Search

Purpose: To quantify the clinical practice of respiratory motion management in radiation oncology. Methods: A respiratory motion management survey was designed and conducted based on clinician survey guidelines. The survey was administered to American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) members on 17 August 2020 and closed on 13 September 2020. Results: A total of 527 respondents completed the entire survey and 651 respondents completed part of the survey, with the partially completed surveys included in the analysis. Overall, 84% of survey respondents used deep inspiration breath hold for left-sided breast cancer. Overall, 83% of respondents perceived respiratory motion management for thoracic and abdominal cancer radiotherapy patients to be either very important or required. Overall, 95% of respondents used respiratory motion management for thoracic and abdominal sites, with 36% of respondents using respiratory motion management for at least 90% of thoracic and abdominal patients. The majority (60%) of respondents used the internal target volume method to treat thoracic and abdominal cancer patients, with 25% using breath hold or abdominal compression and 13% using gating or tracking. Conclusions: A respiratory motion management survey has been completed by AAPM members. Respiratory motion management is generally considered very important or required and is widely used for breast, thoracic, and abdominal cancer treatments.

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

The field of radiation oncology has recently experienced a period of remarkable transformation of our technical capabilities. These technical and computational advancements have resulted in a tremendous improvement in our ability to precisely and accurately deliver radiation dose. However, this increased emphasis on technical capabilities may be inadvertently diverting attention and funding from scientific developments in other areas, even at a time when exciting new advances are occurring in cancer biology. Much of our recent technical development has been promoted and subsidized by the manufacturers of radiation oncology equipment. The question now becomes “who will encourage and subsidize the research needed to bring our recent biological advances to clinical fruition?” In a recent commentary which inspired this debate, Brown and Adler suggest that we “…are in a golden age of radiation and cancer biology” and that “…the industry's current focus on equipment development alone is undermining significant potential clinical advances in radiation oncology.”3 This is the subject of this month's 3DCRT debate. Arguing for the proposition will be Drs. Leonard Kim, Stephanie Markovina, and Samantha Van Nest. Dr. Leonard Kim has worked on defining microscopic disease target volumes for breast cancer radiotherapy at William Beaumont Hospital and Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey. He is currently Chief Medical Physicist at the MD Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper. Dr. Stephanie Markovina is interested in improving therapeutic response to radiation in cervical cancer and other solid tumors by better understanding molecular mechanisms of radiation induced tumor cell death and survival. She is an Assistant Professor of Radiation Oncology and Cancer Biology at Washington University in St Louis where she specializes primarily in the treatment of patients with gynecologic cancers. Dr. Samantha Van Nest has worked to establish spectroscopic techniques for the personalization of radiation therapy. She is currently a Postdoctoral Associate at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York, where her research investigates the effects of radiation on tumor immunity, with a particular focus on improving our understanding of the abscopal effect. Arguing against the proposition will be Drs. Subarna Eisaman, Lakshmi Santanam, and Julie Sullivan. Dr. Subarna Hamid Eisaman is the clinical director and assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) Hillman Cancer Center Department of Radiation Oncology at the J. Murtha Pavilion in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. She serves as co‐chair of the Radiation Oncology Lung and Lymphoma Via Oncology Pathways Physician Advisory Committee. Her clinical practice includes treatment of breast, GYN, lung, CNS, head and neck, skin and musculoskeletal malignancies. Dr. Lakshmi Santanam is an attending medical physicist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Her primary interests include motion management and patient safety. She currently serves as vice chair for the AAPM Working Group on RO‐ILS and the Task Group on the Management of Respiratory Motion in Radiation Oncology. Dr. Julie Sullivan is a biologist at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Her scientific interests include the use of radiation‐emitting medical devices in clinical trials and the medical planning for and response to radiological and nuclear incidents.

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

With the advancement of data-intensive technologies, such as image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), the amount and complexity of data to be transferred between clinical subsystems have increased beyond the reach of manual checking. As a result, unintended treatment deviations (e.g., dose errors) may occur if the treatment system is not closely monitored by a comprehensive data transfer quality management program (QM). This report summarizes the findings and recommendations from the task group (TG) on quality assurance (QA) of external beam treatment data transfer (TG-201), with the aim to assist medical physicists in designing their own data transfer QM. As a background, a section of this report describes various models of data flow (distributed data repositories and single data base systems) and general data test characteristics (data integrity, interpretation, and consistency). Recommended tests are suggested based on the collective experience of TG-201 members. These tests are for the acceptance of, commissioning of, and upgrades to subsystems that store and/or modify clinical treatment data. As treatment complexity continues to evolve, we will need to do and know more about ensuring the quality of data transfers. The report concludes with the recommendation to move toward data transfer open standards compatibility and to develop tools that automate data transfer QA.

