GEC-ESTRO ACROP recommendations on calibration and traceability of LE-LDR photon-emitting brachytherapy sources at the hospital level

GEC-ESTRO survey of 106Ru eye applicator practice for ocular melanoma - Physicist survey

AIM

106Ru eye plaque brachytherapy (BT, interventional radiotherapy) is an eye-preserving treatment for uveal melanoma performed in about 100 clinics worldwide. Despite this relatively low number, there is a considerable variation in clinical practice. In 2022, the BRAPHYQS and Head & Neck and Skin GEC-ESTRO working groups conducted a survey to map the current clinical practice. The survey consisted of a physicist and a physician part. This paper describes the physicist results. However, three physician questions with overlapping interest are included here as well.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The survey questions pertained to commissioning and quality control (QC) of the plaques, treatment planning, radiobiological correction, as well as more general questions on practice improvement. The questions overlapping with the physician survey were related to dose prescription and margins.

RESULTS

Sixty-five physicist responses were included. A majority of the centres do not perform an independent measurement of the absorbed dose at reference depth, percentage depth dose (PDD) and off-axis data. A lack of calibration services and suitable equipment are the main reasons. About one third of the centres indicated that they do image based treatment planning. The use of margins and dose prescription showed a large variability, despite the availability of guidelines [1]. Many respondents expressed a strong wish for improvement in a wide range of aspects of clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The physics survey showed a wide variability regarding quality control of the 106Ru sources and treatment planning practice.

Current status and issues with the dosimetric assay of iodine-125 seed sources at medical facilities in Japan: a questionnaire-based survey†

In conducting dosimetric assays of seed sources containing iodine-125 (125I), several major guidelines require the medical physicist to verify the source strength before patient treatment. Japanese guidelines do not mandate dosimetric assays at medical facilities, but since 2017, three incidents have occurred in Japan wherein seeds with incorrect strengths were delivered to medical facilities. Therefore, this study aimed to survey the current situation and any barriers to conducting the dosimetric assay of iodine-125 seeds at medical facilities in Japan. We conducted a questionnaire-based survey from December 2020 to April 2021, to examine whether seed assay and verification of the number of seeds delivered were being performed. We found that only 9 facilities (16%) performed seed assay and 28 (52%) verified the number of seeds. None of the facilities used an assay method that ensured traceability. The reasons for not performing an assay were divided into two categories: lack of resources and legal issues. Lack of resources included lack of instruments, lack of knowledge of assay methods, shorthand, or all of the above, whereas legal issues included the inability to resterilize iodine-125 seeds distributed in Japan and/or purchase seeds dedicated to the assay. Dosimetric assays, including simple methods, are effective in detecting calibration date errors and non-radioactive seeds. The study findings suggest that familiarization of medical personnel with these assay methods and investigation of the associated costs of labor and equipment should be recommended, as these measures will lead to medical reimbursement for quality assurance.

Risk and Quality in Brachytherapy From a Technical Perspective

AIMS

To provide an overview of the history of incidents in brachytherapy and to describe the pillars in place to ensure that medical physicists deliver high-quality brachytherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review of the literature was carried out to identify reported incidents in brachytherapy, together with an evaluation of the structures and processes in place to ensure that medical physicists deliver high-quality brachytherapy. In particular, the role of education and training, the use of process and technical quality assurance and the role of international guidelines are discussed.

RESULTS

There are many human factors in brachytherapy procedures that introduce additional risks into the process. Most of the reported incidents in the literature are related to human factors. Brachytherapy-related education and training initiatives are in place at the societal and departmental level for medical physicists. Additionally, medical physicists have developed process and technical quality assurance procedures, together with international guidelines and protocols. Education and training initiatives, together with quality assurance procedures and international guidelines may reduce the risk of human factors in brachytherapy.

CONCLUSION

Through application of the three pillars (education and training; process control and technical quality assurance; international guidelines), medical physicists will continue to minimise risk and deliver high-quality brachytherapy treatments.

