Prospective Evaluation of the Clinical Benefits of a Novel Tattoo-less Workflow for Nonspine Bone Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: Integrating Surface-Guidance With Triggered Imaging Reduces Treatment Time and Eliminates the Need for Tattoos.

PURPOSE: Oligometastatic disease has expanded the indications for nonspine bone stereotactic body radiation therapy (NSB SBRT). We investigated whether optical surface monitoring systems (OSMS) could enable tattoo-less setup and substitute for 2-dimensional/3-dimensional or cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based mid-imaging in NSB SBRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: OSMS was incorporated in parallel with an existing workflow using pretreatment CBCT and 2-dimensional/3-dimensional kV/kV mid-imaging beginning November 2019. The ability of OSMS to detect out-of-tolerance (>2 mm/>2°) and commanded couch shifts was analyzed. A workflow incorporating OSMS reference captures, CBCT for pretreatment verification, and OSMS/triggered imaging (TI) for intrafraction monitoring was developed for rib/sternum SBRT beginning November 2021 and all NSB SBRT beginning February 2022. Treatment time and CBCT-related radiation dose between the OSMS and the non-OSMS intrafraction monitoring group was analyzed pre- and post-OSMS/TI workflow adoption. All fractions were analyzed through statistical process control with use of an XmR chart of treatment time per quarter from February 2019 to February 2023. Special cause rules were based on Institute for Healthcare Improvement criteria. RESULTS: From February 2019 to February 2023, 1993 NSB SBRT fractions were delivered, including 234 rib, 109 sternum, 214 ilium, and 682 multisite. Over 20 commanded shifts, OSMS could detect 2-mm shifts to within 0.4 mm 67% of the time and 0.8 mm 95% of the time. All NSB SBRT sites showed significant reductions in treatment time, including the greatest improvement in rib total treatment (21.6-13.4 minutes; P = 1.16 × 10-17) and beam time (7.9-3.2 minutes; P = 7.32 × 10-27). Significant reductions in CBCT-related radiation were also observed for several NSB sites. These process improvements were associated with OSMS adoption. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of a novel NSB SBRT workflow incorporating OSMS/TI for bone intrafraction motion monitoring reduced treatment time and CBCT-related radiation exposure while also allowing for more continuous intrafraction motion monitoring for NSB SBRT. OSMS/TI enabled the transition to a tattoo-less workflow.

Computerized System for Safety Verification of External Beam Radiation Therapy Planning.

PURPOSE: To report an assessment of in-house software, Verifier, developed to improve efficacy and efficiency of the radiation therapy (RT) treatment planning process and quality control review (QCR). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Radiation therapy plan parameters retrieved from our treatment planning database are used by automated tests to give 75 types of warnings, such as prescription and plan discrepancies. The software is continuously updated on the basis of new issues, ideas, and planning policies. Verifier was retrospectively assessed (2007-2015) by examining impact on treatment plan revisions, frequency of quality improvement incident reports of avoidable RT plan-related safety events, unaddressed issues, and staff efficiency. RESULTS: Plan revisions for specific issues declined dramatically in response to implementation of corresponding Verifier tests. Between 2012 and 2015 our institution's total rate of plan revisions dropped from 18.0% to 11.2%. Between 2008 and 2015 specific tests were added to Verifier while the rate of corresponding avoidable safety events was reduced from 0.34% to 0.00% over the same period. Simulations suggest Verifier saves approximately 2 to 5 minutes per QCR. CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in quantifiable metrics of plan revisions and incident reports suggests automatic RT plan-checking software enhances patient safety and clinical efficiency. Although only modest time savings may be gained using Verifier for the QCR itself, the greater impact on efficiency is through avoiding late-stage plan modifications and improving documentation via automation. We encourage other institutions to consider working toward adding similar technologies to enhance their RT quality assurance programs.

A comparative study of standard intensity-modulated radiotherapy and RapidArc planning techniques for ipsilateral and bilateral head and neck irradiation.

