Dosimetric evaluation of a novel modular cell irradiation platform for multi-modality in vitro studies including high dose rate brachytherapy.

PURPOSE: High dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy is integral for the treatment of numerous cancers. Preclinical studies involving HDR brachytherapy are limited. We aimed to describe a novel platform allowing multi-modality studies with clinical HDR brachytherapy and external beam irradiators, establish baseline dosimetry standard of a preclinical orthovoltage irradiator, to determine accurate dosimetric methods. METHODS: A dosimetric assessment of a commercial preclinical irradiator was performed establishing the baseline dosimetry goals for clinical irradiators. A 3D printed platform was then constructed with 14 brachytherapy channels at 1cm spacing to accommodate a standard tissue culture plate at a source-to-cell distance (SCD) of 1 cm or 0.4 cm. 4-Gy CT-based treatment plans were created in clinical treatment planning software and delivered to 96-well tissue culture plates using an Ir192 source or a clinical linear accelerator. Standard calculation models for HDR brachytherapy and external beam were compared to corresponding deterministic model-based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs). Agreement between predicted and measured dose was assessed with 2D-gamma passing rates to determine the best planning methodology. RESULTS: Mean (±standard deviation) and median dose measured across the plate for the preclinical irradiator was 423.7 ± 8.5 cGy and 430.0 cGy. Mean percentage differences between standard and MBDCA dose calculations were 9.4% (HDR, 1 cm SCD), 0.43% (HDR, 0.4 cm SCD), and 2.4% (EBRT). Predicted and measured dose agreement was highest for MBDCAs for all modalities. CONCLUSION: A 3D-printed tissue culture platform can be used for multi-modality irradiation studies with great accuracy. This tool will facilitate preclinical studies to reveal biologic differences between clinically relevant radiation modalities.

Handling Patient Emergencies During Radiopharmaceutical Therapy.

PURPOSE: Radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) is a rapidly growing treatment modality. Though uncommon, patients may experience complications during their RPT treatment, which may trigger a rapid response from the hospital team. However, members of this team are typically not familiar with precautions for radiation safety. During these events, it is important to prioritize the patient's health over all else. There are some practices that can help minimize the risk of radiation contamination spread and exposure to staff while tending to the patient. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We formed a team to develop a standard protocol for handling patient emergencies during RPT treatment. This team consisted of an authorized user, radiation safety officer, medical physicist, nurse, RPT administration staff, and a quality/safety coordinator. The focus for developing this standardized protocol for RPT patient emergencies was 3-fold: (1) stabilize the patient; (2) reduce radiation exposure to staff; and (3) limit the spread of radiation contamination. RESULTS: We modified our hospital's existing rapid response protocol to account for the additional staff and tasks needed to accomplish all 3 of these goals. Each team member was assigned specific responsibilities, which include serving as a gatekeeper to restrict traffic, managing the crash cart, performing chest compressions, timing chest compressions, documenting the situation, and monitoring/managing radiation safety in the area. We developed a small, easy-to-read card for rapid response staff to read while they are en route to the area so they can be aware of and prepare for the unique circumstances that RPT treatments present. CONCLUSIONS: Though rapid response events with RPT patients are uncommon, it is important to have a standardized protocol for how to handle these situations beforehand rather than improvise in the moment. We have provided an example of how our team adapted our hospital's current rapid response protocol to accommodate RPT patients.

Logistical, technical, and radiation safety aspects of establishing a radiopharmaceutical therapy program: A case in Lutetium-177 prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) therapy.

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is a cell surface protein highly expressed in nearly all prostate cancers, with restricted expression in some normal tissues. The differential expression of PSMA from tumor to non-tumor tissue has resulted in the investigation of numerous targeting strategies for therapy of patients with metastatic prostate cancer. In March of 2022, the FDA granted approval for the use of lutetium-177 PSMA-617 (Lu-177-PSMA-617) for patients with PSMA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who have been treated with androgen receptor pathway inhibition and taxane-based chemotherapy. Therefore, the use of Lu-177-PSMA-617 is expected to increase and become more widespread. Herein, we describe logistical, technical, and radiation safety considerations for implementing a radiopharmaceutical therapy program, with particular focus on the development of operating procedures for therapeutic administrations. Major steps for a center in the U.S. to implement a new radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) program are listed below, and then demonstrated in greater detail via examples for Lu-177-PSMA-617 therapy.