GEC-ESTRO ACROP recommendations on calibration and traceability of HE HDR-PDR photon-emitting brachytherapy sources at the hospital level

The vast majority of radiotherapy departments in Europe using brachytherapy (BT) perform temporary implants of high- or pulsed-dose rate (HDR-PDR) sources with photon energies higher than 50 keV. Such techniques are successfully applied to diverse pathologies and clinical scenarios. These recommendations are the result of Working Package 21 (WP-21) initiated within the BRAchytherapy PHYsics Quality Assurance System (BRAPHYQS) GEC-ESTRO working group with a focus on HDR-PDR source calibration. They provide guidance on the calibration of such sources, including practical aspects and issues not specifically accounted for in well-accepted societal recommendations, complementing the BRAPHYQS WP-18 Report dedicated to low energy BT photon emitting sources (seeds). The aim of this report is to provide a European-wide standard in HDR-PDR BT source calibration at the hospital level to maintain high quality patient treatments.

GEC-ESTRO ACROP prostate brachytherapy guidelines

This is an evidence-based guideline for prostate brachytherapy. Throughout levels of evidence quoted are those from the Oxford Centre for Evidence based Medicine (https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/oxford-centre-for-evidence-based-medicine-levels-of-evidence-march-2009). Prostate interstitial brachytherapy using either permanent or temporary implantation is an established and evolving treatment technique for non-metastatic prostate cancer. Permanent brachytherapy uses Low Dose Rate (LDR) sources, most commonly I-125, emitting photon radiation over months. Temporary brachytherapy involves first placing catheters within the prostate and, on confirmation of accurate positioning, temporarily introducing the radioactive source, generally High Dose Rate (HDR) radioactive sources of Ir-192 or less commonly Co-60. Pulsed dose rate (PDR) brachytherapy has also been used for prostate cancer [1] but few centres have adopted this approach. Previous GEC ESTRO recommendations have considered LDR and HDR separately [2-4] but as there is considerable overlap, this paper provides updated guidance for both treatment techniques. Prostate brachytherapy allows safe radiation dose escalation beyond that achieved using external beam radiotherapy alone as it has greater conformity around the prostate, sparing surrounding rectum, bladder, and penile bulb. In addition there are fewer issues with changes in prostate position during treatment delivery. Systematic review and randomised trials using both techniques as boost treatments demonstrate improved PSA control when compared to external beam radiotherapy alone [5-7].

Low-dose-rate iodine-125 seed air kerma strength measurement intercomparison

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the rate of compliance of air kerma strength (AKS) measurements of iodine-125 (I-125) seeds with international recommendations by departments in Australia and determine the potential impact of noncompliance.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

To achieve this aim, we present an intercomparison of AKS measurements for a single I-125 seed performed by 11 radiotherapy departments in Australia. Measurements were performed at two sites, with each participating department traveling to one of the two host sites and measuring the AKS using their own equipment and local protocols. Each of the AKS measurements was compared with each other and the manufacturer-certified AKS.

RESULTS

Nine of the 11 participating departments measured AKS fell within ±3% of the manufacturer's calibration certificate value, whereas all participating departments measured AKS within ±5% of the manufacturer's calibration certificate value. The total spread of the measured AKS among the 11 departments was 7.7%. Only two of the 11 participating departments complied with international recommendations and had their well chamber calibrated within the last 2 years. In addition, 2 of the 11 departments used a well chamber calibrated that was calibrated with a different seed model used during the intercomparison, whereas 4 of the 11 departments calibrated their well chamber "in-house" using a factory-calibrated seed provided by the seed manufacturer.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant variation in the methods used and frequency of calibration of well chambers were observed among the participating departments. The results of this study support the international recommendations on frequency and methodology of well chamber calibration. Failure to follow these recommendations significantly increases the uncertainty in AKS measurement of I-125 seeds.