Total body irradiation delivered using a dedicated Co-60 TBI unit: Evaluation of dosimetric uniformity and dose verification.

This work presents the dosimetric characteristics of Total Body Irradiation (TBI) delivered using a dedicated Co-60 TBI unit. We demonstrate the ability to deliver a uniform dose to the entire patient without the need for a beam spoiler or patient-specific compensation. Full dose distributions are calculated using an in-house Monte Carlo treatment planning system, and cumulative dose distributions are created by deforming the dose distributions within two different patient orientations. Sample dose distributions and profiles are provided to illustrate the plan characteristics, and dose and DVH statistics are provided for a heterogeneous cohort of patients. The patient cohort includes adult and pediatric patients with a range of 132-198 cm in length and 16.5-37.5 cm in anterior-posterior thickness. With the exception of the lungs, a uniform dose of 12 Gy is delivered to the patient with nearly the entire volume receiving a dose within 10% of the prescription dose. Mean lung doses (MLDs) are maintained below the estimated threshold for radiation pneumonitis, with MLDs ranging from 7.3 to 9.3 Gy (estimated equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2 ) of 6.2-8.5 Gy). Dose uniformity is demonstrated across five anatomical locations within the patient for which mean doses are all within 3.1% of the prescription dose. In-vivo dosimetry demonstrates excellent agreement between measured and calculated doses, with 78% of measurements within ±5% of the calculated dose and 99% within ±10%. These results demonstrate a state-of-the-art TBI planning and delivery system using a dedicated TBI unit and hybrid in-house and commercial planning techniques which provide comprehensive dosimetric data for TBI treatment plans that are accurately verified using in-vivo dosimetry.

AAPM Task Group Report 307: Use of EPIDs for Patient-Specific IMRT and VMAT QA.

PURPOSE: Electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) have been widely utilized for patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) and their use for transit dosimetry applications is emerging. Yet there are no specific guidelines on the potential uses, limitations, and correct utilization of EPIDs for these purposes. The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 307 (TG-307) provides a comprehensive review of the physics, modeling, algorithms and clinical experience with EPID-based pre-treatment and transit dosimetry techniques. This review also includes the limitations and challenges in the clinical implementation of EPIDs, including recommendations for commissioning, calibration and validation, routine QA, tolerance levels for gamma analysis and risk-based analysis. METHODS: Characteristics of the currently available EPID systems and EPID-based PSQA techniques are reviewed. The details of the physics, modeling, and algorithms for both pre-treatment and transit dosimetry methods are discussed, including clinical experience with different EPID dosimetry systems. Commissioning, calibration, and validation, tolerance levels and recommended tests, are reviewed, and analyzed. Risk-based analysis for EPID dosimetry is also addressed. RESULTS: Clinical experience, commissioning methods and tolerances for EPID-based PSQA system are described for pre-treatment and transit dosimetry applications. The sensitivity, specificity, and clinical results for EPID dosimetry techniques are presented as well as examples of patient-related and machine-related error detection by these dosimetry solutions. Limitations and challenges in clinical implementation of EPIDs for dosimetric purposes are discussed and acceptance and rejection criteria are outlined. Potential causes of and evaluations of pre-treatment and transit dosimetry failures are discussed. Guidelines and recommendations developed in this report are based on the extensive published data on EPID QA along with the clinical experience of the TG-307 members. CONCLUSION: TG-307 focused on the commercially available EPID-based dosimetric tools and provides guidance for medical physicists in the clinical implementation of EPID-based patient-specific pre-treatment and transit dosimetry QA solutions including intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatments.

A bi-institutional multi-disciplinary failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) for a Co-60 based total body irradiation technique.

