1
|
Brunner TB, Boda-Heggemann J, Bürgy D, Corradini S, Dieckmann UK, Gawish A, Gerum S, Gkika E, Grohmann M, Hörner-Rieber J, Kirste S, Klement RJ, Moustakis C, Nestle U, Niyazi M, Rühle A, Lang ST, Winkler P, Zurl B, Wittig-Sauerwein A, Blanck O. Dose prescription for stereotactic body radiotherapy: general and organ-specific consensus statement from the DEGRO/DGMP Working Group Stereotactic Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery. Strahlenther Onkol 2024:10.1007/s00066-024-02254-2. [PMID: 38997440 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-024-02254-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2024] [Accepted: 06/02/2024] [Indexed: 07/14/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE To develop expert consensus statements on multiparametric dose prescriptions for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) aligning with ICRU report 91. These statements serve as a foundational step towards harmonizing current SBRT practices and refining dose prescription and documentation requirements for clinical trial designs. MATERIALS AND METHODS Based on the results of a literature review by the working group, a two-tier Delphi consensus process was conducted among 24 physicians and physics experts from three European countries. The degree of consensus was predefined for overarching (OA) and organ-specific (OS) statements (≥ 80%, 60-79%, < 60% for high, intermediate, and poor consensus, respectively). Post-first round statements were refined in a live discussion for the second round of the Delphi process. RESULTS Experts consented on a total of 14 OA and 17 OS statements regarding SBRT of primary and secondary lung, liver, pancreatic, adrenal, and kidney tumors regarding dose prescription, target coverage, and organ at risk dose limitations. Degree of consent was ≥ 80% in 79% and 41% of OA and OS statements, respectively, with higher consensus for lung compared to the upper abdomen. In round 2, the degree of consent was ≥ 80 to 100% for OA and 88% in OS statements. No consensus was reached for dose escalation to liver metastases after chemotherapy (47%) or single-fraction SBRT for kidney primaries (13%). In round 2, no statement had 60-79% consensus. CONCLUSION In 29 of 31 statements a high consensus was achieved after a two-tier Delphi process and one statement (kidney) was clearly refused. The Delphi process was able to achieve a high degree of consensus for SBRT dose prescription. In summary, clear recommendations for both OA and OS could be defined. This contributes significantly to harmonization of SBRT practice and facilitates dose prescription and reporting in clinical trials investigating SBRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas B Brunner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 32, 8036, Graz, Austria.
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Graz, 8036, Graz, Austria.
| | - Judit Boda-Heggemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Daniel Bürgy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Stefanie Corradini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Ute Karin Dieckmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 32, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Ahmed Gawish
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Giessen-Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - Sabine Gerum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Paracelsus University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria
| | - Eleni Gkika
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, 53127, Bonn, Germany
| | - Maximilian Grohmann
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Simon Kirste
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Rainer J Klement
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Leopoldina Hospital Schweinfurt, Robert-Koch-Straße 10, 97422, Schweinfurt, Germany
| | - Christos Moustakis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, 04103, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Ursula Nestle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kliniken Maria Hilf, Moenchengladbach, Germany
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Alexander Rühle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, 04103, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Stephanie-Tanadini Lang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Peter Winkler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 32, 8036, Graz, Austria
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Graz, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Brigitte Zurl
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Graz, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | | | - Oliver Blanck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Levy A, Adebahr S, Hurkmans C, Ahmed M, Ahmad S, Guckenberger M, Geets X, Lievens Y, Lambrecht M, Pourel N, Lewitzki V, Konopa K, Franks K, Dziadziuszko R, McDonald F, Fortpied C, Clementel E, Fournier B, Rizzo S, Fink C, Riesterer O, Peulen H, Andratschke N, McWilliam A, Gkika E, Schimek-Jasch T, Grosu AL, Le Pechoux C, Faivre-Finn C, Nestle U. