100% peer review in radiation oncology: is it feasible?

PURPOSE: Peer review has been proposed as a strategy to ensure patient safety and plan quality in radiation oncology. Despite its potential benefits, barriers commonly exist to its optimal implementation in daily clinical routine. Our purpose is to analyze peer-review process at our institution. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Based on our group peer-review process, we quantified the rate of plan changes, time and resources needed for this process. Prospectively, data on cases presented at our institutional peer-review conference attended by physicians, resident physicians and physicists were collected. Items such as time to present per case, type of patient (adult or pediatric), treatment intent, dose, aimed technique, disease location and receipt of previous radiation were gathered. Cases were then analyzed to determine the rate of major change, minor change and plan rejection after presentation as well as the median time per session. RESULTS: Over a period of 4 weeks, 148 cases were reviewed. Median of attendants was six physicians, three in-training-physicians and one physicist. Median time per session was 38 (4-72) minutes. 59.5% of cases presented in 1-4 min, 32.4% in 5-9 min and 8.1% in ≥ 10 min. 79.1% of cases were accepted without changes, 11.5% with minor changes, 6% with major changes and 3.4% were rejected with indication of new presentation. Most frequent reason of change was contouring corrections (53.8%) followed by dose or fractionation (26.9%). CONCLUSION: Everyday group consensus peer review is an efficient manner to recollect clinical and technical data of cases presented to ensure quality radiation care before initiation of treatment as well as ensuring department quality in a feedback team environment. This model is feasible within the normal operation of every radiation oncology Department.

Impact of real-time, dose-escalated permanent seed implant brachytherapy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate biochemical control and toxicity in patients who underwent 125I seed brachytherapy (BT) for intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2004-December 2014, 395 patients with intermediate-risk PCa underwent 125I BT. Of these, 117 underwent preoperative planning (PP; 145 Gy) and 278 real-time intraoperative preplanning (IoP; 160 Gy). All patients were followed for ≥ 6 months (> 5 years in 48% of patients and > 7 years in 13%). Median follow-up was 59 months. RESULTS: Biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS) rates at 5 and 8 years were, respectively, 91.7% and 82.1%. By treatment group, the corresponding BRFS rates were 93.5% and 90% for IoP and 89% and 76.8% for PP. The maximum dose to the urethra remained unchanged (217 Gy) despite the dose escalation (from 145 to 160 Gy), without any significant increase in treatment-related toxicity (p = 0.13). Overall toxicity outcomes in the series were excellent, with only 3 cases (0.76%) of grade 3 genitourinary toxicity. CONCLUSION: The real-time intraoperative planning technique at 160 Gy yields better biochemical controls than the preoperative planning technique at 145 Gy. Dose escalation did not increase urinary toxicity. The excellent results obtained with the IoP BT technique support its use as the first treatment option in this patient population.

Evaluation of lens absorbed dose with Cone Beam IGRT procedures.

The purpose of this work is to evaluate the absorbed dose to the eye lenses due to the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) system used to accurately position the patient during head-and-neck image guided procedures. The on-board imaging (OBI) systems (v.1.5) of Clinac iX and TrueBeam (Varian) accelerators were used to evaluate the imparted dose to the eye lenses and some additional points of the head. All CBCT scans were acquired with the Standard-Dose Head protocol from Varian. Doses were measured using thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLDs) placed in an anthropomorphic phantom. TLDs were calibrated at the beam quality used to reduce their energy dependence. Average dose to the lens due to the OBI systems of the Clinac iX and the TrueBeam were 0.71 ± 0.07 mGy/CBCT and 0.70 ± 0.08 mGy/CBCT, respectively. The extra absorbed dose received by the eye lenses due to one CBCT acquisition with the studied protocol is far below the 500 mGy threshold established by ICRP for cataract formation (ICRP 2011 Statement on Tissue Reactions). However, the incremental effect of several CBCT acquisitions during the whole treatment should be taken into account.

Fetal dose measurements and shielding efficiency assessment in a custom setup of (192)Ir brachytherapy for a pregnant woman with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the radiation dose to the fetus of a pregnant patient undergoing high-dose-rate (HDR) (192)Ir interstitial breast brachytherapy, and to design a new patient setup and lead shielding technique that minimizes the fetal dose. METHODS: Radiochromic films were placed between the slices of an anthropomorphic phantom modeling the patient. The pregnant woman was seated in a chair with the breast over a table and inside a leaded box. Dose variation as a function of distance from the implant volume as well as dose homogeneity within a representative slice of the fetal position was evaluated without and with shielding. RESULTS: With shielding, the peripheral dose after a complete treatment ranged from 50 cGy at 5 cm from the caudal edge of the breast to <0.1 cGy at 30 cm. The shielding reduces absorbed dose by a factor of two near the breast and more than an order of magnitude beyond 20 cm. The dose is heterogeneous within a given axial plane, with variations from the central region within 50%. Interstitial HDR (192)Ir brachytherapy with breast shielding can be more advantageous than external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) from a radiation protection point of view, as long as the distance to the uterine fundus is higher than about 10 cm. Furthermore, the weight of the shielding here proposed is notably lower than that needed in EBRT. CONCLUSIONS: Shielded breast brachytherapy may benefit pregnant patients needing localized radiotherapy, especially during the early gestational ages when the fetus is more sensitive to ionizing radiation.