Purpose We describe the acceptance testing, commissioning, periodic quality assurance, and workflow procedures developed for the first clinically implemented magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiation therapy (MR-IGRT) system for real-time tracking and beam control. Methods The system utilizes real-time cine imaging capabilities at 4 frames per second for real-time tracking and beam control. Testing of the system was performed using an in-house developed motion platform and a commercially available motion phantom. Anatomical tracking is performed by first identifying a target (a region of interest that is either tissue to be treated or a critical structure) and generating a contour around it. A boundary contour is also created to identify tracking margins. The tracking algorithm deforms the anatomical contour (target or a normal organ) on every subsequent cine frame and compares it to the static boundary contour. If the anatomy of interest moves outside the boundary, the radiation delivery is halted until the tracked anatomy returns to treatment portal. The following were performed to validate and clinically implement the system: (a) spatial integrity evaluation; (b) tracking accuracy; (c) latency; (d) relative point dose and spatial dosimetry; (e) development of clinical workflow for gating; and (f) independent verification by an outside credentialing service. Results The spatial integrity of the MR system was found to be within 2 mm over a 45-cm diameter field-of-view. The tracking accuracy for geometric targets was within 1.2 mm. The average system latency was measured to be within 394 ms. The dosimetric accuracy using ionization chambers was within 1.3% ± 1.7%, and the dosimetric spatial accuracy was within 2 mm. The phantom irradiation for the outside credentialing service had satisfactory results, as well. Conclusions The first clinical MR-IGRT system was validated for real-time tracking and gating capabilities and shown to be reliable and accurate. Patient workflow methods were developed for efficient treatment. Periodic quality assurance tests can be efficiently performed with commercially available equipment to ensure accurate system performance.

A substantial barrier to the single-and multi-institutional aggregation of data to supporting clinical trials, practice quality improvement efforts, and development of big data analytics resource systems is the lack of standardized nomenclatures for expressing dosimetric data. To address this issue, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 263 was charged with providing nomenclature guidelines and values in radiation oncology for use in clinical trials, data-pooling initiatives, population-based studies, and routine clinical care by standardizing: (1) structure names across image processing and treatment planning system platforms; (2) nomenclature for dosimetric data (eg, doseevolume histogram [DVH]-based metrics); (3) templates for clinical trial groups and users of an initial subset of software platforms to facilitate adoption of the standards; (4) formalism for nomenclature schema, which can accommodate the addition of other structures defined in the future. A multisociety, multidisciplinary, multinational group of 57 members representing stake holders ranging from large academic centers to community clinics and vendors was assembled, including physicists, physicians, dosimetrists, and vendors. The stakeholder groups represented in the membership included the AAPM, American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), NRG Oncology, European Society for Radiation Oncology (ESTRO), Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), Children's Oncology Group (COG), Integrating Healthcare Enterprise in Radiation Oncology (IHE-RO), and Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine working group (DICOM WG); A nomenclature system for target and organ at risk volumes and DVH nomenclature was developed and piloted to demonstrate viability across a range of clinics and within the framework of clinical trials. The final report was approved by AAPM in October 2017. The approval process included review by 8 AAPM committees, with additional review by ASTRO, European Society for Radiation Oncology (ESTRO), and American Association of Medical Dosimetrists (AAMD). This Executive Summary of the report highlights the key recommendations for clinical practice, research, and trials. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Purpose: Magnetokinetic changes may affect crystal orientation and polymerization within the active layer of radiochromic film (RCF). This effect is investigated in a magnetic resonance image-guided radiotherapy unit within the context of film dosimetry. Methods: Gafchromic EBT2 RCF was irradiated in a 30 × 30 × 30 cm3 solid water phantom using a Co-60 MRI guided radiotherapy system (B = 0.35 T) under normal operating conditions, and under the exact conditions and setup without a magnetic field. Fifteen 20.3 × 25.4 cm2 EBT2 film sheets were placed at three different depths (d = 0.5, 5, and 10 cm) using five different treatment plans. The plans were computed using the MRIdian (ViewRay, Inc.) treatment planning system to deliver doses between 0 and 17.6 Gy. Films were analyzed before and after irradiation to obtain the net optical density (netOD) for each color channel separately. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images were obtained to compare the active layer of selected samples. Results: The results indicated that the red channel netOD decreased between 0.013 and 0.123 (average of 0.060 ± 0.033) for doses above 2.8 Gy, with a linear increase in this effect for higher doses. Green channel netOD showed similar results with a decrease between 0.012 and 0.105 (average of 0.041 ± 0.027) for doses above 3.5 Gy. The blue channel showed the weakest effect with a netOD decrease between 0.013 and 0.029 (average of 0.020 ± 0.006) for doses above 8.0 Gy. SEM images show changes in crystal orientation within active layer in RCF exposed in a magnetic field. Conclusions: The presence of a magnetic field affects crystal orientation and polymerization during irradiation, where netOD decreased by an average of 8.7%, 8.0%, and 4.3% in the red, green, and blue channels, respectively. The under response was dependent on dose and differed by up to 15% at 17.6 Gy.