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Centrally Located Inoperable Early-Stage NSCLC: EORTC 22113-08113 LungTech Phase II Trial Results. J Thorac Oncol 2024:S1556-0864(24)00577-X. [PMID: 38788924 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2024.05.366] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2024] [Revised: 05/04/2024] [Accepted: 05/16/2024] [Indexed: 05/26/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The international phase II single-arm LungTech trial 22113-08113 of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer assessed the safety and efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with centrally located early-stage NSCLC. METHODS Patients with inoperable non-metastatic central NSCLC (T1-T3 N0 M0, ≤7cm) were included. After prospective central imaging review and radiation therapy quality assurance for any eligible patient, SBRT (8 × 7.5 Gy) was delivered. The primary endpoint was freedom from local progression probability three years after the start of SBRT. RESULTS The trial was closed early due to poor accrual related to repeated safety-related pauses in recruitment. Between August 2015 and December 2017, 39 patients from six European countries were included and 31 were treated per protocol and analyzed. Patients were mainly male (58%) with a median age of 75 years. Baseline comorbidities were mainly respiratory (68%) and cardiac (48%). Median tumor size was 2.6 cm (range 1.2-5.5) and most cancers were T1 (51.6%) or T2a (38.7%) N0 M0 and of squamous cell origin (48.4%). Six patients (19.4%) had an ultracentral tumor location. The median follow-up was 3.6 years. The rates of 3-year freedom from local progression and overall survival were 81.5% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 62.7%-91.4%) and 61.1% (90% CI: 44.1%-74.4%), respectively. Cumulative incidence rates of local, regional, and distant progression at three years were 6.7% (90% CI: 1.6%-17.1%), 3.3% (90% CI: 0.4%-12.4%), and 29.8% (90% CI: 16.8%-44.1%), respectively. SBRT-related acute adverse events and late adverse events ≥ G3 were reported in 6.5% (n = 2, including one G5 pneumonitis in a patient with prior interstitial lung disease) and 19.4% (n = 6, including one lethal hemoptysis after a lung biopsy in a patient receiving anticoagulants), respectively. CONCLUSIONS The LungTech trial suggests that SBRT with 8 × 7.5Gy for central lung tumors in inoperable patients is associated with acceptable local control rates. However, late severe adverse events may occur after completion of treatment. This SBRT regimen is a viable treatment option after a thorough risk-benefit discussion with patients. To minimize potentially fatal toxicity, careful management of dose constraints, and post-SBRT interventions is crucial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antonin Levy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Sonja Adebahr
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Coen Hurkmans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Merina Ahmed
- Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust/Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Shahreen Ahmad
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Xavier Geets
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, MIRO - IREC Lab, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Maarten Lambrecht
- Department of Radiotherapy-Oncology, UZ Gasthuisberg Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; KU Leuven, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Nicolas Pourel
- Institut Sainte-Catherine, Service de radiothérapie, Avignon, France
| | - Victor Lewitzki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Krzysztof Konopa
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland
| | - Kevin Franks
- Department of Clinical Oncology, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Rafal Dziadziuszko
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland
| | - Fiona McDonald
- Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust/Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | - Stefania Rizzo
- Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Christian Fink
- Allgemeines Krankenhaus, AKH Celle, Celle, Germany; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Oliver Riesterer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Kantonsspital Aarau, Radio-Onkologie-Zentrum KSA-KSB, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - Heike Peulen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands; Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nicolaus Andratschke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Alan McWilliam
- Division of Cancer Sciences, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Eleni Gkika
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Tanja Schimek-Jasch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Anca-Ligia Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Cécile Le Pechoux
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Corinne Faivre-Finn
