American College of Radiology (ACR) and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Practice Guideline for Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT)

Is full-automation in radiotherapy treatment planning ready for take off?

Radiotherapy treatment planning is undergoing a transformation with the increasing integration of automation. This transition draws parallels with the aviation industry, which has a long-standing history of addressing challenges and opportunities introduced by automated systems. Both fields witness a shift from manual operations to systems capable of operating independently, raising questions about the risks and evolving role of humans within automated workflows. In response to this shift, a working group assembled during the ESTRO Physics Workshop 2023, reflected on parallels to draw lessons for radiotherapy. A taxonomy is proposed, leveraging insights from aviation, that outlines the observed levels of automation within the context of radiotherapy and their corresponding implications for human involvement. Among the common identified risks associated with automation integration are complacency, overreliance, attention tunneling, data overload, a lack of transparency and training. These risks require mitigation strategies. Such strategies include ensuring role complementarity, introducing checklists and safety requirements for human-automation interaction and using automation for cognitive unload and workflow management. Focusing on already automated processes, such as dose calculation and auto-contouring as examples, we have translated lessons learned from aviation. It remains crucial to strike a balance between automation and human involvement. While automation offers the potential for increased efficiency and accuracy, it must be complemented by human oversight, expertise, and critical decision-making. The irreplaceable value of human judgment remains, particularly in complex clinical situations. Learning from aviation, we identify a need for human factors engineering research in radiation oncology and a continued requirement for proactive incident learning.

Colorectal cancer: Recent advances in management and treatment

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, and the second most common cause of cancer-related death. In 2020, the estimated number of deaths due to CRC was approximately 930000, accounting for 10% of all cancer deaths worldwide. Accordingly, there is a vast amount of ongoing research aiming to find new and improved treatment modalities for CRC that can potentially increase survival and decrease overall morbidity and mortality. Current management strategies for CRC include surgical procedures for resectable cases, and radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy, in addition to their combination, for non-resectable tumors. Despite these options, CRC remains incurable in 50% of cases. Nonetheless, significant improvements in research techniques have allowed for treatment approaches for CRC to be frequently updated, leading to the availability of new drugs and therapeutic strategies. This review summarizes the most recent therapeutic approaches for CRC, with special emphasis on new strategies that are currently being studied and have great potential to improve the prognosis and lifespan of patients with CRC.

Impact of beam complexity on plan delivery accuracy verification of a transmission detector in volumetric modulated arc therapy

OBJECTIVE

To study the effect of beam complexity on VMAT delivery accuracy evaluated by means of a transmission detector, together with the possibility of scoring plan complexity.

METHODS

43 clinical VMAT plans delivered by a TrueBeam linear accelerator to both Delta4 Discover and Delta4 Phantom+ for patient-specific quality assurance were evaluated. Global Dose-γ analysis, MLC-γ analysis, percentage of leaves with a deviation between planned and measured leaf tip position lower than 1 mm (LD) were computed. Modulation complexity score (MCSv), average leaf travel (LT), a multiplicative combination of LT and MCSv (LTMCS), percentage of leaves with speed lower than 5 mm/s (LS), from 5 to 20 mm/s (MS), higher than 20 mm/s (HS) and the average value of leaf speed (MLCSav) were evaluated by means of an home-made Matlab script.

RESULTS

Dose-γ passing rate showed a moderate correlation with MCSv, LT, MLCSav, LS and HS, while a stronger positive correlation was found with LTMCS. A strong correlation was observed between LD and both LT and leaves speed, while a weak correlation was observed with MCSv. A correlation between MLC-γ pass rate and plan complexity parameters was found except for MCSv; a moderate correlation with LS was observed, while all other parameters showed weak correlations.

CONCLUSIONS

The study confirmed the possibility to establish correlations between plan complexity indices versus dose distribution and MLC parameters measured by a transmissive detector. Further investigation is necessary to define specific values of the complexity indices to evaluate whether a VMAT plan is deliverable as intended.

Postmastectomy radiotherapy in breast reconstruction: Current controversies and trends

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women worldwide. Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) is an essential component of combined therapy for early-stage, high-risk breast cancer. Breast reconstruction (BR) is often considered for patients with breast cancer who have undergone mastectomy. There has been a considerable amount of discussion about the optimal approach to combining PMRT with BR in the treatment of breast cancer. PMRT may increase the risk of complications and prevent good aesthetic results after BR, while BR may increase the complexity of PMRT and the radiation dose to surrounding normal tissues. The purpose of this review is to give a broad overview and summary of the current controversies and trends in PMRT and BR in the context of the most recent literature available.