The purpose of this study is to describe the comprehensive commissioning process and initial clinical experience of the Mevion S250 proton therapy system, a gantry‐mounted, single‐room proton therapy platform clinically implemented in the S. Lee Kling Proton Therapy Center at Barnes‐Jewish Hospital in St. Louis, MO, USA. The Mevion S250 system integrates a compact synchrocyclotron with a C‐inner gantry, an image guidance system and a 6D robotic couch into a beam delivery platform. We present our commissioning process and initial clinical experience, including i) CT calibration; ii) beam data acquisition and machine characteristics; iii) dosimetric commissioning of the treatment planning system; iv) validation through the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core credentialing process, including irradiations on the spine, prostate, brain, and lung phantoms; v) evaluation of localization accuracy of the image guidance system; and vi) initial clinical experience. Clinically, the system operates well and has provided an excellent platform for the treatment of diseases with protons. PACS number(s): 87.55.ne, 87.56.bd

Purpose: To characterize the performance of the onboard imaging unit for the first clinical magnetic resonance image guided radiation therapy (MR-IGRT) system. Methods: The imaging performance characterization included four components: ACR (the American College of Radiology) phantom test, spatial integrity, coil signal to noise ratio (SNR) and uniformity, and magnetic field homogeneity. The ACR phantom test was performed in accordance with the ACR phantom test guidance. The spatial integrity test was evaluated using a 40.8 × 40.8 × 40.8 cm{sup 3} spatial integrity phantom. MR and computed tomography (CT) images of the phantom were acquired and coregistered. Objects were identified around the surfaces of 20 and 35 cm diameters of spherical volume (DSVs) on both the MR and CT images. Geometric distortion was quantified using deviation in object location between the MR and CT images. The coil SNR test was performed according to the national electrical manufacturers association (NEMA) standards MS-1 and MS-9. The magnetic field homogeneity test was measured using field camera and spectral peak methods. Results: For the ACR tests, the slice position error was less than 0.10 cm, the slice thickness error was less than 0.05 cm, the resolved high-contrast spatial resolution was 0.09 cm, the resolvedmore » low-contrast spokes were more than 25, the image intensity uniformity was above 93%, and the percentage ghosting was less than 0.22%. All were within the ACR recommended specifications. The maximum geometric distortions within the 20 and 35 cm DSVs were 0.10 and 0.18 cm for high spatial resolution three-dimensional images and 0.08 and 0.20 cm for high temporal resolution two dimensional cine images based on the distance-to-phantom-center method. The average SNR was 12.0 for the body coil, 42.9 for the combined torso coil, and 44.0 for the combined head and neck coil. Magnetic field homogeneities at gantry angles of 0°, 30°, 60°, 90°, and 120° were 23.55, 20.43, 18.76, 19.11, and 22.22 ppm, respectively, using the field camera method over the 45 cm DSV. Conclusions: The onboard imaging unit of the first commercial MR-IGRT system meets ACR, NEMA, and vendor specifications.« less

A device for MRI-guided radiation therapy (MR-IGRT) that uses cobalt-60 sources to deliver intensity modulated radiation therapy is now commercially available. We investigated the performance of the treatment planning and delivery system against the benchmark recommended by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 119 for IMRT commissioning and demonstrated that the device plans and delivers IMRT treatments within recommended confidence limits and with similar accuracy as linac IMRT.

