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

Prostate brachytherapy treatment using permanent implantation of low-energy (LE) low-dose rate (LDR) sources is successfully and widely applied in Europe. In addition, seeds are used in other tumour sites, such as ophthalmic tumours, implanted temporarily. The calibration issues for LE-LDR photon emitting sources are specific and different from other sources used in brachytherapy. In this report, the BRAPHYQS (BRAchytherapy PHYsics Quality assurance System) working group of GEC-ESTRO, has developed the present recommendations to assure harmonized and high-quality seed calibration in European clinics. There are practical aspects for which a clarification/procedure is needed, including aspects not specifically accounted for in currently existing AAPM and ESTRO societal recommendations. The aim of this report has been to provide a European wide standard in LE-LDR source calibration at end-user level, in order to keep brachytherapy treatments with high safety and quality levels. The recommendations herein reflect the guidance to the ESTRO brachytherapy users and describe the procedures in a clinic or hospital to ensure the correct calibration of LE-LDR seeds.

Prospective multi-center dosimetry study of low-dose Iodine-125 prostate brachytherapy performed after transurethral resection.

PURPOSE: To evaluate in a multicenter setting the ability of centers to perform pre-implant permanent prostate brachytherapy planning, fulfilling dosimetric goals and constraints based on the Groupe de Curiethérapie-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology guidelines in the setting of implantation after prior prostate transurethral resection (TURP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A reference transrectal ultrasound image set of the prostate gland from a patient who had undergone TURP was used. Contouring of the prostate, clinical target volume and organs at risk was performed by the coordinating center. Goals and constraints regarding the dosimetry were defined. RESULTS: Seventeen of twenty-five centers invited to participate were able to import the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine-images into their planning computer and plan the implant using the defined guidelines. All centers were able to plan treatment, and achieve the recommended objectives and constraints. However, sector analysis has shown a risk of under-dosage in the anterior part of the prostate. CONCLUSIONS: Correct pre-implantation planning with adherence to protocol guidelines and in compliance with defined dosimetric constraints seems feasible in a post-TURP setting, at least on a theoretical basis. A prospective study evaluating the outcome of prostate brachytherapy performed after TURP can therefore be undertaken with an expectation of a correct dosimetry in the multicenter setting.

CT- and MRI-based seed localization in postimplant evaluation after prostate brachytherapy.

PURPOSE: To compare the uncertainties in CT- and MRI-based seed reconstruction in postimplant evaluation after prostate seed brachytherapy in terms of interobserver variability and quantify the impact of seed detection variability on a selection of dosimetric parameters for three postplan techniques: (1) CT, (2) MRI-T1 weighted fused with MRI-T2 weighted, and (3) CT fused with MRI-T2 weighted. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seven physicists reconstructed the seed positions on postimplant CT and MRI-T1 images of three patients. For each patient and imaging modality, the interobserver variability was calculated with respect to a reference seed set. The effect of this variability on dosimetry was calculated for CT and CT + MRI-T2 (CT-based seed reconstruction), as well as for MRI-T1 + MRI-T2 (MRI-T1-based seed reconstruction), using fixed CT and MRI-T2 prostate contours. RESULTS: Averaged over three patients, the interobserver variability in CT-based seed reconstruction was 1.1 mm (1 SDref, i.e., standard deviation with respect to the reference value). The D90 (dose delivered to 90% of the target) variability was 1.5% and 1.3% (1 SDref) for CT and CT + MRI-T2, respectively. The mean interobserver variability in MRI-based seed reconstruction was 3.0 mm (1 SDref), and the impact of this variability on D90 was 6.6% for MRI-T1 + MRI-T2. CONCLUSIONS: Seed reconstruction on MRI-T1-weighted images was less accurate than on CT. This difference in uncertainties should be weighted against uncertainties due to contouring and image fusion when comparing the overall reliability of postplan techniques.

The updated ESTRO core curricula 2011 for clinicians, medical physicists and RTTs in radiotherapy/radiation oncology.

INTRODUCTION: In 2007 ESTRO proposed a revision and harmonisation of the core curricula for radiation oncologists, medical physicists and RTTs to encourage harmonised education programmes for the professional disciplines, to facilitate mobility between EU member states, to reflect the rapid development of the professions and to secure the best evidence-based education across Europe. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Working parties for each core curriculum were established and included a broad representation with geographic spread and different experience with education from the ESTRO Educational Committee, local representatives appointed by the National Societies and support from ESTRO staff. RESULTS: The revised curricula have been presented for the ESTRO community and endorsement is ongoing. All three curricula have been changed to competency based education and training, teaching methodology and assessment and include the recent introduction of the new dose planning and delivery techniques and the integration of drugs and radiation. The curricula can be downloaded at http://www.estro-education.org/europeantraining/Pages/EuropeanCurricula.aspx. CONCLUSION: The main objective of the ESTRO core curricula is to update and harmonise training of the radiation oncologists, medical physicists and RTTs in Europe. It is recommended that the authorities in charge of the respective training programmes throughout Europe harmonise their own curricula according to the common framework.

Tumour and target volumes in permanent prostate brachytherapy: a supplement to the ESTRO/EAU/EORTC recommendations on prostate brachytherapy.

The aim of this paper is to supplement the GEC/ESTRO/EAU recommendations for permanent seed implantations in prostate cancer to develop consistency in target and volume definition for permanent seed prostate brachytherapy. Recommendations on target and organ at risk (OAR) definitions and dosimetry parameters to be reported on post implant planning are given.

Quality control of brachytherapy equipment in the Netherlands and Belgium: current practice and minimum requirements.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Brachytherapy is applied in 39 radiotherapy institutions in The Netherlands and Belgium. Each institution has its own quality control (QC) programme to ensure safe and accurate dose delivery to the patient. The main goal of this work is to gain insight into the current practice of QC of brachytherapy in The Netherlands and Belgium and to reduce possible variations in test frequencies and tolerances by formulating a set of minimum QC-requirements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An extensive questionnaire about QC of brachytherapy was distributed to and completed by the 39 radiotherapy institutions. A separate smaller questionnaire was sent to nine institutions performing intracoronary brachytherapy. The questions were related to safety systems, physical irradiation parameters and total time spent on QC. The results of the questionnaires were compared with recommendations given in international brachytherapy QC reports. RESULTS: The answers to the questionnaires showed large variations in test frequencies and test methods. Furthermore, large variations in time spent on QC exist, which is mainly due to differences in QC-philosophy and differences in the available resources. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of the questionnaires and the comparison with the international recommendations, a set of minimum requirements for QC of brachytherapy has been formulated. These guidelines will be implemented in the radiotherapy institutions in The Netherlands and Belgium.