Failure modes and effects analysis of pediatric I-131 MIBG therapy: Program design and potential pitfalls.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest among pediatric institutions for implementing iodine-131 (I-131) meta-iodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) therapy for treating children with high-risk neuroblastoma. Due to regulations on the medical use of radioactive material (RAM), and the complexity and safety risks associated with the procedure, a multidisciplinary team involving radiation therapy/safety experts is required. Here, we describe methods for implementing pediatric I-131 MIBG therapy and evaluate our program's robustness via failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA). METHODS: We formed a multidisciplinary team, involving pediatric oncology, radiation oncology, and radiation safety staff. To evaluate the robustness of the therapy workflow and quantitatively assess potential safety risks, an FMEA was performed. Failure modes were scored (1-10) for their risk of occurrence (O), severity (S), and being undetected (D). Risk priority number (RPN) was calculated from a product of these scores and used to identify high-risk failure modes. RESULTS: A total of 176 failure modes were identified and scored. The majority (94%) of failure modes scored low (RPN <100). The highest risk failure modes were related to training and to drug-infusion procedures, with the highest S scores being (a) caregivers did not understand radiation safety training (O = 5.5, S = 7, D = 5.5, RPN = 212); (b) infusion training of staff was inadequate (O = 5, S = 8, D = 5, RPN = 200); and (c) air in intravenous lines/not monitoring for air in lines (O = 4.5, S = 8, D = 5, RPN = 180). CONCLUSION: Through use of FMEA methodology, we successfully identified multiple potential points of failure that have allowed us to proactively mitigate risks when implementing a pediatric MIBG program.

Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Unresectable Primary Liver Cancer Treated With Yttrium-90 Radioembolization With an Escalated Dose.

Purpose: Yttrium-90 (90Y) radioembolization with an escalated dose has been shown to improve clinical outcomes compared with standard dose radioembolization, but there are few data on the local control of primary liver tumors. We reported the clinical outcomes of patients with unresectable primary liver tumors treated with 90Y radioembolization with an escalated dose. Methods and Materials: Clinical data of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CC), and biphenotypic tumors (cHCC-CC) treated with radioembolization with an escalated dose (≥150 Gy) between 2013 and 2020 with >3 months follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. The primary endpoint was freedom from local progression. Clinical response was defined by Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours and toxic effects were assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Results: Fifty-three patients with HCC and 15 patients with CC/cHCC-CC were analyzed. The median dose delivered was 205 Gy (interquartile range, 183-253 Gy) and 198 Gy (interquartile range, 154-234 Gy) for patients with HCC and CC/cHCC-CC, respectively. The 1-year freedom from local progression rate was 54% (95% confidence interval [CI], 38%-78%) for patients with HCC and 66% (95% CI, 42%-100%) for patients with CC/cHCC-CC. For patients with HCC, United Network for Organ Sharing nodal stage 1 (P = .01), nonsolitary tumors (P = .02), pretreatment α-fetoprotein of >7.7 ng/mL (P = .006), and ≤268 Gy dose delivered (P = .003) were predictors for local progression on multivariate Cox analysis. No patients with HCC who received a dose >268 Gy had a local tumor progression. The 1-year overall survival for patients with HCC was 74% (95% CI, 61%-89%). After radioembolization, 5 (7%) patients had grade 3 ascites, and 4 (6%) patients had grade 3/4 hyperbilirubinemia. Conclusions: Treatment of unresectable primary liver tumors with 90Y radioembolization with an escalated dose was safe and well tolerated. Delivery of >268 Gy may improve local tumor control of HCC. Determination of the maximum tolerated dose needs to be performed in the context of future prospective dose-escalation trials to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of such an approach.

AAPM task group report 303 endorsed by the ABS: MRI implementation in HDR brachytherapy-Considerations from simulation to treatment.