BACKGROUND: We aim to assess the risks associated with total body irradiation (TBI) delivered using a commercial dedicated Co-60 irradiator, and to evaluate inter-institutional and inter-professional variations in the estimation of these risks. METHODS: A failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) was generated using guidance from the AAPM TG-100 report for quantitative estimation of prospective risk metrics. Thirteen radiation oncology professionals from two institutions rated possible failure modes (FMs) for occurrence (O), severity (S), and detectability (D) indices to generate a risk priority number (RPN). The FMs were ranked by descending RPN value. Absolute gross differences (AGD) in resulting RPN values and Jaccard Index (JI; for the top 20 FMs) were calculated. The results were compared between professions and institutions. RESULTS: A total of 87 potential FMs (57, 15, 10, 3, and 2 for treatment, quality assurance, planning, simulation, and logistics respectively) were identified and ranked, with individual RPN ranging between 1-420 and mean RPN values ranging between 6 and 74. The two institutions shared 6 of their respective top 20 FMs. For various institutional and professional comparison pairs, the number of common FMs in the top 20 FMs ranged from 6 to 13, with JI values of 18-48%. For the top 20 FMs, the trend in inter-professional variability was institution-specific. The mean AGD values ranged between 12.5 and 74.5 for various comparison pairs. AGD values differed the most for medical physicists (MPs) in comparison to other specialties i.e. radiation oncologists (ROs) and radiation therapists (RTs) [MPs-vs-ROs: 36.3 (standard deviation SD = 34.1); MPs-vs-RTs: 41.2 (SD = 37.9); ROs-vs-RTs: 12.5 (SD = 10.8)]. Trends in inter-professional AGD values were similar for both institutions. CONCLUSION: This inter-institutional comparison provides prospective risk analysis for a new treatment delivery unit and illustrates the institution-specific nature of FM prioritization, primarily due to operational differences. Despite being subjective in nature, the FMEA is a valuable tool to ensure the identification of the most significant risks, particularly when implementing a novel treatment modality. The creation of a bi-institutional, multidisciplinary FMEA for this unique TBI technique has not only helped identify potential risks but also served as an opportunity to evaluate clinical and safety practices from the perspective of both multiple professional roles and different institutions.

Dosimetric evaluation of incorporating the revised V4.0 calibration protocol for breast intraoperative radiotherapy with the INTRABEAM system.

In breast-targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT) clinical trials (TARGIT-B, TARGIT-E, TARGIT-US), a single fraction of radiation is delivered to the tumor bed during surgery with 1.5- to 5.0-cm diameter spherical applicators and an INTRABEAM x-ray source (XRS). This factory-calibrated XRS is characterized by two depth-dose curves (DDCs) named "TARGIT" and "V4.0." Presently, the TARGIT DDC is used to treat patients enrolled in clinical trials; however, the V4.0 DDC is shown to better represent the delivered dose. Therefore, we reevaluate the delivered prescriptions under the TARGIT protocols using the V4.0 DDC. A 20-Gy dose was prescribed to the surface of the spherical applicator, and the TARGIT DDC was used to calculate the treatment time. For a constant treatment time, the V4.0 DDC was used to recalculate the dosimetry to evaluate differences in dose rate, dose, and equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions (EQD2) for an α/ß = 3.5 Gy (endpoint of locoregional relapse). At the surface of the tumor bed (i.e., spherical applicator surface), the calculations using the V4.0 DDC predicted increased values for dose rate (43-16%), dose (28.6-23.2 Gy), and EQD2 (95-31%) for the 1.5- to 5.0-cm diameter spherical applicator sizes, respectively. In general, dosimetric differences are greatest for the 1.5-cm diameter spherical applicator. The results from this study can be interpreted as a reevaluation of dosimetry or the dangers of underdosage, which can occur if the V4.0 DDC is inadvertently used for TARGIT clinical trial patients. Because the INTRABEAM system is used in TARGIT clinical trials, accurate knowledge about absorbed dose is essential for making meaningful comparisons between radiation treatment modalities, and reproducible treatment delivery is imperative. The results of this study shed light on these concerns.

Evaluation of the dosimetric impact of manufacturing variations for the INTRABEAM x-ray source.

INTRODUCTION: INTRABEAM x-ray sources (XRSs) have distinct output characteristics due to subtle variations between the ideal and manufactured products. The objective of this study is to intercompare 15 XRSs and to dosimetrically quantify the impact of manufacturing variations on the delivered dose. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The normality of the XRS datasets was evaluated with the Shapiro-Wilk test, the accuracy of the calibrated depth-dose curves (DDCs) was validated with ionization chamber measurements, and the shape of each DDC was evaluated using depth-dose ratios (DDRs). For 20 Gy prescribed to the spherical applicator surface, the dose was computed at 5-mm and 10-mm depths from the spherical applicator surface for all XRSs. RESULTS: At 5-, 10-, 20-, and 30-mm depths from the source, the coefficient of variation (CV) of the XRS output for 40 kVp was 4.4%, 2.8%, 2.0%, and 3.1% and for 50 kVp was 4.2%, 3.8%, 3.8%, and 3.4%, respectively. At a 20-mm depth from the source, the 40-kVp energy had a mean output in Gy/Minute = 0.36, standard deviation (SD) = 0.0072, minimum output = 0.34, and maximum output = 0.37 and a 50-kVp energy had a mean output = 0.56, SD = 0.021, minimum output = 0.52, and maximum output = 0.60. We noted the maximum DRR values of 2.8% and 2.5% for 40 kVp and 50 kVp, respectively. For all XRSs, the maximum dosimetric effect of these variations within a 10-mm depth of the applicator surface is ≤ 2.5%. The CV increased as depth increased and as applicator size decreased. CONCLUSION: The American Association of Physicist in Medicine Task Group-167 requires that the impurities in radionuclides used for brachytherapy produce ≤ 5.0% dosimetric variations. Because of differences in an XRS output and DDC, we have demonstrated the dosimetric variations within a 10-mm depth of the applicator surface to be ≤ 2.5%.