Is it still necessary to perform measured based pre-treatment patient-specific QA for SRS HyperArc treatments?

PURPOSE

The Mobius3D system was validated as a modern secondary check dosimetry system. In particular, our objective has been to assess the suitability of the M3D as pre-treatment patient-specific Quality Assurance (QA) tool for Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) HyperArc (HA) treatments. We aimed to determine whether Mobius3D could safely replace the measurements-based patient-specific QA for this type of treatment.

METHODS

30 SRS HA treatment plans for brain were selected. The dose distributions, calculated by Mobius and our routinely used algorithm (AcurosXB v.15.6), were compared using gamma analysis index and DVH parameters based on the patient's CT dataset. All 30 plans were then delivered across the ionization chamber in a homogeneous phantom and the measured dose was compared with both M3D and TPS calculated one. The plans were delivered and verified in terms of PSQA using the electronic portal imaging device (EPID) with Portal Dosimetry (PD) and myQA SRS (IBA Dosimetry) detector. Plans that achieved a global gamma passing rate (GPR) ≥ 97% based on 2%/2 mm criteria, with both Mobius3D and the conventional methods were evaluated acceptable. Finally, we assessed the capability of the M3D system to detect errors related to the position of the Multi-Leaf Collimator (MLC) in comparison to the analyzed measurement-based systems.

RESULTS

No relevant differences were observed in the comparison between the dose calculated on the CT-dataset by M3D and the TPS. Observed discrepancies are imputable to different used algorithms, but no discrepancies related to goodness of plans have been found. Average differences between calculated (M3D and TPS) vs measured dose with ionization chamber were 2.5% (from 0.41% to 3.2%) and 1.81% (from 0.66% to 2.65%), for M3D and TPS, respectively. All plans passed with a gamma passing rate > 97% using conventional PSQA methods with a gamma criterion of 2% dose difference and 2 mm distance-to-agreement. The average gamma passing rate for the M3D system was determined to be 99.4% (from 97.3% to 100%). Results from this study also demonstrated Mobius has better error detectability than conventional measurement-based systems.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows Mobius3D could be a suitable alternative to conventional measured based QA methods for SRS HyperArc treatments.

Evaluation of complexity and deliverability of IMRT treatment plans for breast cancer

This study aimed to predict the outcome of patient specific quality assurance (PSQA) in IMRT for breast cancer using complexity metrics, such as MU factor, MAD, CAS, MCS. Several breast cancer plans were considered, including LBCS, RBCS, LBCM, RBCM, left breast, right breast and the whole breast for both Edge and TrueBeam LINACS. Dose verification was completed by Portal Dosimetry (PD). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was employed to determine whether the treatment plans pass or failed. The area under the curve (AUC) was used to assess the classification performance. The correlation of PSQA and complexity metrics was examined using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (Rs). For LINACS, the most suitable complexity metric was found to be the MU factor (Edge Rs = - 0.608, p < 0.01; TrueBeam Rs = - 0.739, p < 0.01). Regarding the specific breast cancer categories, the optimal complexity metrics were as follows: MAD (AUC = 0.917) for LBCS, MCS (AUC = 0.681) for RBCS, MU factor (AUC = 0.854) for LBCM and MAD (AUC = 0.731) for RBCM. On the Edge LINAC, the preferable method for breast cancers was MCS (left breast, AUC = 0.938; right breast, AUC = 0.813), while on the TrueBeam LINAC, it became MU factor (left breast, AUC = 0.950) and MCS (right breast, AUC = 0.806), respectively. Overall, there was no universally suitable complexity metric for all types of breast cancers. The choice of complexity metric depended on different cancer types, locations and treatment LINACs. Therefore, when utilizing complexity metrics to predict PSQA outcomes in IMRT for breast cancer, it was essential to select the appropriate metric based on the specific circumstances and characteristics of the treatment.

Towards real-time EPID-based 3D in vivo dosimetry for IMRT with Deep Neural Networks: A feasibility study