The task group (TG) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) implementation in high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT)-Considerations from simulation to treatment, TG 303, was constituted by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine's (AAPM's) Science Council under the direction of the Therapy Physics Committee, the Brachytherapy Subcommittee, and the Working Group on Brachytherapy Clinical Applications. The TG was charged with developing recommendations for commissioning, clinical implementation, and on-going quality assurance (QA). Additionally, the TG was charged with describing HDR BT workflows and evaluating practical consideration that arise when implementing MR imaging. For brevity, the report is focused on the treatment of gynecologic and prostate cancer. The TG report provides an introduction and rationale for MRI implementation in BT, a review of previous publications on topics including available applicators, clinical trials, previously published BT-related TG reports, and new image-guided recommendations beyond CT-based practices. The report describes MRI protocols and methodologies, including recommendations for the clinical implementation and logical considerations for MR imaging for HDR BT. Given the evolution from prescriptive to risk-based QA, an example of a risk-based analysis using MRI-based, prostate HDR BT is presented. In summary, the TG report is intended to provide clear and comprehensive guidelines and recommendations for commissioning, clinical implementation, and QA for MRI-based HDR BT that may be utilized by the medical physics community to streamline this process. This report is endorsed by the American Brachytherapy Society.

Lutetium-177 Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Therapy: A Practical Review.

Prostate-specific membrane antigen is a transmembrane protein found predominately on prostate epithelium and is expressed at high levels in prostate cancer. In this review, we discuss the background, clinical data, patient selection, side effects, and necessary resources to deliver lutetium-177 prostate-specific membrane antigen in the research setting, or as standard of care if approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration. Targeted radionuclide therapeutics require understanding of fundamental principles of radiobiology and physics, and radiation oncologists and medical physicists are well-suited to play an integral role in their delivery and treatment response monitoring as key components of a multidisciplinary care team.

Lutetium-177 DOTATATE: A Practical Review.

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a heterogeneous group of tumors that originate in endocrine tissues throughout the body. Though most are indolent, clinical outcomes vary greatly based on histologic differentiation and grade. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy has emerged as a promising treatment for patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic disease refractory to standard of care treatment. The phase III NETTER-1 trial found that [177Lu] Lu-DOTA-[Tyr3]-octreotate improved disease-free survival versus octreotide alone for somatostatin receptor-positive gastroenteropancreatic NETs and had a favorable toxicity profile, leading to Food and Drug Administration approval. [177Lu] Lu-DOTA-[Tyr3]-octreotate is an important new treatment that expands the role of radiation in the treatment of NETs. Several important trials are ongoing to better elucidate the role of this treatment.

Does the sequence of high-dose rate brachytherapy boost and IMRT for prostate cancer impact early toxicity outcomes? Results from a single institution analysis.

BACKGROUND: We present the first report comparing early toxicity outcomes with high-dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) boost upfront versus intensity modulated RT (IMRT) upfront combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as definitive management for intermediate risk or higher prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We reviewed all non-metastatic prostate cancer patients who received HDR-BT boost from 2014 to 2019. HDR-BT boost was offered to patients with intermediate-risk disease or higher. ADT use and IMRT target volume was based on NCCN risk group. IMRT dose was typically 45 Gy in 25 fractions to the prostate and seminal vesicles ± pelvic lymph nodes. HDR-BT dose was 15 Gy in 1 fraction, delivered approximately 3 weeks before or after IMRT. The sequence was based on physician preference. Biochemical recurrence was defined per ASTRO definition. Gastrointestinal (GI) and Genitourinary (GU) toxicity was graded per CTCAE v5.0. Pearson Chi-squared test and Wilcoxon tests were used to compare toxicity rates. P-value < 0.05 was significant. RESULTS: Fifty-eight received HDR-BT upfront (majority 2014-2016) and 57 IMRT upfront (majority 2017-2018). Median follow-up was 26.0 months. The two cohorts were well-balanced for baseline patient/disease characteristics and treatment factors. There were differences in treatment sequence based on the year in which patients received treatment. Overall, rates of grade 3 or higher GI or GU toxicity were <1%. There was no significant difference in acute or late GI or GU toxicity between the two groups. CONCLUSION: We found no significant difference in GI/GU toxicity in intermediate-risk or higher prostate cancer patients receiving HDR-BT boost upfront versus IMRT upfront combined with ADT. These findings suggest that either approach may be reasonable. Longer follow-up is needed to evaluate late toxicity and long-term disease control.

AAPM medical physics practice guideline 3.b.: Levels of supervision for medical physicists in clinical training.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8,000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: (1) Must and Must Not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. (2) Should and Should Not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances.