Dosimetric evaluation of the INTRABEAM system for breast intraoperative radiotherapy: A single-institution experience.

Breast intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) with the INTRABEAM system uses a 50 kV x-ray source to deliver a single fraction of radiation therapy to the lumpectomy cavity during breast-conserving surgery. We seek to perform a dosimetric analysis of the lumpectomy cavity for rigid spherical applicators. Water phantom measurements were acquired to validate the vendor-provided x-ray calibration. The planning target volume (PTV) was defined as a 10 mm expansion beyond the spherical applicator, a dose-volume histogram (DVH) was generated and dose-volume parameters [Dmin, D1mm, V90, V80, V50, HI] were reported. Additionally, the therapeutic treatment depth using the 90 and 80% isodose level was computed [R90, R80]. When the percent depth dose (PDD) is normalized to the surface of the applicator, smaller applicators have a steeper PDD. For a prescription dose of 20 Gy to the surface of the applicator, the range of dose-volume parameters for the PTV was: 3.15 to 6.84 Gy for Dmin, 16.2 to 17.6 Gy for D1mm, 2.6 to 6.9% for V90, 5.5 to 15.1% for V80, and 21.1 to 55.6% for V50. For applicators 15 to 50 mm in diameter, the reported values were: 6.35 to 2.9 for HI, 0.53 to 0.85 mm for R90, and 1.18 to 1.85 mm for R80. Smaller applicators have reduced PTV coverage but elevated HI because the attenuation of the beam proximal to the source is more pronounced. Additionally, the presence of the aluminum filter for small applicators (≤30 mm) increases PTV coverage but reduces the dose rate on the applicator surface. The delivery of IORT is performed in the OR without the use of image-based planning. To overcome this limitation, we have generated sample DVH's and report dosimetric parameters to offer clinicians a unique dosimetric perspective.

Dosimetric evaluation of Point A and volume-based high-dose-rate plans: a single institution study on adaptive brachytherapy planning for cervical cancer.

PURPOSE: External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy (BT) with concurrent cisplatin is the standard of care for locally advanced cervical cancer. The applicability of image-guided adaptive volume-based high-dose-rate (HDR) intracavitary brachytherapy planning is an active area of investigation. In this study, we examined whether volume-based HDR-BT (HDRVOL) plans leads to more conformal plans compared to Point A (HDRPointA)-based plans. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred and forty HDRPointA plans from 48 cervical cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy were retrospectively collected. Point A plans were renormalized with respect to the high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) for the HDRVOL plans. The doses to organs at risk (OAR; rectum, sigmoid, and bladder), and HR-CTV and the conformal index were compared between HDRPointA and HDRVOL plans. RESULTS: HDRVOL plans resulted in a 6-12% reduction in the total dose (EBRT + HDR-BT) to 0.1 cc, 1.0 cc, and 2.0 cc of the OAR as well as an 8-37% reduction in the dose to 2 cc of OAR per HDR-BT fraction compared to HDRPointA plans. Differences in the conformal indexes between the two groups of plans showed an 18-31% relative increase per HDR-BT fraction for HDRVOL plans. The D90 of the HR-CTV was reduced by 11% by HDRVOL planning and had a median dose of 86 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Our study reports the relative improvement in OAR doses per HDR-BT fraction by HDRVOL planning compared to HDRPointA planning and demonstrates the dosimetric advantages of volume-based HDR-BT planning in creating more conformal plans.

Commissioning of a dedicated commercial Co-60 total body irradiation unit.