We investigate the potential of the Deep Dose Estimate (DDE) neural network to predict 3D dose distributions inside patients with Monte Carlo (MC) accuracy, based on transmitted EPID signals and patient CTs. The network was trained using as input patient CTs and first-order dose approximations (FOD). Accurate dose distributions (ADD) simulated with MC were given as training targets. 83 pelvic CTs were used to simulate ADDs and respective EPID signals for subfields of prostate IMRT plans (gantry at 0∘). FODs were produced as backprojections from the EPID signals. 581 ADD-FOD sets were produced and divided into training and test sets. An additional dataset simulated with gantry at 90∘ (lateral set) was used for evaluating the performance of the DDE at different beam directions. The quality of the FODs and DDE-predicted dose distributions (DDEP) with respect to ADDs, from the test and lateral sets, was evaluated with gamma analysis (3%,2 mm). The passing rates between FODs and ADDs were as low as 46%, while for DDEPs the passing rates were above 97% for the test set. Meaningful improvements were also observed for the lateral set. The high passing rates for DDEPs indicate that the DDE is able to convert FODs into ADDs. Moreover, the trained DDE predicts the dose inside a patient CT within 0.6 s/subfield (GPU), in contrast to 14 h needed for MC (CPU-cluster). 3D in vivo dose distributions due to clinical patient irradiation can be obtained within seconds, with MC-like accuracy, potentially paving the way towards real-time EPID-based in vivo dosimetry.

AAPM Task Group Report 306: Quality control and assurance for tomotherapy: An update to Task Group Report 148

Since the publication of AAPM Task Group (TG) 148 on quality assurance (QA) for helical tomotherapy, there have been many new developments on the tomotherapy platform involving treatment delivery, on-board imaging options, motion management, and treatment planning systems (TPSs). In response to a need for guidance on quality control (QC) and QA for these technologies, the AAPM Therapy Physics Committee commissioned TG 306 to review these changes and make recommendations related to these technology updates. The specific objectives of this TG were (1) to update, as needed, recommendations on tolerance limits, frequencies and QC/QA testing methodology in TG 148, (2) address the commissioning and necessary QA checks, as a supplement to Medical Physics Practice Guidelines (MPPG) with respect to tomotherapy TPS and (3) to provide risk-based recommendations on the new technology implemented clinically and treatment delivery workflow. Detailed recommendations on QA tests and their tolerance levels are provided for dynamic jaws, binary multileaf collimators, and Synchrony motion management. A subset of TPS commissioning and QA checks in MPPG 5.a. applicable to tomotherapy are recommended. In addition, failure mode and effects analysis has been conducted among TG members to obtain multi-institutional analysis on tomotherapy-related failure modes and their effect ranking.

Quality and Safety Considerations in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy: An ASTRO Safety White Paper Update

PURPOSE

This updated report on intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is part of a series of consensus-based white papers previously published by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) addressing patient safety. Since the first white papers were published, IMRT went from widespread use to now being the main delivery technique for many treatment sites. IMRT enables higher radiation doses to be delivered to more precise targets while minimizing the dose to uninvolved normal tissue. Due to the associated complexity, IMRT requires additional planning and safety checks before treatment begins and, therefore, quality and safety considerations for this technique remain important areas of focus.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

ASTRO convened an interdisciplinary task force to assess the original IMRT white paper and update content where appropriate. Recommendations were created using a consensus-building methodology, and task force members indicated their level of agreement based on a 5-point Likert scale, from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." A prespecified threshold of ≥75% of raters who select "strongly agree" or "agree" indicated consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

This IMRT white paper primarily focuses on quality and safety processes in planning and delivery. Building on the prior version, this consensus paper incorporates revised and new guidance documents and technology updates. IMRT requires an interdisciplinary team-based approach, staffed by appropriately trained individuals as well as significant personnel resources, specialized technology, and implementation time. A comprehensive quality assurance program must be developed, using established guidance, to ensure IMRT is performed in a safe and effective manner. Patient safety in the delivery of IMRT is everyone's responsibility, and professional organizations, regulators, vendors, and end-users must work together to ensure the highest levels of safety.

Predictive gamma passing rate of 3D detector array-based volumetric modulated arc therapy quality assurance for prostate cancer via deep learning

To predict the gamma passing rate (GPR) of the three-dimensional (3D) detector array-based volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) quality assurance (QA) for prostate cancer using a convolutional neural network (CNN) with the 3D dose distribution. One hundred thirty-five VMAT plans for prostate cancer were selected: 110 plans were used for training and validation, and 25 plans were used for testing. Verification plans were measured using a helical 3D diode array (ArcCHECK). The dose distribution on the detector element plane of these verification plans was used as input data for the CNN model. The measured GPR (mGPR) values were used as the training data. The CNN model comprises eighteen layers and predicted GPR (pGPR) values. The mGPR and pGPR values were compared, and a cumulative frequency histogram of the prediction error was created to clarify the prediction error tendency. The correlation coefficients of pGPR and mGPR were 0.67, 0.69, 0.66, and 0.73 for 3%/3-mm, 3%/2-mm, 2%/3-mm, and 2%/2-mm gamma criteria, respectively. The respective mean±standard deviations of pGPR-mGPR were -0.87±2.18%, -0.65±2.93%, -0.44±2.53%, and -0.71±3.33%. The probabilities of false positive error cases (pGPR < mGPR) were 72%, 60%, 68%, and 56% for each gamma criterion. We developed a deep learning-based prediction model of the 3D detector array-based VMAT QA for prostate cancer, and evaluated the accuracy and tendency of prediction GPR. This model can provide a proactive estimation for the results of the patient-specific QA before the verification measurement.