- Division of Cancer Sciences, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Ursula Nestle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, Kliniken Maria Hilf GmbH Mönchengladbach, Mönchengladbach, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Burton A, Gaudreault M, Hardcastle N, Lye J, Beveridge S, Kry SF, Franich R. Optimized scoring of end-to-end dosimetry audits for passive motion management - A simulation study using the IROC thorax phantom. Phys Med 2024; 121:103363. [PMID: 38653119 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.103363] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2023] [Revised: 03/24/2024] [Accepted: 04/19/2024] [Indexed: 04/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Dosimetry audits for passive motion management require dynamically-acquired measurements in a moving phantom to be compared to statically calculated planned doses. This study aimed to characterise the relationship between planning and delivery errors, and the measured dose in the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) thorax phantom, to assess different audit scoring approaches. Treatment plans were created using a 4DCT scan of the IROC phantom, equipped with film and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Plans were created on the average intensity projection from all bins. Three levels of aperture complexity were explored: dynamic conformal arcs (DCAT), low-, and high-complexity volumetric modulated arcs (VMATLo, VMATHi). Simulated-measured doses were generated by modelling motion using isocenter shifts. Various errors were introduced including incorrect setup position and target delineation. Simulated-measured film doses were scored using gamma analysis and compared within specific regions of interest (ROIs) as well as the entire film plane. Positional offsets were estimated based on isodoses on the film planes, and point doses within TLD contours were compared. Motion-induced differences between planned and simulated-measured doses were evident even without introduced errors Gamma passing rates within target-centred ROIs correlated well with error-induced dose differences, while whole film passing rates did not. Isodose-based setup position measurements demonstrated high sensitivity to errors. Simulated point doses at TLD locations yielded erratic responses to introduced errors. ROI gamma analysis demonstrated enhanced sensitivity to simulated errors compared to whole film analysis. Gamma results may be further contextualized by other metrics such as setup position or maximum gamma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex Burton
- Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA), Yallambie, Victoria 3085, Australia; Department of Physical Sciences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, the University of Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia; School of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia.
| | - Mathieu Gaudreault
- Department of Physical Sciences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, the University of Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
| | - Nicholas Hardcastle
- Department of Physical Sciences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, the University of Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia; Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, New South Wales 2522, Australia
| | - Jessica Lye
- Olivia Newton John Cancer Research and Wellness Centre, Heidelberg 3084, Australia
| | - Sabeena Beveridge
- Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA), Yallambie, Victoria 3085, Australia
| | - Stephen F Kry
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core, Houston, TX 77054, USA
| | - Rick Franich
- Department of Physical Sciences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia; School of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Yalvac B, Reulens N, Reniers B. Early results of a remote dosimetry audit program for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2024; 29:100544. [PMID: 38327761 PMCID: PMC10848021 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100544] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2023] [Revised: 01/25/2024] [Accepted: 01/26/2024] [Indexed: 02/09/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose A dosimetry audit program based on alanine electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) and radiochromic film dosimetry, may be a valuable tool for monitoring and improving the quality of lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The aim of this study was to report the initial, independent assessment of the dosimetric accuracy for lung SBRT practice using these dosimeters in combination with a novel phantom design. Materials and Methods The audit service was a remote audit program performed on a commercial lung phantom preloaded with film and alanine detectors. An alanine pellet was placed in the centre of the target simulated using silicone in a 3D-printed mould. Large film detectors were placed coronally through the target and the lung/tissue interface and analysed using gamma analysis. The beam output was always checked on the same day with alanine dosimetry in water. We audited 29 plans from 14 centres up to now. Results For the alanine results 28/29 plans were within 5 % with 19/29 plans being within 3 %. The passing rates were > 95 % for the film through the target for 27/29 plans and 17/29 plans for the film at the lung/tissue interface. For three plans the passing rate was < 90 % for the film on top of the lungs. Conclusions The preliminary results were very satisfactory for both detectors. The high passing rates for the film in the interface region indicate good performance of the treatment planning systems. The phantom design was robust and performed well on several treatment systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Burak Yalvac
- Universiteit Hasselt, CMK, NuTeC, Diepenbeek, Belgium