We describe the commissioning of the first dedicated commercial total body irradiation (TBI) unit in clinical operation. The Best Theratronics GammaBeam 500 is a Co-60 teletherapy unit with extended field size and imaging capabilities. Radiation safety, mechanical and imaging systems, and radiation output are characterized. Beam data collection, calibration, and external dosimetric validation are described. All radiation safety and mechanical tests satisfied relevant requirements and measured dose distributions meet recommendations of American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Report #17. At a typical treatment distance, the dose rate in free space per unit source activity using the thick flattening filter is 1.53 × 10-3 cGy*min-1 *Ci-1 . With a 14,000 Ci source, the resulting dose rate at the midplane of a typical patient is approximately 17 and 30 cGy/min using the thick and thin flattening filters, respectively, using the maximum source to couch distance. The maximum useful field size, defined by the 90% isodose line, at this location is 225 × 78 cm with field flatness within 5% over the central 178 × 73 cm. Measured output agreed with external validation within 0.5%. End-to-end testing was performed in a modified Rando phantom. In-house MATLAB software was developed to calculate patient-specific dose distributions using DOSXYZnrc, and fabricate custom 3D-printed forms for creating patient-specific lung blocks. End-to-end OSLD and diode measurements both with and without lung blocks agreed with Monte Carlo calculated doses to within 5% and in-phantom film measurements validated dose distribution uniformity. Custom lung block transmission measurements agree well with design criteria and provide clinically favorable dose distributions within the lungs. Block placement is easily facilitated using the flat panel imaging system with an exposure time of 0.01 min. In conclusion, a novel dedicated TBI unit has been commissioned and clinically implemented. Its mechanical, dosimetric, and imaging capabilities are suitable to provide state-of-the-art TBI for patients as large as 220 cm in height and 78 cm in width.

Single fraction radiosurgery/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for spine metastasis: A dosimetric comparison of multiple delivery platforms.

There are numerous commercial radiotherapy systems capable of delivering single fraction spine radiosurgery/SBRT. We aim to compare the capabilities of several of these systems to deliver this treatment when following standardized criteria from a national protocol. Four distinct target lesions representing various case presentations of spine metastases were contoured in both the thoracic and lumbar spine of an anthropomorphic SBRT phantom. Single fraction radiosurgery/SBRT plans were designed for each target with each of our treatment platforms. Plans were prescribed to 16 Gy in one fraction to cover 90% of the target volume using normal tissue and target constraints from RTOG 0631. We analyzed these plans with priority on the dose to 10% of the partial spinal cord and dose to 0.03 cc of the spinal cord. Each system was able to maintain 90% target coverage while meeting all the constraints of RTOG 0631. On average, CyberKnife was able to achieve the lowest spinal cord doses overall and also generated the sharpest dose falloff as indicated by the Paddick gradient index. Treatment times varied widely depending on the modality utilized. On average, treatment can be delivered faster with Flattening Filter Free RapidArc and Tomotherapy, compared to Vero and Cyberknife. While all systems analyzed were able to meet the dose constraints of RTOG 0631, unique characteristics of individual treatment modalities may guide modality selection. Specifically, certain modalities performed better than the others for specific target shapes and locations, and delivery time varied significantly among the different modalities. These findings could provide guidance in determining which of the available modalities would be preferable for the treatment of spine metastases based on individualized treatment goals.

Helical Therapy is Safe for Lung Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Despite Limitations in Achieving Sharp Dose Gradients.

PURPOSE: We observed that many of our helical therapy lung stereotactic body radiation therapy plans did not meet the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) recommended R50% (volume of 50% of the prescription dose/planning target volume), which characterizes the steepness of dose fall off. We hypothesized that despite not meeting R50%, helical therapy lung stereotactic body radiation therapy plans would confer similar local control and minimal side effects as previously reported using nonhelical treatment platforms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We report a retrospective review of all consecutive patients treated off-protocol with stereotactic body radiation therapy for peripheral lung lesions from 2008 to 2013 utilizing helical therapy. Seventy-four patients (81 lesions and 79 plans) were treated with doses ranging from 48 to 60 Gy in 3 to 5 fractions prescribed to the edge of the planning target volume. RESULTS: Forty-eight (61%) plans had major deviation from R50%. Only 1 (<1%) plan had a major deviation from the R100%. All plans had > 95% planning target volume coverage by prescription dose, 7(8.6%) plans with 121% to 133% maximum dose, and lung V20 Gy <10% in 70 (89%) plans. With a median follow-up of 4.7 years (95% confidence interval: 4.1-5.3), local control for all patients at 1, 2, and 5 years was 94.6%, 83.4%, and 74%, respectively. For patients with primary stage I-II lung cancer (n = 46), the 1, 2, and 5-year local control: 97.2%, 94.2%, and 86.9%; RC: 97.6%, 82.5%, and 69.5%; and DM: 3%, 16%, and 33.4%, respectively. Patients treated for lung metastases (n = 26) had worse local control at 1, 2, and 5 years: 94.4%, 69.3%, and 55.5%, respectively. Side effects were rare with 2 (3%) patients reporting chest wall pain and 6 (8%) patients experiencing radiation pneumonitis, including 1 patient who had grade 5 radiation pneumonitis. CONCLUSIONS: Helical therapy delivers a safe and effective lung stereotactic body radiation therapy plan, despite not being able to meet RTOG's recommended R50 conformality constraint.