An independent Monte Carlo-based IMRT QA tool for a 0.35 T MRI-guided linear accelerator

PURPOSE

To develop an independent log file-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) quality assurance (QA) tool for the 0.35 T magnetic resonance-linac (MR-linac) and investigate the ability of various IMRT plan complexity metrics to predict the QA results. Complexity metrics related to tissue heterogeneity were also introduced.

METHODS

The tool for particle simulation (TOPAS) Monte Carlo code was utilized with a previously validated linac head model. A cohort of 29 treatment plans was selected for IMRT QA using the developed QA tool and the vendor-supplied adaptive QA (AQA) tool. For 27 independent patient cases, various IMRT plan complexity metrics were calculated to assess the deliverability of these plans. A correlation between the gamma pass rates (GPRs) from the AQA results and calculated IMRT complexity metrics was determined using the Pearson correlation coefficients. Tissue heterogeneity complexity metrics were calculated based on the gradient of the Hounsfield units.

RESULTS

The median and interquartile range for the TOPAS GPRs (3%/3 mm criteria) were 97.24% and 3.75%, respectively, and were 99.54% and 0.36% for the AQA tool, respectively. The computational time for TOPAS ranged from 4 to 8 h to achieve a statistical uncertainty of <1.5%, whereas the AQA tool had an average calculation time of a few minutes. Of the 23 calculated IMRT plan complexity metrics, the AQA GPRs had correlations with 7 out of 23 of the calculated metrics. Strong correlations (|r| > 0.7) were found between the GPRs and the heterogeneity complexity metrics introduced in this work.

CONCLUSIONS

An independent MC and log file-based IMRT QA tool was successfully developed and can be clinically deployed for offline QA. The complexity metrics will supplement QA reports and provide information regarding plan complexity.

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.

Isodoses-a set theory-based patient-specific QA measure to compare planned and delivered isodose distributions in photon radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

The gamma index and dose-volume histogram (DVH)-based patient-specific quality assurance (QA) measures commonly applied in radiotherapy planning are unable to simultaneously deliver detailed locations and magnitudes of discrepancy between isodoses of planned and delivered dose distributions. By exploiting statistical classification performance measures such as sensitivity or specificity, compliance between a planned and delivered isodose may be evaluated locally, both for organs-at-risk (OAR) and the planning target volume (PTV), at any specified isodose level. Thus, a patient-specific QA tool may be developed to supplement those presently available in clinical radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A method was developed to locally establish and report dose delivery errors in three-dimensional (3D) isodoses of planned (reference) and delivered (evaluated) dose distributions simultaneously as a function the dose level and of spatial location. At any given isodose level, the total volume of delivered dose containing the reference and the evaluated isodoses is locally decomposed into four subregions: true positive-subregions within both reference and evaluated isodoses, true negative-outside of both of these isodoses, false positive-inside the evaluated isodose but not the reference isodose, and false negatives-inside the reference isodose but not the evaluated isodose. Such subregions may be established over the whole volume of delivered dose. This decomposition allows the construction of a confusion matrix and calculation of various indices to quantify the discrepancies between the selected planned and delivered isodose distributions, over the complete range of values of dose delivered. The 3D projection and visualization of the spatial distribution of these discrepancies facilitates the application of the developed method in clinical practice.

RESULTS

Several clinical photon radiotherapy plans were analyzed using the developed method. In some plans at certain isodose levels, dose delivery errors were found at anatomically significant locations. These errors were not otherwise highlighted-neither by gamma analysis nor by DVH-based QA measures. A specially developed 3D projection tool to visualize the spatial distribution of such errors against anatomical features of the patient aids in the proposed analysis of therapy plans.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed method is able to spatially locate delivery errors at selected isodose levels and may supplement the presently applied gamma analysis and DVH-based QA measures in patient-specific radiotherapy planning.

Assessment of log-based fingerprinting system of Mobius3D with Elekta linear accelerators

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate the matching error that occurs when the Mobius3D fingerprinting system is applied in conjunction with an Elekta linear accelerator (LINAC) and to offer an acceptable and alternative method for circumventing this problem.