Radiation-Induced Brachial Plexopathy in Patients With Breast Cancer Treated With Comprehensive Adjuvant Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to describe the risk of radiation-induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP) in patients with breast cancer who received comprehensive adjuvant radiation therapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Records for 498 patients who received comprehensive adjuvant RT (treatment of any residual breast tissue, the underlying chest wall, and regional nodes) between 2004 and 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were treated with conventional 3 to 5 field technique (CRT) until 2008, after which intensity modulated RT (IMRT) was introduced. RIBP events were determined by reviewing follow-up documentation from oncologic care providers. Patients with RIBP were matched (1:2) with a control group of patients who received CRT and a group of patients who received IMRT. Dosimetric analyses were performed in these patients to determine whether there were differences in ipsilateral brachial plexus dose distribution between RIBP and control groups. RESULTS: Median study follow-up was 88 months for the overall cohort and 92 months for the IMRT cohort. RIBP occurred in 4 CRT patients (1.6%) and 1 IMRT patient (0.4%) (P = .20). All patients with RIBP in the CRT cohort received a posterior axillary boost. Maximum dose to the brachial plexus in RIBP, CRT control, and IMRT control patients had median values of 56.0 Gy (range, 49.7-65.1), 54.8 Gy (47.4-60.5), and 54.8 Gy (54.2-57.3), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RIBP remains a rare complication of comprehensive adjuvant breast radiation and no clear dosimetric predictors for RIBP were identified in this study. The IMRT technique does not appear to adversely affect the development of this late toxicity.

Characterization of Dosimetric Differences in Strut-Adjusted Volume Implant Treatment Plans Calculated With TG-43 Formalism and a Model-Based Dose Calculation Algorithm.

PURPOSE: To comprehensively characterize dosimetric differences between calculations with a commercial model-based dose calculation algorithm (MBDCA) and the TG-43 formalism in application to accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) with the strut-adjusted volume implant (SAVI) applicator. METHODS: Dose for 100 patients treated with the SAVI applicator was recalculated with an MBDCA for comparison to dose calculated via TG-43. For every pair of dose calculations, dose-volume histogram (DVH) metrics including V90%, V95%, V100%, V150%, and V200% for the PTV_EVAL were compared. Features were defined for each case including (1) applicator size, (2) ratio between PTV_EVAL contour and 1-cm rind surrounding SAVI applicator, (3) ratio between dwell time in central catheter and total dwell time, and (4) mean computed tomography (CT) number within the lumpectomy cavity. Wilcoxon rank sum tests were performed to test whether treatment plans could be stratified according to feature values into groups with statistically significant dosimetry differences between MBDCA and TG-43. RESULTS: For all DVH metrics, differences between TG-43 and MBDCA calculations were statistically significant (P < .05). Minimum (maximum) relative percent differences between the MBDCA and TG-43 for V90%, V95%, and V100% were -2.1% (0.1%), -3.1% (-0.1%), and -5.0% (-0.5%), respectively. The median relative percent difference in mean PTV_EVAL dose between the MBDCA and TG-43 was -3.9%, with minimum (maximum) difference of -6.5% (-1.8%). For V90%, V95%, and V100%, plan quality worsened beyond defined thresholds in 26, 23, and 31 cases with no instances of coverage improvement. Features 1, 2, and 4 were shown to be able to stratify treatment plans into groups with statistically significant differences in dosimetry metrics between MBDCA and TG-43. CONCLUSIONS: Investigated dose metrics for SAVI treatments were found to be systematically lower with MBDCA calculation in comparison to TG-43. Plans could be stratified according to several features by the magnitude of dosimetric differences between these calculations.

Filmless quality assurance of a Leksell Gamma Knife® Icon™.