A comprehensive evaluation of adaptive daily planning for cervical cancer HDR brachytherapy.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate adaptive daily planning for cervi-cal cancer patients who underwent high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy (HDR-BT) using comprehensive interfractional organ motion measurements. This study included 22 cervical cancer patients who underwent 5 fractions of HDR-BT. Regions of interest (ROIs) including high-risk clinical tumor volume (HR-CTV) and organs at risk (OARs) were manually contoured on daily CT images. All patients were clinically treated with adaptive daily plans (ADP), which involved ROI delineation and dose optimization at each treatment fraction. Single treatment plans (SP) were retrospectively generated by applying the first treatment fraction's dwell times adjusted for decay and dwell positions of the applicator to subsequent treatment fractions. Various existing similarity metrics were calculated for the ROIs to quantify interfractional organ variations. A novel similarity (JRARM) score was established, which combined both volumetric overlap metrics (DSC, JSC, and RVD) and distance metrics (ASD, MSD, and RMSD). Linear regression was performed to determine a relationship between interfractional organ varia-tions of various similarity metrics and D2cc variations from both plans. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to assess ADP and SP by comparing EQD2 D2cc (α/ß = 3) for OARs. For interfractional organ variations, the sigmoid demonstrated the greatest variations based on the JRARM, DSC, and RMSD metrics. Comparisons between paired ROIs showed differences in metrics at each treatment fraction. RVD, MSD, and RMSD were found to be significantly correlated to D2cc varia-tions for bladder and sigmoid. The comparison between plans found ADP provided lower EQD2 D2cc of OARs than SP. Specifically, the sigmoid demonstrated sta-tistically significant dose variations (p = 0.015). Substantial interfractional organ motion occurs during HDR-BT based on comprehensive measurements and may significantly affect D2cc of OARs. Adaptive daily planning provides improved dose sparing for OARs compared to single planning with the extent of sparing being different among OARs.

Dosimetric evaluation of total marrow irradiation using 2 different planning systems.

This study compared 2 different treatment planning systems (TPSs) for quality and efficiency of total marrow irradiation (TMI) plans. The TPSs used in this study were VOxel-Less Optimization (VoLO) (Accuray Inc, Sunnyvale, CA) using helical dose delivery on a Tomotherapy Hi-Art treatment unit and Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems Inc, Palo Alto, CA) using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) dose delivery on a Varian iX treatment unit. A total dose of 1200cGy was prescribed to cover 95% of the planning target volume (PTV). The plans were optimized and calculated based on a single CT data and structure set using the Alderson Rando phantom (The Phantom Laboratory, Salem, NY) and physician contoured target and organ at risk (OAR) volumes. The OARs were lungs, heart, liver, kidneys, brain, and small bowel. The plans were evaluated based on plan quality, time to optimize the plan and calculate the dose, and beam on time. The resulting mean and maximum doses to the PTV were 1268 and 1465cGy for VoLO and 1284 and 1541cGy for Eclipse, respectively. For 5 of 6 OAR structures the VoLO system achieved lower mean and D10 doses ranging from 22% to 52% and 3% to 44%, respectively. Total computational time including only optimization and dose calculation were 0.9 hours for VoLO and 3.8 hours for Eclipse. These times do not include user-dependent target delineation and field setup. Both planning systems are capable of creating high-quality plans for total marrow irradiation. The VoLO planning system was able to achieve more uniform dose distribution throughout the target volume and steeper dose fall off, resulting in superior OAR sparing. VoLO׳s graphics processing unit (GPU)-based optimization and dose calculation algorithm also allowed much faster creation of TMI plans.

The American Society for Radiation Oncology's 2015 Core Physics Curriculum for Radiation Oncology Residents.

