An overview of the medical-physics-related verification system for radiotherapy multicenter clinical trials by the Medical Physics Working Group in the Japan Clinical Oncology Group-Radiation Therapy Study Group

A virtual audit system for intensity-modulated radiation therapy credentialing in Japan Clinical Oncology Group clinical trials: A pilot study

PURPOSE

The Medical Physics Working Group of the Radiation Therapy Study Group at the Japan Clinical Oncology Group is currently developing a virtual audit system for intensity-modulated radiation therapy dosimetry credentialing. The target dosimeters include films and array detectors, such as ArcCHECK (Sun Nuclear Corporation, Melbourne, Florida, USA) and Delta4 (ScandiDos, Uppsala, Sweden). This pilot study investigated the feasibility of our virtual audit system using previously acquired data.

METHODS

We analyzed 46 films (32 and 14 in the axial and coronal planes, respectively) from 29 institutions. Global gamma analysis between measured and planned dose distributions used the following settings: 3%/3 mm criteria (the dose denominator was 2 Gy), 30% threshold dose, no scaling of the datasets, and 90% tolerance level. In addition, 21 datasets from nine institutions were obtained for array evaluation. Five institutions used ArcCHECK, while the others used Delta4. Global gamma analysis was performed with 3%/2 mm criteria (the dose denominator was the maximum calculated dose), 10% threshold dose, and 95% tolerance level. The film calibration and gamma analysis were conducted with in-house software developed using Python (version 3.9.2).

RESULTS

The means ± standard deviations of the gamma passing rates were 99.4 ± 1.5% (range, 92.8%-100%) and 99.2 ± 1.0% (range, 97.0%-100%) in the film and array evaluations, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of virtual audits. The proposed virtual audit system will contribute to more efficient, cheaper, and more rapid trial credentialing than on-site and postal audits; however, the limitations should be considered when operating our virtual audit system.

Prioritizing clinical trial quality assurance for photons and protons: A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) comparison

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The Global Clinical Trials RTQA Harmonization Group (GHG) set out to evaluate and prioritize clinical trial quality assurance.

METHODS

The GHG compiled a list of radiotherapy quality assurance (QA) tests performed for proton and photon therapy clinical trials. These tests were compared between modalities to assess whether there was a need for different types of assessments per modality. A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) was performed to assess the risk of each QA failure.

RESULTS

The risk analysis showed that proton and photon therapy shared four out of five of their highest-risk failures (end-to-end anthropomorphic phantom test, phantom tests using respiratory motion, pre-treatment patient plan review of contouring/outlining, and on-treatment/post-treatment patient plan review of dosimetric coverage). While similar trends were observed, proton therapy had higher risk failures, driven by higher severity scores. A sub-analysis of occurrence × severity scores identified high-risk scores to prioritize for improvements in RTQA detectability. A novel severity scaler was introduced to account for the number of patients affected by each failure. This scaler did not substantially alter the ranking of tests, but it elevated the QA program evaluation to the top 20th percentile. This is the first FMEA performed for clinical trial quality assurance.

CONCLUSION

The identification of high-risk errors associated with clinical trials is valuable to prioritize and reduce errors in radiotherapy and improve the quality of trial data and outcomes, and can be applied to optimize clinical radiotherapy QA.

Assessment of using a gamma index analysis for patient-specific quality assurance in Japan

PURPOSE

The Task Group 218 (TG-218) report was published by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine in 2018, recommending the appropriate use of gamma index analysis for patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA). The paper demonstrates that PSQA for radiotherapy in Japan appropriately applies the gamma index analysis considering TG-218.

MATERIALS/METHODS

This survey estimated the acceptance state of radiotherapeutic institutes or facilities in Japan for the guideline using a web-based questionnaire. To investigate an appropriate PSQA of the facility-specific conditions, we researched an optimal tolerance or action level for various clinical situations, including different treatment machines, clinical policies, measurement devices, staff or their skills, and patient conditions. The responded data were analyzed using principal component analysis (PCA) and multidimensional scaling (MDS). The PCA focused on factor loading values of the first contribution over 0.5, whereas the MDS focused on mapped distances among data.

RESULTS

Responses were obtained from 148 facilities that use intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), which accounted for 42.8% of the probable IMRT use in Japan. This survey revealed the appropriate application of the following universal criteria for gamma index analysis from the guideline recommendation despite the facility-specific variations (treatment machines/the number of IMRT cases/facility attributes/responded [representative] expertise or staff): (a) 95% pass rate, (b) 3% dose difference and 2-mm distance-to-agreement, and (c) 10% threshold dose. Conditions (a)-(c) were the principal components of the data by the PCA method and were mapped in a similar distance range, which was easily clustered from other gamma index analytic factors by the MDS method. Conditions (a)-(c) were the universally essential factors for the PSQA in Japan.

CONCLUSION

We found that the majority of facilities using IMRT in each region of Japan complied with the guideline and conducted PSQA with deliberation under the individual facility-specific conditions.

The Value of On-Site Proton Audits

PURPOSE

This study aimed to highlight the value and key findings of on-site proton audits.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The authors performed 38 on-site measurement-based peer reviews of proton centers participating in National Cancer Institute-funded clinical trials. The reviews covered beam calibration, lateral and depth measurements, mechanical checks, treatment planning and clinical practice, and quality assurance (QA) practices. Program deficiencies were noted, and recommendations were made about ways institutions could improve their practices.

RESULTS

Institutions received an average of 3 (range, 1-8) recommendations for practice improvements. The number of deficiencies did not decrease over time, highlighting the continued need for this type of peer review. The most common deficiencies were for Task Group-recommended QA compliance (97% of centers), computed tomography number (CTN) to relative linear stopping power conversion (59%), and QA procedures (53%). In addition, 32% of institutions assessed failed at least 1 lateral beam profile measurement (<90% of pixels passing 3% [global]/3 mm; 10% threshold), despite passing internal QA measurements. These failures occurred for several different plan configurations (large, small, shallow, and deep targets) and at different depths in the beam path (proximal to target, central, and distal). CTN to relative linear stopping power conversion curves showed deviations at low, mid, and high CTNs and highlighted areas of inconsistency between proton centers, with many centers falling outside of 2 sigma of the mean curve of their peers. All deficiencies from the peer review were discussed with the institutions, and many implemented dosimetric treatment planning and practice changes to improve the accuracy of their system and consistency with other institutions.

CONCLUSIONS

This peer review program has been integral in confirming and promoting consistency and best practice across proton centers for clinical trials, minimizing deviations for outcomes data.