[Relative renal function based on DMSA uptake corrected for volume: normalized relative renal function]. / Función renal relativa basada en captación de ácido dimercaptosuccínico corregida por volumen: función renal relativa normalizada.

OBJECTIVE: Relative renal function (RRF) quantification based on dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) uptake is an established method for determining differential renal function. An abnormal kidney size may lead to an alteration in its RRF value, although it has no dysfunction. Therefore, it is useful to correct RRF values taking into account relative renal volumes, thus obtaining the normalized relative renal function (NRRF). The feasibility of the method used for volume correction, differences with respect to usual quantification and different normality intervals were studied. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 187 DMSA renal scintigraphies (130 children and 57 adults) were studied. RRF was quantified and volume corrected to obtain NRRF. Patients were classified as normal or pathological using various normality intervals for NRRF. A second classification was performed depending on how the diagnostic changed after volume correction. RESULTS: An increase of pathological diagnosis was observed after volume correction, mainly in children. Using an intermediate estimation for the normality interval, 53% of the initially pathological diagnosis for children may be caused simply by different renal volumes. CONCLUSIONS: NRRF provides complementary information to RRF and helps to distinguish between a smaller kidney and a really hypofunctioning one in cases with abnormal RRF.

Función renal relativa basada en captación de ácido dimercaptosuccínico corregida por volumen: función renal relativa normalizada / Relative renal function based on DMSA uptake corrected for volume: normalized relative renalfunction

Objetivo. La cuantificación de la función renal relativa (FRR) basada en la incorporación de ácido dimercaptosuccínico (DMSA) es un método establecido para la determinación del nivel de funcionamiento renal. Un tamaño anormal del riñón puede producir una alteración en el valor de su FRR, aunque no tenga disfunción alguna. Por tanto, resulta de utilidad corregir por volumen renal relativo los valores de la FRR, obteniendo así la función renal relativa normalizada (FRRN). En este trabajo se estudiará la viabilidad del método utilizado para la corrección por volumen, las diferencias respecto a la cuantificación habitual, y la influencia del margen de normalidad a aplicar. Material y métodos. Se estudiaron las gammagrafías renales con 99mTc-DMSA de 187 pacientes, 130 infantiles y 57 adultos. Se cuantificó la FRR y se corrigió por volumen para evaluar la FRRN. Se clasificaron los pacientes en normales o patológicos estableciendo varios márgenes de normalidad para la FRRN. Se realizó una segunda clasificación de los casos según cómo cambió su valoración al corregir por volumen. Resultados. Se observó un aumento de los diagnósticos patológicos al corregir por volumen, sobre todo en niños. Para el margen de normalidad aceptado se observó que del total de casos infantiles diagnosticados como patológicos inicialmente, el 53 % puede ser debido simplemente a una diferencia de volumen renal. Conclusiones. La FRRN proporciona una información complementaria a la FRR y ayuda a distinguir entre un riñón de menor tamaño y uno realmente hipocaptante en el caso de que la FRR resulte fuera de la normalidad

Objective. Relative renal function (RRF) quantification based on dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) uptake is an established method for determining differential renal function. An abnormal kidney size may lead to an alteration in its RRF value, although it has no dysfunction. Therefore, it is useful to correct RRF values taking into account relative renal volumes, thus obtaining the normalized relative renal function (NRRF). The feasibility of the method used for volume correction, differences with respect to usual quantification and different normality intervals were studied. Material and methods. A total of 187 DMSA renal scintigraphies (130 children and 57 adults) were studied. RRF was quantified and volume corrected to obtain NRRF. Patients were classified as normal or pathological using various normality intervals for NRRF. A second classification was performed depending on how the diagnostic changed after volume correction. Results. An increase of pathological diagnosis was observed after volume correction, mainly in children. Using an intermediate estimation for the normality interval, 53 % of the initially pathological diagnosis for children may be caused simply by different renal volumes. Conclusions. NRRF provides complementary information to RRF and helps to distinguish between a smaller kidney and a really hypofunctioning one in cases with abnormal RRF