Purpose The Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System (RO-ILS) receives event reports from facilities across the country. This effort extracted common error pathways seen in the data. These pathways, expressed as fault trees, demonstrate the need for, and opportunities for, preventing these errors and/or limiting their propagation to treatment. Methods and materials As of the third quarter of 2016, 2344 event reports had been submitted to RO-ILS and reviewed. A total of 396 of the reports judged highest priority were rereviewed and assigned up to 3 keywords to classify events. Based on patterns among the keyword assignments, the data were further aggregated into pathways leading to 3 general error types: "problematic plan approved for treatment," "wrong shift instructions given to therapists," and "wrong shift performed at treatment." Fault trees were created showing how different errors at different stages in the treatment process combine to flow into these general error types. Results A total of 173 of the 396 (44%) events were characterized as belonging to 1 of these 3 general error types. Ninety-nine events were defined as "problematic plan approved for treatment," 40 as "wrong shift instructions given to therapists," and 34 as "wrong shift performed at treatment." Seventy-six of these events (44%) resulted in incorrectly delivered treatment. Event discovery was by therapists (n = 76), physicists (n = 45), physicians (n = 23), dosimetrists (n = 15), or not identified (n = 9); 5 events were found as a result of the patient questioning the staff. For the event type "problematic plan approved for treatment," 64 of the 99 (65%) events were attributable to physician error: incorrect target or dosing pattern prescribed. Conclusions Data extracted from RO-ILS event reports demonstrate common error pathways in radiation oncology that propagate all the way to treatment. Additional study and coordination of efforts is needed to develop and share best practices to address the sources of these errors and curtail their propagation.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Gamma Knife radiosurgery is an established technique for non-urgent treatment of various intracranial pathologies. Intra-procedural dislodgement of the stereotactic frame is an uncommon occurrence that could lead to abortion of ongoing treatment and necessitate more invasive treatment strategies. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: In this case report we describe a novel method for resumption of Gamma Knife treatment after an unplanned intra-procedural interruption. The case example involves a radiosurgical treatment of a Spetzler-Martin Grade I arteriovenous malformation. CONCLUSION: Our technique involves integration of scans and coordinate systems from two imaging sessions using the composite isodose line to resolve translational differences, thereby limiting delivery of remaining shots to the untreated region of the lesion. MRI follow-up at 13 months showed a reduction in the nidus size with no evidence of any radiation injury to the surrounding brain parenchyma. We believe this technique will allow care teams to effectively salvage interrupted gamma knife procedures and reduce progression to more invasive treatment options.

Purpose: To determine the feasibility of automating mechanical quality assurance measurements on the Varian Truebeam LINAC.Methods: Using the XML coding capability of the Varian Truebeam Research Mode, the LINAC was programmed to mimic the beams delivered for the following mechanical tests. These tests included: Field size accuracy, jaw positions for asymmetric fields, collimator rotation isocenter, and MLC positional‐accuracy. Images for these beams were acquired with the EPID. The images were analyzed using an analysis code written in MATLAB. Tests for gantry and couch rotation isocenters and radiation and mechanical isocenter coincidence are being developed. Results: For field‐sizes ranging from 4×4cm2 to 15×15cm2, the measured matched the nominal field sizes to within 1mm. The collimator rotation isocenter and the overall accuracy for asymmetric field matched to within 1mm. No positional error 〉1mm was seen in the 33 MLC pairs visible in the MLC positional‐accuracy images.Conclusions: A large portion of the time required to make mechanical QA measurements using film is spent placing, processing, and scanning the film. Complete automation in performing these mechanical tests results in a significant time gain compared to film. A majority of the mechanical tests suggested by TG‐142 have been performed using this technique, and an automated mechanical QA process has been established in our clinic.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to develop a novel process for using on-board MV and kV Electronic Portal Imaging Devices (EPIDs) to perform linac acceptance testing (AT) for two reasons: (a) to standardize the assessment of new equipment performance, and (b) to reduce the time to clinical use while reducing physicist workload. Methods and materials In this study, Varian TrueBeam linacs equipped with amorphous silicon-based EPID (aS1000) were used. The conventional set of AT tests and tolerances were used as a baseline guide. A novel methodology was developed or adopted from published literature to perform as many tests as possible using the MV and kV EPIDs. The developer mode on Varian TrueBeam linacs was used to automate the process. In the EPID-based approach, most of mechanical tests were conducted by acquiring images through a custom phantom and software tools were developed for quantitative analysis to extract different performance parameters. The embedded steel-spheres in a custom phantom provided both visual and radiographic guidance for beam geometry testing. For photon beams, open field EPID images were used to extract inline/crossline profiles to verify the beam energy, flatness and symmetry. EPID images through a double wedge phantom were used for evaluating electron beam properties via diagonal profile. Testing was augmented with a commercial automated application (Machine Performance Check) which was used to perform several geometric accuracy tests such as gantry, collimator rotations, and couch rotations/translations. Results The developed process demonstrated that the tests, which required customer demonstration, were efficiently performed using EPIDs. The AT tests that were performed using EPIDs were fully automated using the developer mode on the Varian TrueBeam system, while some tests, such as the light field versus radiation field congruence, and collision interlock checks required user interaction. Conclusions On-board imagers are quite suitable for both geometric and dosimetric testing of linac system involved in AT. Electronic format of the acquired data lends itself to benchmarking, transparency, as well as longitudinal use of AT data. While the tests were performed on a specific model of a linear accelerator, the proposed approach can be extended to other linacs.