The purpose of this study was to investigate class solutions using RapidArc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning for ipsilateral and bilateral head and neck (H&N) irradiation, and to compare dosimetric results with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans. A total of 14 patients who received ipsilateral and 10 patients who received bilateral head and neck irradiation were retrospectively replanned with several volumetric-modulated arc therapy techniques. For ipsilateral neck irradiation, the volumetric-modulated arc therapy techniques included two 360° arcs, two 360° arcs with avoidance sectors around the contralateral parotid, two 260° or 270° arcs, and two 210° arcs. For bilateral neck irradiation, the volumetric-modulated arc therapy techniques included two 360° arcs, two 360° arcs with avoidance sectors around the shoulders, and 3 arcs. All patients had a sliding-window-delivery intensity-modulated radiotherapy plan that was used as the benchmark for dosimetric comparison. For ipsilateral neck irradiation, a volumetric-modulated arc therapy technique using two 360° arcs with avoidance sectors around the contralateral parotid was dosimetrically comparable to intensity-modulated radiotherapy, with improved conformity (conformity index = 1.22 vs 1.36, p < 0.04) and lower contralateral parotid mean dose (5.6 vs 6.8Gy, p < 0.03). For bilateral neck irradiation, 3-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy techniques were dosimetrically comparable to intensity-modulated radiotherapy while also avoiding irradiation through the shoulders. All volumetric-modulated arc therapy techniques required fewer monitor units than sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy to deliver treatment, with an average reduction of 35% for ipsilateral plans and 67% for bilateral plans. Thus, for ipsilateral head and neck irradiation a volumetric-modulated arc therapy technique using two 360° arcs with avoidance sectors around the contralateral parotid is recommended. For bilateral neck irradiation, 2- or 3-arc techniques are dosimetrically comparable to intensity-modulated radiotherapy, but more work is needed to determine the optimal approaches by disease site.

Evaluation of the dose calculation accuracy in intensity-modulated radiation therapy for mesothelioma, focusing on low doses to the contralateral lung.

This study compares Monte Carlo (MC) with conventional treatment planning system (TPS) calculations. The EGS4nrc MC code, BEAMnrc, was commissioned to simulate a Varian 21Ex Linac. The accuracy of the simulations, including points blocked by the jaws, was evaluated by comparing MC with ion chamber and MOSFET measurements. Eight mesothelioma IMRT cases were planned using Eclipse (pencil beam and superposition convolution algorithms). Dose distributions were recalculated using BEAMnrc/DOSxyz, and compared with TPS. MC agreed with experimental results for IMRT fields within 3% (96% of points). For regions blocked by the jaws, average agreement between MC and experiment was better than 5% up to 20 cm from isocenter. The pencil beam algorithm underestimated lung MLD, V20, and V5, compared with MC, by a mean (range) of 16% (11-22%), 9.0% (2.4-30.1%), and 11.8% (2-30%), respectively. The superposition convolution algorithm gave better agreement of 8.5% (0-17%), 4% (0-12%) and 0% (-6-6%). Mean dose to the targets was better than +/- 5% in all cases. In conclusion, there is excellent correlation between TPS and MC calculations for the target doses. The pencil beam algorithm and superposition convolution algorithms both underestimate lung dose parameters, but the superposition convolution dose offers improvements in dose calculation accuracy for these patients.

Restricted field IMRT dramatically enhances IMRT planning for mesothelioma.

PURPOSE: To improve the target coverage and normal tissue sparing of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for mesothelioma after extrapleural pneumonectomy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Thirteen plans from patients previously treated with IMRT for mesothelioma were replanned using a restricted field technique. This technique was novel in two ways. It limited the entrance beams to 200 degrees around the target and three to four beams per case had their field apertures restricted down to the level of the heart or liver to further limit the contralateral lung dose. New constraints were added that included a mean lung dose of <9.5 Gy and volume receiving >or=5 Gy of <55%. RESULTS: In all cases, the planning target volume coverage was excellent, with an average of 97% coverage of the planning target volume by the target dose. No change was seen in the target coverage with the new technique. The heart, kidneys, and esophagus were all kept under tolerance in all cases. The average mean lung dose, volume receiving >or=20 Gy, and volume receiving >or=5 Gy with the new technique was 6.6 Gy, 3.0%, and 50.8%, respectively, compared with 13.8 Gy, 15%, and 90% with the previous technique (p < 0.0001 for all three comparisons). The maximal value for any case in the cohort was 8.0 Gy, 7.3%, and 57.5% for the mean lung dose, volume receiving >or=20 Gy, and volume receiving >or=5 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSION: Restricted field IMRT provides an improved method to deliver IMRT to a complex target after extrapleural pneumonectomy. An upcoming Phase I trial will provide validation of these results.