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Palmer AL, Nash D, Polak W, Wilby S. Evaluation of a new radiochromic film dosimeter, Gafchomic EBT4, for VMAT, SABR and HDR treatment delivery verification. Phys Med Biol 2023; 68:175003. [PMID: 37499683 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aceb48] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2023] [Accepted: 07/27/2023] [Indexed: 07/29/2023]
Abstract
Objective.To evaluate a new film for radiotherapy dosimetry, Gafchromic EBT4, compared to the current EBT3. To evaluate dose-response and verify test cases in MV external beam and HDR brachytherapy.Approach. Three lots (batches) of EBT4 and three lots of EBT3 films were calibrated at 6 MV over 0-1200 cGy range, using FilmQAPro software. Signal-to-noise of pixel value, reported dose (RD), and factors affecting dosimetry accuracy were evaluated (rotation of the film at scanning, energy response and post-exposure darkening). Both films were exposed to clinical treatment plans (VMAT prostate, SABR lung, single HDR source dwell, and 'pseudo' 3-channel HDR cervix brachytherapy). Film-RD was compared to TPS-calculated dose.Main results.EBT4 calibration curves had characteristics more favourable than EBT3 for radiation dosimetry, with improved signal to noise in film-RD of EBT4 compared to EBT3 (increase of average 46% in red and green channels at 500 cGy). Film rotation at scanning and post-exposure darkening was similar for the two films. The energy response of EBT4 is similar to EBT3. For all clinical case studies, EBT4 provided better agreement with the TPS-planned doses than EBT3. VMAT prostate gamma 3%/3 mm passing rate, EBT4 100.0% compared to EBT3 97.9%; SABR lung gamma 2%/2 mm, EBT4 99.6% and EBT3 97.9%; HDR cervix gamma 3%/2 mm, EBT4 97.7% and EBT3 95.0%.Significance.These results show EBT4 is superior to EBT3 for radiotherapy dosimetry validation of TPS plan delivery. Fundamental improvements in noise profile and calibration curve are reported for EBT4. All clinical test cases showed EBT4 provided equivalent or smaller difference in measured dose to TPS calculated dose than EBT3. Baseline data is presented on the achievable accuracy of film dosimetry in radiotherapy using the new Gafchromic EBT4 film.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antony L Palmer
- Medical Physics Dept, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Cosham, PO6 3LY, United Kingdom
| | - David Nash
- Medical Physics Dept, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Cosham, PO6 3LY, United Kingdom
| | - Wojciech Polak
- Medical Physics Dept, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Cosham, PO6 3LY, United Kingdom
| | - Sarah Wilby
- Medical Physics Dept, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Cosham, PO6 3LY, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Shaw M, Lye J, Alves A, Lehmann J, Sanagou M, Geso M, Brown R. Measuring dose in lung identifies peripheral tumour dose inaccuracy in SBRT audit. Phys Med 2023; 112:102632. [PMID: 37406592 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2023.102632] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2023] [Revised: 04/25/2023] [Accepted: 06/21/2023] [Indexed: 07/07/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) for lung tumours has become a mainstay of clinical practice worldwide. Measurements in anthropomorphic phantoms enable verification of patient dose in clinically realistic scenarios. Correction factors for reporting dose to the tissue equivalent materials in a lung phantom are presented in the context of a national dosimetry audit for SBRT. Analysis of dosimetry audit results is performed showing inaccuracies of common dose calculation algorithms in soft tissue lung target, inhale lung material and at tissue interfaces. METHODS Monte Carlo based simulation of correction factors for detectors in non-water tissue was performed for the soft tissue lung target and inhale lung materials of a modified CIRS SBRT thorax phantom. The corrections were determined for Gafchromic EBT3 Film and PTW 60019 microDiamond detectors used for measurements of 168 SBRT lung plans in an end-to-end dosimetry audit. Corrections were derived for dose to medium (Dm,m) and dose to water (Dw,w) scenarios. RESULTS Correction factors were up to -3.4% and 9.2% for in field and out of field lung respectively. Overall, application of the correction factors improved the measurement-to-plan dose discrepancy. For the soft tissue lung target, agreement between planned and measured dose was within average of 3% for both film and microDiamond measurements. CONCLUSIONS The correction factors developed for this work are provided for clinical users to apply to commissioning measurements using a commercially available thorax phantom where inhomogeneity is present. The end-to-end dosimetry audit demonstrates dose calculation algorithms can underestimate dose at lung tumour/lung tissue interfaces by an average of 2-5%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maddison Shaw
- Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service, Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, Melbourne, Australia; School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
| | - Jessica Lye
- Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service, Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, Melbourne, Australia; Olivia Newton John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre, Austin Health, Australia
| | - Andrew Alves
- Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service, Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Joerg Lehmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Calvary Mater Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia; School of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia; School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Newcastle, Australia; Institute of Medical Physics, University of Sydney, Australia
| | - Masoumeh Sanagou
- Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Moshi Geso
- School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Rhonda Brown
- Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service, Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Dufreneix S, Kirié C, Autret D. Evaluation of stereotactic VMAT lung treatment plans for small moving targets. Phys Med 2023; 107:102547. [PMID: 36804692 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2023.102547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2022] [Revised: 01/09/2023] [Accepted: 02/13/2023] [Indexed: 02/19/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study is to perform patient quality controls and end-to-end tests for stereotactic VMAT lung treatment plans and to investigate the influence of various parameters on the results. METHOD 18 plans were defined by an experimental design methodology to cover a large variety of stereotactic VMAT lung treatments including different doses per fraction, target diameters, target movements and respiratory parameters. Plans were first controlled using portal dosimetry and a homogeneous static cylindrical phantom. End-to-end tests were then performed in a dynamic respiratory thorax phantom. Measurements were conducted with ionization chamber and films. Calculations were performed with the AcurosXB and AAA algorithms in 6 FFF. RESULTS Portal dosimetry gave excellent gamma pass rates (greater than 97.1 %) and dose deviations between measurement and calculations in a homogeneous static phantom were smaller than 2 %. The methodology followed for comparing calculated and measured doses in a moving target was validated in static fields (largest deviation smaller than 2 %). End-to-end tests showed mean deviations of 1.9 %, 3.3 % and 6.6 % for the 3, 2 and 1 cm diameter's target respectively. Deviations increased for larger movements for the 1 cm lesion. CONCLUSION End-to-end tests revealed that stereotactic VMAT lung treatment plans for moving targets can be delivered within 5 % for 3 and 2 cm diameter targets and amplitudes up to 1.5 cm. The AcurosXB and AAA algorithms however tend to underestimate the dose to the target. Even with satisfactory patient quality controls like portal dosimetry, extra care should be taken for GTV lesions smaller than 2 cm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Dufreneix
- Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, Angers, France; CEA, List, Laboratoire National Henri Becquerel (LNE-LNHB), Palaiseau, France.
| | - C Kirié
- Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, Angers, France
| | - D Autret
- Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, Angers, France
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Pallotta S, Calusi S, Marrazzo L, Talamonti C, Russo S, Esposito M, Fiandra C, Giglioli FR, Pimpinella M, De Coste V, Bruschi A, Barbiero S, Mancosu P, Stasi M, Lisci R. End-to-end test for lung SBRT: An Italian multicentric pilot experience. Phys Med 2022; 104:129-135. [PMID: 36401941 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2022.11.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2022] [Revised: 09/13/2022] [Accepted: 11/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Set up a lung SBRT end-to-end (e2e) test and perform a multicentre validation. MATERIAL AND METHODS A group of medical physicists from four hospitals and the Italian Institute of Ionizing Radiation Metrology designed the present e2e test. One sub-group set up the test, while another tested its feasibility and ease of use. A satisfaction questionnaire was used to collect user feedback. Each participating centre (PC) received the ADAM breathing phantom, a microDiamond detector and radiochromic films. Following the e2e protocol, each PC performed its standard internal procedure for simulating, planning, and irradiating the phantom. Each PC uploaded its planning and treatment delivery data in a shared Google Drive. A single centre analyzed all the data. RESULTS The e2e test was successfully performed by all PCs. Participants' comments indicated that ADAM was well suited to the purpose and the protocol well described. All PCs performed the test in static and dynamic modes. The ratio between measured and planned point dose obtained by PC1, PC2, PC3, PC4 was: 0.99, 0.96, 1.01 and 1.01 (static track) and 0.99, 1.02, 1.01 and 0.94 (dynamic track). The gamma passing rates (3 % global, 3 mm) between planned and measured dose maps were 98.5 %, 94.0 %, 99.1 % and 94.0 % (static track) and 99.5 %, 96.5 %, 86.0 % and 94.5 % (dynamic track) for PC1, PC2, PC3 and PC4, respectively. CONCLUSIONS An e2e test for lung SBRT has been proposed and tested in a multicentre framework. The results and user feedback prove the validity of the proposed e2e test.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Pallotta
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences "Mario Serio", University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Medical Physics Unit, AOU Careggi Florence, Italy.