Purpose To demonstrate that fiducial tracking during pretreatment Cone-Beam CT (CBCT) can accurately measure tumor motion and that this method should be used to validate 4-dimensional CT (4DCT) margins before each treatment fraction. Methods and Materials For 31 patients with abdominal tumors and implanted fiducial markers, tumor motion was measured daily with CBCT and fluoroscopy for 202 treatment fractions. Fiducial tracking and maximum-likelihood algorithms extracted 3-dimensional fiducial trajectories from CBCT projections. The daily internal margin (IM) (ie, range of fiducial motion) was calculated for CBCT and fluoroscopy as the 5th-95th percentiles of displacement in each cardinal direction. The planning IM from simulation 4DCT (IM 4DCT ) was considered adequate when within ±1.2 mm (anterior–posterior, left–right) and ±3 mm (superior–inferior) of the daily measured IM. We validated CBCT fiducial tracking as an accurate predictive measure of intrafraction motion by comparing the daily measured IM CBCT with the daily IM measured by pretreatment fluoroscopy (IM pre-fluoro ); these were compared with pre- and posttreatment fluoroscopy (IM fluoro ) to identify those patients who could benefit from imaging during treatment. Results Four-dimensional CT could not accurately predict intrafractional tumor motion for ≥80% of fractions in 94% (IM CBCT ), 97% (IM pre-fluoro ), and 100% (IM fluoro ) of patients. The IM CBCT was significantly closer to IM pre-fluoro than IM 4DCT ( P t CBCT was in agreement with IM fluoro for 93% of fractions (superior–inferior), compared with 63% for the t > 7.5 minutes group, demonstrating the need for patient-specific intratreatment imaging. Conclusions Tumor motion determined from 4DCT simulation does not accurately predict the daily motion observed on CBCT or fluoroscopy. Cone-beam CT could replace fluoroscopy for pretreatment verification of simulation IM 4DCT , reducing patient setup time and imaging dose. Patients with treatment time t > 7.5 minutes could benefit from the addition of intratreatment imaging.

To characterize the performance of the onboard imaging unit for the first clinical magnetic resonance image guided radiation therapy (MR-IGRT) system.The imaging performance characterization included four components: ACR (the American College of Radiology) phantom test, spatial integrity, coil signal to noise ratio (SNR) and uniformity, and magnetic field homogeneity. The ACR phantom test was performed in accordance with the ACR phantom test guidance. The spatial integrity test was evaluated using a 40.8 × 40.8 × 40.8 cm(3) spatial integrity phantom. MR and computed tomography (CT) images of the phantom were acquired and coregistered. Objects were identified around the surfaces of 20 and 35 cm diameters of spherical volume (DSVs) on both the MR and CT images. Geometric distortion was quantified using deviation in object location between the MR and CT images. The coil SNR test was performed according to the national electrical manufacturers association (NEMA) standards MS-1 and MS-9. The magnetic field homogeneity test was measured using field camera and spectral peak methods.For the ACR tests, the slice position error was less than 0.10 cm, the slice thickness error was less than 0.05 cm, the resolved high-contrast spatial resolution was 0.09 cm, the resolved low-contrast spokes were more than 25, the image intensity uniformity was above 93%, and the percentage ghosting was less than 0.22%. All were within the ACR recommended specifications. The maximum geometric distortions within the 20 and 35 cm DSVs were 0.10 and 0.18 cm for high spatial resolution three-dimensional images and 0.08 and 0.20 cm for high temporal resolution two dimensional cine images based on the distance-to-phantom-center method. The average SNR was 12.0 for the body coil, 42.9 for the combined torso coil, and 44.0 for the combined head and neck coil. Magnetic field homogeneities at gantry angles of 0°, 30°, 60°, 90°, and 120° were 23.55, 20.43, 18.76, 19.11, and 22.22 ppm, respectively, using the field camera method over the 45 cm DSV.The onboard imaging unit of the first commercial MR-IGRT system meets ACR, NEMA, and vendor specifications.