PURPOSE: The annual quality assurance (QA) of Leksell Gamma Knife® (LGK) systems are typically performed using films. Film is a good candidate for small field dosimetry due to its high spatial resolution and availability. However, there are multiple challenges with using film; film does not provide real-time measurement and requires batch-specific calibration. Our findings show that active detector-based QA can simplify the procedure and save time without loss of accuracy. METHODS: Annual QA tests for a LGK Icon™ system were performed using both film-based and filmless techniques. Output calibration, relative output factors (ROF), radiation profiles, sector uniformity/source counting, and verification of the unit center point (UCP) and radiation focal point (RFP) coincidence tests were performed. Radiochromic films, two ionization chambers, and a synthetic diamond detector were used for the measurements. Results were compared and verified with the treatment planning system (TPS). RESULTS: The measured dose rate of the LGK Icon was within 0.4% of the TPS value set at the time of commissioning using an ionization chamber. ROF for the 8 and 4-mm collimators were found to be 0.3% and 1.8% different from TPS values using the MicroDiamond detector and 2.6% and 1.9% different for film, respectively. Excellent agreement was found between TPS and measured dose profiles using the MicroDiamond detector which was within 1%/1 mm vs 2%/1 mm for film. Sector uniformity was found to be within 1% for all eight sectors measured using an ionization chamber. Verification of UCP and RFP coincidence using the MicroDiamond detector and pinprick film test was within 0.3 mm at isocenter for both. CONCLUSION: The annual QA of a LGK Icon was successfully performed by employing filmless techniques. Comparable results were obtained using radiochromic films. Utilizing active detectors instead of films simplifies the QA process and saves time without loss of accuracy.

Initial experience and lessons learned with implementing Lutetium-177-dotatate radiopharmaceutical therapy in a radiation oncology-based program.

PURPOSE: To assist radiation oncology centers in implementing Lutetium-177-dotatate (177Lu) radiopharmaceutical therapy for midgut neuroendocrine tumors. Here we describe our workflow and how it was revised based on our initial experience on an expanded access protocol (EAP). METHODS: A treatment team/area was identified. An IV-pump-based infusion technique was implemented. Exposure-based techniques were implemented to determine completion of administration, administered activity, and patient releasability. Acute toxicities were assessed at each fraction. A workflow failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) was performed. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients were treated: 11 patients during EAP (36 administrations) and 11 patients after EAP (44 administrations). Mean 177Lu infusion time was 37 min (range 26-65 min). Mean administered activity was 97% (range 90-99%). Mean patient exposures at 1 m were 1.9 mR/h (range 1.0-4.1 mR/h) post-177Lu and 0.9 mR/h (range 0.4-1.8 mR/h) at discharge, rendering patients releasable with instructions. Treatment area was decontaminated and released same day. All patients in the EAP experienced nausea, and nearly half experienced emesis despite premedication with antiemetics. Peripheral IV-line complications occurred in six treatments (16.7%), halting administration in 2 cases (5.6%). We transitioned to peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)-lines and revised amino acid formulary after the EAP. The second cohort of 11 patients after EAP were analyzed for PICC-line complications and acute toxicity. Nausea and emesis rates decreased (nausea G1+ 61%-27%; emesis G1+ 23%-7%), and no PICC complications were observed. FMEA revealed that a failure in amino acid preparation was the highest risk. CONCLUSION: 177Lu-dotatate can be administered safely in an outpatient radiation oncology department.

Evaluation of a new secondary dose calculation software for Gamma Knife radiosurgery.

Current available secondary dose calculation software for Gamma Knife radiosurgery falls short in situations where the target is shallow in depth or when the patient is positioned with a gamma angle other than 90°. In this work, we evaluate a new secondary calculation software which utilizes an innovative method to handle nonstandard gamma angles and image thresholding to render the skull for dose calculation. 800 treatment targets previously treated with our GammaKnife Icon system were imported from our treatment planning system (GammaPlan 11.0.3) and a secondary dose calculation was conducted. The agreement between the new calculations and the TPS were recorded and compared to the original secondary dose calculation agreement with the TPS using a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. Further comparisons using a Mann-Whitney test were made for targets treated at a 90° gamma angle against those treated with either a 70 or 110 gamma angle for both the new and commercial secondary dose calculation systems. Correlations between dose deviations from the treatment planning system against average target depth were evaluated using a Kendall's Tau correlation test for both programs. The Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test indicated a significant difference in the agreement between the two secondary calculations and the TPS, with a P-value < 0.0001. With respect to patients treated at nonstandard gamma angles, the new software was largely independent of patient setup, while the commercial software showed a significant dependence (P-value < 0.0001). The new secondary dose calculation software showed a moderate correlation with calculation depth, while the commercial software showed a weak correlation (Tau = -.322 and Tau = -.217 respectively). Overall, the new secondary software has better agreement with the TPS than the commercially available secondary calculation software over a range of diverse treatment geometries.

Single fraction high-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer: toxicities and early outcomes from a single institutional experience.