PURPOSE: The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Physics Core Curriculum Subcommittee (PCCSC) has updated the recommended physics curriculum for radiation oncology resident education to improve consistency in teaching, intensity, and subject matter. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The ASTRO PCCSC is composed of physicists and physicians involved in radiation oncology residency education. The PCCSC updated existing sections within the curriculum, created new sections, and attempted to provide additional clinical context to the curricular material through creation of practical clinical experiences. Finally, we reviewed the American Board of Radiology (ABR) blueprint of examination topics for correlation with this curriculum. RESULTS: The new curriculum represents 56 hours of resident physics didactic education, including a 4-hour initial orientation. The committee recommends completion of this curriculum at least twice to assure both timely presentation of material and re-emphasis after clinical experience. In addition, practical clinical physics and treatment planning modules were created as a supplement to the didactic training. Major changes to the curriculum include addition of Fundamental Physics, Stereotactic Radiosurgery/Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy, and Safety and Incidents sections, and elimination of the Radiopharmaceutical Physics and Dosimetry and Hyperthermia sections. Simulation and Treatment Verification and optional Research and Development in Radiation Oncology sections were also added. A feedback loop was established with the ABR to help assure that the physics component of the ABR radiation oncology initial certification examination remains consistent with this curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: The ASTRO physics core curriculum for radiation oncology residents has been updated in an effort to identify the most important physics topics for preparing residents for careers in radiation oncology, to reflect changes in technology and practice since the publication of previous recommended curricula, and to provide practical training modules in clinical radiation oncology physics and treatment planning. The PCCSC is committed to keeping the curriculum current and consistent with the ABR examination blueprint.

Modeling the Agility MLC in the Monaco treatment planning system.

We investigate the relationship between the various parameters in the Monaco MLC model and dose calculation accuracy for an Elekta Agility MLC. The vendor-provided MLC modeling procedure - completed first with external vendor participation and then exclusively in-house - was used in combination with our own procedures to investigate several sets of MLC modeling parameters to determine their effect on dose distributions and point-dose measurements. Simple plans provided in the vendor procedure were used to elucidate specific mechanical characteristics of the MLC, while ten complex treatment plans - five IMRT and five VMAT - created using TG-119-based structure sets were used to test clinical dosimetric effects of particular parameter choices. EDR2 film was used for the vendor fields to give high spatial resolution, while a combination of MapCHECK and ion chambers were used for the in-house TG-119-based proced-ures. The vendor-determined parameter set provided a reasonable starting point for the MLC model and largely delivered acceptable gamma pass rates for clinical plans - including a passing external evaluation using the IROC H&N phantom. However, the vendor model did not provide point-dose accuracy consistent with that seen in other treatment systems at our center. Through further internal testing it was found that there existed many sets of MLC parameters, often at opposite ends of their allowable ranges, that provided similar dosimetric characteristics and good agreement with planar and point-dose measurements. In particular, the leaf offset and tip leakage parameters compensated for one another if adjusted in opposite directions, which provided a level curve of acceptable parameter sets across all plans. Interestingly, gamma pass rates of the plans were less dependent upon parameter choices than point-dose measurements, suggesting that MLC modeling using only gamma evaluation may be generally an insufficient approach. It was also found that exploring all parameters of the very robust MLC model to find the best match to the vendor-provided QA fields can reduce the pass rates of the TG-119-based clinical distributions as compared to simpler models. A wide variety of parameter sets produced MLC models capable of meeting RPC passing criteria for their H&N IMRT phantom. The most accurate models were achievable using a combination of vendor-provided and in-house procedures. The potential existed for an over-modeling of the Agility MLC in an effort to obtain the fine structure of certain quality assurance fields, which led to a reduction in agreement between calculation and measurement of more typical clinical dose distributions.

Limitations of the bowel bag contouring technique in the definitive treatment of cervical cancer.

PURPOSE: Incidence of acute grade 3 and 4 small bowel toxicity in the definitive treatment of cervical cancer is approximately 15%. Given uncertainties in position of the bowel at time of treatment, techniques including the contouring of a bowel bag have been suggested. The purpose of this study is to describe interfraction variability in bowel location for the female pelvis with intact reproductive organs and to characterize the ability of the bowel bag technique, as described in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group pelvic normal tissue contouring guidelines, to account for organ motion in this specific clinical setting. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Bowel position was assessed for 45 computed tomographic scans used in treatment planning for 9 consecutive cervical cancer patients. After a single operator contoured bowel loops, most superior, anterior, posterior, and inferior positions of bowel were recorded. Mixed effects models were used to assess significance of interfraction variability. Frequency of bowel loop migration outside of the bowel bag was then considered for each patient given all potential bowel bag volumes. Standardized scoring was used to determine additional margins that would be required to account for 95%, 90%, and 85% of significant bowel motion. RESULTS: Interfraction variability in the inferior-most bowel position was significant (P = .002). Median maximum variation in the inferior bowel position was 2.1 cm (range, 0.9 cm-4.8 cm). When applying the bowel bag technique, 100% of bowel motion was accounted for as the bowel translated laterally, anteriorly, posteriorly, and superiorly, though accounted for just 70.3% of motion in the inferior direction. A 4-cm inferior margin was required to account for 90% of motion in the inferior direction. CONCLUSIONS: In the intact female pelvis, the bowel bag technique is successful in accounting for most interfraction variability in bowel position but underestimates inferior motion. Until an improved approach to predicting small bowel motion can be routinely implemented, a focus on decreasing dose to potential bowel space should be emphasized.