Purpose: We retrospectively evaluate the dosimetric impact of a 3.5% range uncertainty on CTV coverage and normal organ toxicity for a cohort of brain patients. Methods: Twenty treatment plans involving 20 brain cancer patients treated with Mevions S250 were reviewed. Forty uncertain plans were made by changing the ranges in original plans by ±3.5% while keeping all devices unchanged. Fidelity to the original plans was evaluated with gamma index. Changes in generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) were reported for the following structures: CTV coverage, brainstem, optic chiasm, and optic nerves. Comparisons were made by plotting the relevant endpoints from the uncertain plans as a function of the same endpoints from the original clinical plan. Results: Gamma-index analysis resulted in a 50% pass rate of the uncertain plans using a 90% passing rate and 3%/3mm criterion. A 9.5% decrease in the slope of gEUD plot for the CTV was observed for the 3.5% downward range shift. However, the change in slope did not result in a gEUD change greater than 1.1% for the CTV. The slopes of the gEUD plots for normal structures increased by 3.1% 3.9% 2.4% and 0.2% for the chiasm, brainstem, left optic nerve and right optic nerve respectively. The maximum deviation from the gEUD of the clinical plan for normal structures was: 64% in the chiasm, 31% for the brainstem, and 19% for both optic nerves. Conclusion: A retrospective review shows moderate radiobiological impact of range uncertainty in passively scattered proton therapy with sporadic catastrophe. The linear regression analysis on the statistical data indicates a systematic deviation of gEUD from treatment planning in the light of range uncertainty.

Purpose: To implement image-guided proton therapy (IGPT) based on daily proton dose distribution. Methods: Unlike x-ray therapy, simple alignment based on anatomy cannot ensure proper dose coverage in proton therapy. Anatomy changes along the beam path may lead to underdosing the target, or overdosing the organ-at-risk (OAR). With an in-room mobile computed tomography (CT) system, we are developing a dose-based IGPT software tool that allows patient positioning and treatment adaption based on daily dose distributions. During an IGPT treatment, daily CT images are acquired in treatment position. After initial positioning based on rigid image registration, proton dose distribution is calculated on daily CT images. The target and OARs are automatically delineated via deformable image registration. Dose distributions are evaluated to decide if repositioning or plan adaptation is necessary in order to achieve proper coverage of the target and sparing of OARs. Besides online dose-based image guidance, the software tool can also map daily treatment doses to the treatment planning CT images for offline adaptive treatment. Results: An in-room helical CT system is commissioned for IGPT purposes. It produces accurate CT numbers that allow proton dose calculation. GPU-based deformable image registration algorithms are developed and evaluated for automatic ROI-delineation and dose mapping. The online and offline IGPT functionalities are evaluated with daily CT images of the proton patients. Conclusion: The online and offline IGPT software tool may improve the safety and quality of proton treatment by allowing dose-based IGPT and adaptive proton treatments. Research is partially supported by Mevion Medical Systems.

Purpose: Online adaptive therapy (ART) relies on auto-contouring using deformable image registration (DIR). DIR’s inherent uncertainties require user intervention and manual edits while the patient is on the table. We investigated the dosimetric impact of DIR errors on the quality of re-optimized plans, and used the findings to establish regions for focusing manual edits to where DIR errors can Result in clinically relevant dose differences. Methods: Our clinical implementation of online adaptive MR-IGRT involves using DIR to transfer contours from CT to daily MR, followed by a physicians’ edits. The plan is then re-optimized to meet the organs at risk (OARs) constraints. Re-optimized abdomen and pelvis plans generated based on physician edited OARs were selected as the baseline for evaluation. Plans were then re-optimized on auto-deformed contours with manual edits limited to pre-defined uniform rings (0 to 5cm) around the PTV. A 0cm ring indicates that the auto-deformed OARs were used without editing. The magnitude of the variations caused by the non-deterministic optimizer was quantified by repeat re-optimizations on the same geometry to determine the mean and standard deviation (STD). For each re-optimized plan, various volumetric parameters for the PTV, the OARs were extracted along with DVH and isodose evaluation. A plan was deemed acceptable if the variation from the baseline plan was within one STD. Results: Initial results show that for abdomen and pancreas cases, a minimum of 5cm margin around the PTV is required for contour corrections, while for pelvic and liver cases a 2–3 cm margin is sufficient. Conclusion: Focusing manual contour edits to regions of dosimetric relevance can reduce contouring time in the online ART process while maintaining a clinically comparable plan. Future work will further refine the contouring region by evaluating the path along the beams, dose gradients near the target and OAR dose metrics.