Fatal pneumonitis associated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy for mesothelioma.

PURPOSE: To describe the initial experience at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) as adjuvant therapy after extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) and adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The medical records of patients treated with IMRT after EPP and adjuvant chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. IMRT was given to a dose of 54 Gy to the clinical target volume in 1.8 Gy daily fractions. Treatment was delivered with a dynamic multileaf collimator using a sliding window technique. Eleven of 13 patients received heated intraoperative cisplatin chemotherapy (225 mg/m(2)). Two patients received neoadjuvant intravenous cisplatin/pemetrexed, and 10 patients received adjuvant cisplatin/pemetrexed chemotherapy after EPP but before radiation therapy. All patients received at least 2 cycles of intravenous chemotherapy. The contralateral lung was limited to a V20 (volume of lung receiving 20 Gy or more) of 20% and a mean lung dose (MLD) of 15 Gy. All patients underwent fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for staging, and any FDG-avid areas in the hemithorax were given a simultaneous boost of radiotherapy to 60 Gy. Statistical comparisons were done using two-sided t test. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were treated with IMRT from December 2004 to September 2005. Six patients developed fatal pneumonitis after treatment. The median time from completion of IMRT to the onset of radiation pneumonitis was 30 days (range 5-57 days). Thirty percent of patients (4 of 13) developed acute Grade 3 nausea and vomiting. One patient developed acute Grade 3 thrombocytopenia. The median V20, MLD, and V5 (volume of lung receiving 5 Gy or more) for the patients who developed pneumonitis was 17.6% (range, 15.3-22.3%), 15.2 Gy (range, 13.3-17 Gy), and 98.6% (range, 81-100%), respectively, as compared with 10.9% (range, 5.5-24.7%) (p = 0.08), 12.9 Gy (range, 8.7-16.9 Gy) (p = 0.07), and 90% (range, 66-98.3%) (p = 0.20), respectively, for the patients who did not develop pneumonitis. CONCLUSIONS: Intensity-modulated RT treatment for mesothelioma after EPP and adjuvant chemotherapy resulted in a high rate of fatal pneumonitis when standard dose parameters were used. We therefore recommend caution in the utilization of this technique. Our data suggest that with IMRT, metrics such as V5 and MLD should be considered in addition to V20 to determine tolerance levels in future patients.

CT computer-optimized high-dose-rate brachytherapy with surface applicator technique for scar boost radiation after breast reconstruction surgery.

PURPOSE: Immediate breast reconstruction has become increasingly prevalent after mastectomy for breast cancer. Postoperative scar boost radiation for the reconstructed breast presents many planning challenges due to the shape, size, and curvature of the scar. High-dose-rate (HDR) surface applicator brachytherapy is a novel and effective method of delivering scar boost radiation. Two cases, one with a saline implant and one with a transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap reconstruction, illustrate the method and advantages of HDR optimization of surface applicators. METHODS AND MATERIALS: For 2 patients a mold of the breast was made with Aquaplast sheets. A reproducible system was used for arm positioning. Skin fiducials, including tattoos from external beam planning, were matched to fiducials on the mold. HDR catheters were sited on the mold at 1cm intervals, with the central catheter situated along the scar. Topographically, both scars demonstrated extreme curvature in both craniocaudal and mediolateral directions. A CT computer-optimized HDR plan was developed, with the reference dose prescribed at the skin surface. The dosimetry was compared to single-field and matched-field electron plans. RESULTS: This surface applicator technique provided a uniform skin dose of 100% to the entire clinical target volume (CTV) without hot spots in both patients. The patient position and surface applicator setup were consistently reproducible. The patients tolerated the treatment well with minimal skin erythema. In the single-field electron plan, skin dose was decreased to 50% at the periphery of the scar. Matching fields addressed this depth dose decrement, but resulted in large localized hot spots of more than 200% centrally in each field. CONCLUSION: CT computer-optimized HDR surface applicator brachytherapy provided a reproducible homogeneous method of treating highly curved scars on the reconstructed breast. Electron beam treatment would result in longer and more complex treatments yet still provide a less homogeneous dose than this surface applicator technique.