Correlation of admissions statistics to graduate student success in medical physics.

The purpose of this work is to develop metrics for evaluation of medical physics graduate student performance, assess relationships between success and other quantifiable factors, and determine whether graduate student performance can be accurately predicted by admissions statistics. A cohort of 108 medical physics graduate students from a single institution were rated for performance after matriculation based on final scores in specific courses, first year graduate Grade Point Average (GPA), performance on the program exit exam, performance in oral review sessions, and faculty rating. Admissions statistics including matriculating program (MS vs. PhD); undergraduate degree type, GPA, and country; graduate degree; general and subject GRE scores; traditional vs. nontraditional status; and ranking by admissions committee were evaluated for potential correlation with the performance metrics. GRE verbal and quantitative scores were correlated with higher scores in the most difficult courses in the program and with the program exit exam; however, the GRE section most correlated with overall faculty rating was the analytical writing section. Students with undergraduate degrees in engineering had a higher faculty rating than those from other disciplines and faculty rating was strongly correlated with undergraduate country. Undergraduate GPA was not statistically correlated with any success metrics investigated in this study. However, the high degree of selection on GPA and quantitative GRE scores during the admissions process results in relatively narrow ranges for these quantities. As such, these results do not necessarily imply that one should not strongly consider traditional metrics, such as undergraduate GPA and quantitative GRE score, during the admissions process. They suggest that once applicants have been initially filtered by these metrics, additional selection should be performed via the other metrics shown here to be correlated with success. The parameters used to make admissions decisions for our program are accurate in predicting student success, as illustrated by the very strong statistical correlation between admissions rank and course average, first year graduate GPA, and faculty rating (p < 0.002). Overall, this study indicates that an undergraduate degree in physics should not be considered a fundamental requirement for entry into our program and that within the relatively narrow range of undergraduate GPA and quantitative GRE scores of those admitted into our program, additional variations in these metrics are not important predictors of success. While the high degree of selection on particular statistics involved in the admissions process, along with the relatively small sample size, makes it difficult to draw concrete conclusions about the meaning of correlations here, these results suggest that success in medical physics is based on more than quantitative capabilities. Specifically, they indicate that analytical and communication skills play a major role in student success in our program, as well as predicted future success by program faculty members. Finally, this study confirms that our current admissions process is effective in identifying candidates who will be successful in our program and are expected to be successful after graduation, and provides additional insight useful in improving our admissions selection process.

Lung SBRT: dosimetric and delivery comparison of RapidArc, TomoTherapy, and IMR.

This study seeks to compare fixed-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (FF IMRT), RapidArc (RA), and helical tomotherapy (HT) to discover the optimal treatment modality to deliver SBRT to the peripheral lung. Eight patients with peripheral primary lung cancer were reviewed. Plans were prescribed a dose of 48 Gy and optimized similarly with heterogeneity corrections. Plan quality was assessed using conformality index (CI100%), homogeneity index (HI), the ratio of the 50% isodose volume to PTV (R50%) to assess intermediate dose spillage, and normal tissue constraints. Delivery efficiency was evaluated using treatment time and MUs. Dosimetric accuracy was assessed using gamma index (3% dose difference, 3 mm DTA, 10% threshold), and measured with a PTW ARRAY seven29 and OCTAVIUS phantom. CI100%, HI, and R50% were lowest for HT compared to seven-field coplanar IMRT and two-arc coplanar RA (p < 0.05). Normal tissue constraints were met for all modalities, except maximum rib dose due to close proximity to the PTV. RA reduced delivery time by 60% compared to HT, and 40% when compared to FF IMRT. RA also reduced the mean MUs by 77% when compared to HT, and by 22% compared to FF IMRT. All modalities can be delivered accurately, with mean QA pass rates over 97%. For peripheral lung SBRT treatments, HT performed better dosimetrically, reducing maximum rib dose, as well as improving dose conformity and uniformity. RA and FF IMRT plan quality was equivalent to HT for patients with minimal or no overlap of the PTV with the chest wall, but was reduced for patients with a larger overlap. RA and IMRT were equivalent, but the reduced treatment times of RA make it a more efficient modality.

Dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy treatment plans for total marrow irradiation created using GPU and CPU dose calculation engines.

