performing the clinical reference calibration. Forty-two percent of these confirmed errors were detected during ongoing periodic monitoring, and not at the time of the first audit of the machine.

Conclusions

Remote beam output audits have identified, and continue to identify, numerous and often substantial beam calibration errors.

Dosimetric end-to-end tests in a national audit of 3D conformal radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Independent dosimetry audits improve quality and safety of radiation therapy. This work reports on design and findings of a comprehensive 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) Level III audit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The audit was conducted as onsite audit using an anthropomorphic thorax phantom in an end-to-end test by the Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service (ACDS). Absolute dose point measurements were performed with Farmer-type ionization chambers. The audited treatment plans included open and half blocked fields, wedges and lung inhomogeneities. Audit results were determined as Pass Optimal Level (deviations within 3.3%), Pass Action Level (greater than 3.3% but within 5%) and Out of Tolerance (beyond 5%), as well as Reported Not Scored (RNS). The audit has been performed between July 2012 and January 2018 on 94 occasions, covering approximately 90% of all Australian facilities.

RESULTS

The audit pass rate was 87% (53% optimal). Fifty recommendations were given, mainly related to planning system commissioning. Dose overestimation behind low density inhomogeneities by the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) was identified across facilities and found to extend to beam setups which resemble a typical breast cancer treatment beam placement. RNS measurements inside lung showed a variation in the opposite direction: AAA under-dosed a target beyond lung and over-dosed the lung upstream and downstream of the target. Results also highlighted shortcomings of some superposition and convolution algorithms in modelling large angle wedges.

CONCLUSIONS

This audit showed that 3D-CRT dosimetry audits remain relevant and can identify fundamental global and local problems that also affect advanced treatments.

An on-site dosimetry audit for high-energy electron beams

Background and purpose

External dosimetry audits are powerful quality assurance instruments for radiotherapy. The aim of this study was to implement an electron dosimetry audit based on a contemporary code of practice within the requirements for calibration laboratories performing proficiency tests. This involved the determination of suitable acceptance criteria based on thorough uncertainty analyses.

Materials and methods

Subject of the audit was the determination of absorbed dose to water, D _w, and the beam quality specifier, R _50,dos. Fifteen electron beams were measured in four institutes according to the Belgian-Dutch code of practice for high-energy electron beams. The expanded uncertainty (k = 2) for the D _w values was 3.6% for a Roos chamber calibrated in ⁶⁰Co and 3.2% for a Roos chamber cross-calibrated against a Farmer chamber. The expanded uncertainty for the beam quality specifier, R _50,dos, was 0.14 cm. The audit acceptance levels were based on the expanded uncertainties for the comparison results and estimated to be 2.4%.

Results

The audit was implemented and validated successfully. All D _w audit results were satisfactory with differences in D _w values mostly smaller than 0.5% and always smaller than 1%. Except for one, differences in R _50,dos were smaller than 0.2 cm and always smaller than 0.3 cm.

Conclusions

An electron dosimetry audit based on absorbed dose to water and present-day requirements for calibration laboratories performing proficiency tests was successfully implemented. It proved international traceability of the participants value with an uncertainty better than 3.6% (k = 2).

Novel methodologies for dosimetry audits: Adapting to advanced radiotherapy techniques

With new radiotherapy techniques, treatment delivery is becoming more complex and accordingly, these treatment techniques require dosimetry audits to test advanced aspects of the delivery to ensure best practice and safe patient treatment. This review of novel methodologies for dosimetry audits for advanced radiotherapy techniques includes recent developments and future techniques to be applied in dosimetry audits. Phantom-based methods (i.e. phantom-detector combinations) including independent audit equipment and local measurement equipment as well as phantom-less methods (i.e. portal dosimetry, transmission detectors and log files) are presented and discussed. Methodologies for both conventional linear accelerator (linacs) and new types of delivery units, i.e. Tomotherapy, stereotactic devices and MR-linacs, are reviewed. Novel dosimetry audit techniques such as portal dosimetry or log file evaluation have the potential to allow parallel auditing (i.e. performing an audit at multiple institutions at the same time), automation of data analysis and evaluation of multiple steps of the radiotherapy treatment chain. These methods could also significantly reduce the time needed for audit and increase the information gained. However, to maximise the potential, further development and harmonisation of dosimetry audit techniques are required before these novel methodologies can be applied.