Purpose: To investigate the effects of magnetic fields in radiochromic films (RCF). Magnetokinetic changes may affect crystal orientation and polymerization within active layer of RCF, these effects are investigated in Magnetic Resonance Image-guided Radiotherapy (MR-IGRT). Methods: Gafchromic EBT2 RCF were irradiated in a 30×30×30 cm3 solid water phantom using a ViewRay MRIdian Co-60 MRI guided radiotherapy system (B=0.35 T). Fifteen 20.3×25.4 cm2 EBT2 film sheets were placed at three different depths (d=0.5, 5 and 10 cm) and irradiated using 5 different treatment plans. The plans were computed using the MRIdian treatment planning system to deliver 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 Gy at a depth of 10 cm. The films were scanned using an Epson Expression 10000 XL flat-bed document scanner in transmission mode. Films were processed before and after irradiation to obtain a net optical density (netOD) for each color channel separately. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images were obtained to compare the active layer of selected samples. Results: The results show the red channel netOD decreases between 1.3–12.3 % (average of 5.95 %) for doses above 2.8 Gy, with a linear increase in this effect for higher doses. Green channel netOD showed similar results with a decrease between 1.2–10.5 % (average of 4.09 %) for doses above 3.5 Gy. Blue channel showed the weakest effect between 1.3–2.9 % (average of 1.94 %) for doses above 8.0 Gy. SEM images show changes in crystal orientation within active layer in RCF exposed in a magnetic field. Conclusion: The presence of a magnetic field affects crystal orientation and polymerization during irradiation, decreasing netOD by an average of 5.95 % in the red channel. The under response is dependent on dose and differs by up to 12.3 % at 17.6 Gy. The results show that magnetokinetic effects should be carefully considered in MR-IGRT.

Purpose: There is growing recognition of need for increased clarity and consistency in the nomenclatures used for body and organ structures, DVH metrics, toxicity, dose and volume units, etc. Standardization has multiple benefits; e.g. facilitating data collection for clinical trials, enabling the pooling of data between institutions, making transfers (i.e. hand-offs) between centers safer, and enabling vendors to define “default” settings. Towards this goal, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) formed a task group (TG263) in July of 2014, operating under the Work Group on Clinical Trials to develop consensus statements. Guiding principles derived from the investigation and example nomenclatures will be presented for public feedback. Methods: We formed a multi-institutional and multi-vendor collaborative group of 39 physicists, physicians and others involved in clinical use and electronic transfer of information. Members include individuals from IROC, NRG, IHE-RO, DICOM WG-7, ASTRO and EORTC groups with overlapping interests to maximize the quality of the consensus and increase the likelihood of adoption. Surveys of group and NRG members were used to define current nomenclatures and requirements. Technical requirements of vendor systems and the proposed DICOM standards were examined. Results: There is a marked degree of inter and intra institutional variation inmore » current approaches, resulting from inter-vendor differences in capabilities, clinic specific conceptualizations and inconsistencies. Using a consensus approach, the group defined optimal formats for the naming of targets and normal structures. A formal objective assessment of 13 existing clinically-used software packages show that all had capabilities to accommodate these recommended nomenclatures. Conclusions: A multi-stakeholder effort is making significant steps forward in developing a standard nomenclature that will work across platforms. Our current working list includes > 550 structures. Outreach efforts are ongoing to ensure broader participation in evaluating and testing the principles as they are developed by TG263.« less