PURPOSE: High-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) delivered in a single fraction as monotherapy is a potential treatment modality for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer (LIR-PC); however, outcome data with this technique remain limited. Here we describe our institutional HDR monotherapy experience and report the efficacy and toxicity of this treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: LIR-PC patients who received a definitive single fraction HDR-BT during 2013-2017 were retrospectively identified. The intended HDR monotherapy dose was 19 Gy in one fraction. Acute (< 90 days) and late (≥ 90 days) toxicity was assessed using CTCAE version 4.03. Trends in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and American Urological Association (AUA) symptom scores after treatment were assessed using Bayesian linear mixed models. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS). RESULTS: 28 patients with median follow-up of 23.6 months were identified. The median age at treatment was 65 years (48-83). The NCCN risk groups were low in 14, favorable intermediate in 10, and unfavorable intermediate in 4 patients. There were 5 (18%) and 0 (0%) acute grade 2 genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities, respectively, and one (4%) acute grade 3 GU toxicity. There were no late grade 3 toxicities, and 5 (18%) and 0 (0%) late grade 2 GU and GI toxicities respectively. PSA values and AUA symptom scores decreased significantly after treatment. There were 3 biochemical failures with the two- and three-year BFFS of 90.7% and 80.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Early results from a single institution suggest that single fraction HDR-BT with 19 Gy has limited toxicity, although with suboptimal biochemical control.

Characterization and validation of an intra-fraction motion management system for masked-based radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: Characterize the intra-fraction motion management (IFMM) system found on the Gamma Knife Icon (GKI), including spatial accuracy, latency, temporal performance, and overall effect on delivered dose. METHODS: A phantom was constructed, consisting of a three-axis translation mount, a remote motorized flipper, and a thermoplastic sphere surrounding a radiation detector. An infrared marker was placed on the translation mount secured to the flipper. The spatial accuracy of the IFMM was measured via the translation mount in all Cartesian planes. The detector was centered at the radiation focal point. A remote signal was used to move the marker out of the IFMM tolerance and pause the beam. A two-channel electrometer was used to record the signals from the detector and the flipper when motion was signaled. These signals determined the latency and temporal performance of the GKI. RESULTS: The spatial accuracy of the IFMM was found to be <0.1 mm. The measured latency was <200 ms. The dose difference with five interruptions was <0.5%. CONCLUSION: This work provides a quantitative characterization of the GKI IFMM system as required by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This provides a methodology for GKI users to satisfy these requirements using common laboratory equipment in lieu of a commercial solution.

Concurrent chemoradiation for cervical cancer: Comparison of LDR and HDR brachytherapy.

PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes between low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy and high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy for cervical cancer patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: All consecutive newly diagnosed cervical cancer patients undergoing pretreatment 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging and treated with curative-intent definitive chemoradiation from 1997 to 2016 at a U.S. academic center were included. Brachytherapy boost was LDR or HDR 2D treatment planning from 1997 to 2005 and HDR with MR-based 3D planning from 2005 to 2016. Local control (LC), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and late bowel/bladder complications were evaluated. RESULTS: Tumor stages were International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics IB1-IIB (n = 457; 75%) and III-IVA (n = 152; 25%). Brachytherapy was LDR for 104 patients and HDR for 505 patients. Concurrent weekly cisplatin was administered to 536 patients (88%). With median followup of 9.4 years, there was no difference in LC (p = 0.24) or CSS (p = 0.50) between LDR and HDR brachytherapy. Cox multivariable regression showed that only International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III-IVA (HR=2.4, p = 0.004) was associated with worse LC. A propensity-matched cohort (90 LDR vs. 90 HDR) was created, and the 5-year LC rates were 88% LDR and 82% HDR, p = 0.26; 5-year CSS rates were 66% LDR and 58% HDR, p = 0.19; 5-year grade ≥3 bowel/bladder toxicities were 23% LDR and 16% HDR, p = 0.44. For all patients, the 5-year late toxicity in stage III-IVA patients was higher with LDR 47% vs. HDR 15%, p = 0.03, with no difference in LC, 86% and 75%, respectively (p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in LC with either LDR or HDR brachytherapy. The late complication rate was reduced with HDR and 3D-planned brachytherapy compared to LDR and 2D-planned brachytherapy.