PURPOSE: To compare optimization characteristics, plan quality, and treatment delivery efficiency between total marrow irradiation (TMI) plans using the new TomoTherapy graphic processing unit (GPU) based dose engine and CPU/cluster based dose engine. METHODS: Five TMI plans created on an anthropomorphic phantom were optimized and calculated with both dose engines. The planning treatment volume (PTV) included all the bones from head to mid femur except for upper extremities. Evaluated organs at risk (OAR) consisted of lung, liver, heart, kidneys, and brain. The following treatment parameters were used to generate the TMI plans: field widths of 2.5 and 5 cm, modulation factors of 2 and 2.5, and pitch of either 0.287 or 0.43. The optimization parameters were chosen based on the PTV and OAR priorities and the plans were optimized with a fixed number of iterations. The PTV constraint was selected to ensure that at least 95% of the PTV received the prescription dose. The plans were evaluated based on D80 and D50 (dose to 80% and 50% of the OAR volume, respectively) and hotspot volumes within the PTVs. Gamma indices (Γ) were also used to compare planar dose distributions between the two modalities. The optimization and dose calculation times were compared between the two systems. The treatment delivery times were also evaluated. RESULTS: The results showed very good dosimetric agreement between the GPU and CPU calculated plans for any of the evaluated planning parameters indicating that both systems converge on nearly identical plans. All D80 and D50 parameters varied by less than 3% of the prescription dose with an average difference of 0.8%. A gamma analysis Γ(3%, 3 mm) < 1 of the GPU plan resulted in over 90% of calculated voxels satisfying Γ < 1 criterion as compared to baseline CPU plan. The average number of voxels meeting the Γ < 1 criterion for all the plans was 97%. In terms of dose optimization/calculation efficiency, there was a 20-fold reduction in planning time with the new GPU system. The average optimization/dose calculation time utilizing the traditional CPU/cluster based system was 579 vs 26.8 min for the GPU based system. There was no difference in the calculated treatment delivery time per fraction. Beam-on time varied based on field width and pitch and ranged between 15 and 28 min. CONCLUSIONS: The TomoTherapy GPU based dose engine is capable of calculating TMI treatment plans with plan quality nearly identical to plans calculated using the traditional CPU/cluster based system, while significantly reducing the time required for optimization and dose calculation.

Effects of dose scaling on delivery quality assurance in tomotherapy.

Delivery quality assurance (DQA) of tomotherapy plans is routinely performed with silver halide film which has a limited range due to the effects of saturation. DQA plans with dose values exceeding this limit require the dose of the entire plan to be scaled downward if film is used, to evaluate the dose distribution in two dimensions. The potential loss of fidelity between scaled and unscaled DQA plans as a function of dose scaling is investigated. Three treatment plans for 12 Gy fractions designed for SBRT of the lung were used to create DQA procedures that were scaled between 100% and 10%. The dose was measured with an ionization chamber array and compared to values from the tomotherapy treatment planning system. Film and cylindrical ion chamber measurements were also made for one patient for scaling factors of 50% to 10% to compare with the ionization chamber array measurements. The array results show the average gamma pass rate is ≥ 99% from 100% to 30% scaling. The average gamma pass rate falls to 93.6% and 51.1% at 20% and 10% scaling, respectively. Film analysis yields similar pass rates. Cylindrical ion chambers did not exhibit significant variation with dose scaling, but only represent points in the low gradient region of the dose distribution. Scaling the dose changes the mechanics of the radiation delivery, as well as the signal-to-noise ratio. Treatment plans which exhibit parameters that differ significantly from those common to DQA plans studied in this paper may exhibit different behavior. Dose scaling should be limited to the smallest degree possible. Planar information, such as that from film or a detector array, is required. The results show that it is not necessary to perform both a scaled and unscaled DQA plan for the treatment plans considered here.

An independent dose calculation algorithm for MLC-based radiotherapy including the spatial dependence of MLC transmission.

An analytical dose calculation algorithm was developed and commissioned to calculate dose delivered with both static and dynamic multileaf collimator (MLC) in a homogenous phantom. The algorithm is general; however, it was designed specifically to accurately model dose for large and complex IMRT fields. For such fields the delivered dose may have a considerable contribution from MLC transmission, which is dependent upon spatial considerations. Specifically, the algorithm models different MLC effects, such as interleaf transmission, the tongue-and-groove effect, rounded leaf ends, MLC scatter, beam hardening and divergence of the beam, which results in a gradual MLC transmission fall-off with increasing off-axis distance. The calculated dose distributions were compared to measured dose using different methods (film, ionization chamber array, single ionization chamber), and the differences among the treatment planning system, the measurements and the developed algorithm were analysed for static MLC and dynamic IMRT fields. It was found that the calculated dose from the developed algorithm agrees very well with the measurements (mostly within 1.5%) and that a constant value for MLC transmission is insufficient to accurately predict dose for large targets and complex IMRT plans with many monitor units.