Patients treated using a magnetic-resonance image guided radiation therapy (MR-IGRT) system received both CT and MR simulations. During planning, the CT is used to determine relative electron density (RED) using a calibration table. This study aims to investigate the feasibility of MR-only treatments by comparing CT-computed dose distributions to those computed with combinations of water (1.0), lung (0.26), tissue (1.02), and bone (1.12) bulk RED overrides, and to identify the effects of the magnetic field on the RED-overridden doses. Methods: Four patients who received treatment using a commercial MR-IGRT system were analyzed (1 lung, 2 abdomen, and 1 pelvis). The clinical plans were computed using the first fraction MRI as primary, and the simulation CT as secondary for REDs. Plans were reoptimized using default bulk RED overrides (water/lung and tissue/lung for the lung patient, water/bone, tissue/bone, water only, and tissue only for the abdomen and pelvis patients). Additionally, each plan was re-optimized to include the static magnetic field. All plans were normalized to the same PTV coverage as the clinical plan. Dose-difference volumes and DVHs were computed for bulk density override plans, and 3D gamma analyses between each plan and its accompanying magnetic field plan were performed using 3%/3 mmmore » dose difference and distance-to-agreement criteria using the PTV and Skin as masking structures. Results: The average differences in PTV and organs-at-risk mean dose for all RED combinations tested were −0.19 Gy (−0.62 – 0.06 Gy) and −0.34 Gy (−1.76 – 0.33 Gy), respectively. The average PTV and Skin gamma pass rates for all RED combinations tested were 99.88% (99.5% – 100%) and 98. 35% (96.3% – 99.6%). No systematic differences in DVHs or isodoses were observed. Conclusions: It is likely that that a commercial MR-IGRT system may produce high quality treatment plans without the need for CT scans. Authors of this abstract are members of the Washington University Radiation Oncology department, which has a research agreement with ViewRay, Inc.« less

Purpose: In December, 2013 we treated our first patient with the Mevion S250 Proton Therapy System. This followed seven months of acceptance testing and commissioning, including; dosimetric data acquisition, safety checks, establishment of QA programs, mechanical and imaging checks, modeling validation, etc. Methods: The Mevion S250 possesses a compact synchrocyclotron attached to a gantry due to its small size (1.8m diameter) and light weight (22 tons). The system includes a 6D robotic couch allowing for any beam trajectory. The system provides 3D-2D imaging via fixed x-rays. Our TPS is Varian Eclipse, for which modeling and validation comprised most of the commissioning. The electronic medical record system is Elekta’s MOSIAQ 2.5, which provides connectivity for setup, imaging and treatment. Results: The modeling and validation met gamma of 3%/1mm for 98% of points. The imaging quality is superior than our other existing systems. Neutron dose was 95%. Over the first 14 months, for our first 150 cases, were predominantly; adult CNS, pediatrics (including CSI), lung, and liver. Thorax patients receive weekly scans for adaptive planning. Conclusion: The Mevion S250 has added a vital option to compliment our other modalities within our NCI Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Purpose: To develop a methodology for commissioning the real-time tumor tracking and beam control capabilities of a magnetic resonance imaging radiation therapy (MR-IGRT) system. Methods: The MRIdian (ViewRay, Inc., Oakwood Village, OH) MR-IGRT machine consists of a 0.35-T magnet and a three-head Co-60 delivery system capable of real-time sagittal plane acquisition at 4 frames per second (fps). After obtaining a volumetric MR image, a “target” is chosen by contouring an area of interest with different signal intensity than the surrounding medium. A “boundary” is created by expanding the target by some margin or using a previous contour. After a sagittal plane is chosen, during delivery the system deforms the target contour on each acquired plane, and compares it to the boundary - if the target contour is observed outside the boundary, the beam is turned off. Since the system uses no external or internal surrogates, careful tests of the individual system components had to be created and executed to characterize the accuracy and potential dosimetric errors associated with real-time gating on real anatomy. Results: Tests for spatial, temporal, and dosimetric accuracy were devised; these included latency, spatial integrity of the magnetic field, film, and ionization chamber measurements. A new set of phantoms was created, including a CIRS (Norfolk, VA) motion phantom that was modified to function in the magnetic field and have appropriate signal intensities. This phantom also included optical sensors that allowed for signal readout of its target position, and subsequent comparison to “beam off” signal on the heads. Boundary margins and other parameters were evaluated with film dosimetry by comparing the spatial distribution of the dose for static vs. gated deliveries. Ionization chambers were used to confirm an implemented shutter dose correction. Conclusion: The first commercially-available MR-IGRT system’s gating capabilities were characterized and successfully implemented in the clinic. Drs. Green, Kashani, and Mutic have held non-compensated consultant roles, received honoraria, and had travel expenses paid by ViewRay, Inc.