| | - S Calusi
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences "Mario Serio", University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - L Marrazzo
- Medical Physics Unit, AOU Careggi Florence, Italy
| | - C Talamonti
- Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences "Mario Serio", University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Medical Physics Unit, AOU Careggi Florence, Italy
| | - S Russo
- Health Physics Unit, Azienda USL Toscana Centro Florence, Italy
| | - M Esposito
- Health Physics Unit, Azienda USL Toscana Centro Florence, Italy
| | - C Fiandra
- Oncology Department, University of Tourin, Tourin, Italy
| | - F R Giglioli
- Health Physics Unit A. O. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino P.O. Molinette, Tourin, Italy
| | - M Pimpinella
- National Institute of Ionizing Radiation Metrology, ENEA-INMRI, Rome, Italy
| | - V De Coste
- National Institute of Ionizing Radiation Metrology, ENEA-INMRI, Rome, Italy
| | - A Bruschi
- Medical Physics Unit San Rossore, Pisa, Italy
| | - S Barbiero
- Medical Physics Unit San Rossore, Pisa, Italy
| | - P Mancosu
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano (MI), Italy
| | - M Stasi
- Health Physics - AO Ordine Mauriziano, Tourin, Italy
| | - R Lisci
- Department of Agricultural, Food and Forestry System, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Burton A, Beveridge S, Hardcastle N, Lye J, Sanagou M, Franich R. Adoption of respiratory motion management in radiation therapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 24:21-29. [PMID: 36148153 PMCID: PMC9485913 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2022.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2022] [Revised: 09/01/2022] [Accepted: 09/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and Purpose A survey on the patterns of practice of respiratory motion management (MM) was distributed to 111 radiation therapy facilities to inform the development of an end-to-end dosimetry audit including respiratory motion. Materials and methods The survey (distributed via REDCap) asked facilities to provide information specific to the combinations of MM techniques (breath-hold gating – BHG, internal target volume – ITV, free-breathing gating – FBG, mid-ventilation – MidV, tumour tracking – TT), sites treated (thorax, upper abdomen, lower abdomen), and fractionation regimes (conventional, stereotactic ablative body radiation therapy – SABR) used in their clinic. Results The survey was completed by 78% of facilities, with 98% of respondents indicating that they used at least one form of MM. The ITV approach was common to all MM-users, used for thoracic treatments by 89% of respondents, and upper and lower abdominal treatments by 38%. BHG was the next most prevalent (41% of MM users), with applications in upper abdominal and thoracic treatment sites (28% vs 25% respectively), but minimal use in the lower abdomen (9%). FBG and TT were utilised sparingly (17%, 7% respectively), and MidV was not selected at all. Conclusions Two distinct treatment workflows (including use of motion limitation, imaging used for motion assessment, dose calculation, and image guidance procedures) were identified for the ITV and BHG MM techniques, to form the basis of the initial audit. Thoracic SABR with the ITV approach was common to nearly all respondents, while upper abdominal SABR using BHG stood out as more technically challenging. Other MM techniques were sparsely used, but may be considered for future audit development.
Collapse
|
10
|
Eaton DJ. Why all radiotherapy planning studies are wrong but some are useful. Med Dosim 2021; 46:209-211. [PMID: 33423882 DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2020.12.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2020] [Accepted: 12/14/2020] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
Dosimetry comparison studies of radiotherapy treatment planning are common, but often their limitations are not fully acknowledged. Useful data for the community may be produced, which is reproducible and reliable for implementation by others. However, this will only be achieved by clear and detailed reporting, and by consideration of delivered doses and clinical significance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David J Eaton
- Radiotherapy Physics, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|