Material and methods

To avoid the multileaf collimator (MLC) conflicting error in the Mobius3D fingerprinting system, we developed an in‐house program to move the MLC in the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) radiotherapy (RT)‐Plan to pertinent positions, considering the relationship between log data and planned data. The re‐delivered log files were calculated in the Mobius3D system, and the results were compared with those of corrected data (i.e., we analyzed a pair of re‐collected log data and the previous DICOM RT‐Plan data). The results were then evaluated by comparing several items, such as point dose errors, gamma index (GI) passing rates, and MLC root‐mean‐square (RMS) values.

Results

For the point dose error, the maximum difference found was below 2.0%. In the case of GI analysis of all plans, the maximum difference in the passing rates was below 1.4%. The statistical results obtained using a paired Student's t‐test showed that there were no significant differences within the uncertainty. In the case of the RMS test, the maximum difference found was approximately 0.08 mm.

Conclusions

Our results showed that all the mismatched log files were sufficiently acceptable within the uncertainty. We conclude that the matching error obtained when applying Mobius3D to an Elekta LINAC may be addressed using a simple modification of the fingerprinting system, and we expect that our study findings will help vendors resolve this issue in the near future.

Evaluation of a two-dimensional diode array for patient-specific quality assurance of HyperArc

PURPOSE

To evaluate a two-dimensional diode array for patient-specific quality assurance of VMAT stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plans.

METHODS

The diode array, an SRS MapCHECK (SRSMC), was composed of a 77 mm ×77 mm face-centered array having a spacing of 2.47 mm. Sixty SRS plans were selected from our clinical database, 30 for treatment of a single target and 30 for multiple targets. The target sizes ranged from 2.4 mm to 44.7 mm equivalent diameter (median 8.7 mm). The plans were delivered to the diode array. For multiple target plans, two measurements were obtained at two locations, one corresponding to the largest target and the other to the smallest target. Gamma using a 3%/1 mm criteria and the dose to the center diode were compared with radiochromic film (RCF). Dose to selected regions of the detector electronics was calculated.

RESULTS

The mean difference between the center diode and RCF was -1.2%. For a threshold of at least 95% of detectors/pixels having gamma < 1 for a 3%/1 mm criteria, SRSMC and RCF gave consistent results for 79 of the 90 measurements. For plans with an arc having a patient support angle of 90° or 270°, the median dose to the electronics was 0.65% of the prescription dose.

CONCLUSIONS

SRSMC is an efficient tool for accurate patient-specific quality assurance of VMAT single and multiple target radiosurgery, yielding similar clinical decisions as radiochromic film.

Report of AAPM Task Group 219 on independent calculation-based dose/MU verification for IMRT

Independent verification of the dose per monitor unit (MU) to deliver the prescribed dose to a patient has been a mainstay of radiation oncology quality assurance (QA). We discuss the role of secondary dose/MU calculation programs as part of a comprehensive QA program. This report provides guidelines on calculation-based dose/MU verification for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) provided by various modalities. We provide a review of various algorithms for "independent/second check" of monitor unit calculations for IMRT/VMAT. The report makes recommendations on the clinical implementation of secondary dose/MU calculation programs; on commissioning and acceptance of various commercially available secondary dose/MU calculation programs; on benchmark QA and periodic QA; and on clinically reasonable action levels for agreement of secondary dose/MU calculation programs.

Survey of patient-specific quality assurance practice for IMRT and VMAT

A first‐time survey across 15 cancer centers in Ontario, Canada, on the current practice of patient‐specific quality assurance (PSQA) for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery was conducted. The objectives were to assess the current state of PSQA practice, identify areas for potential improvement, and facilitate the continued improvement in standardization, consistency, efficacy, and efficiency of PSQA regionally. The survey asked 40 questions related to PSQA practice for IMRT/VMAT delivery. The questions addressed PSQA policy and procedure, delivery log evaluation, instrumentation, measurement setup and methodology, data analysis and interpretation, documentation, process, failure modes, and feedback. The focus of this survey was on PSQA activities related to routine IMRT/VMAT treatments on conventional linacs, including stereotactic body radiation therapy but excluding stereotactic radiosurgery. The participating centers were instructed to submit answers that reflected the collective view or opinion of their department and represented the most typical process practiced. The results of the survey provided a snapshot of the current state of PSQA practice in Ontario and demonstrated considerable variations in the practice. A large majority (80%) of centers performed PSQA measurements on all VMAT plans. Most employed pseudo‐3D array detectors with a true composite (TC) geometry. No standard approach was found for stopping or reducing frequency of measurements. The sole use of delivery log evaluation was not widely implemented, though most centers expressed interest in adopting this technology. All used the Gamma evaluation method for analyzing PSQA measurements; however, no universal approach was reported on how Gamma evaluation and pass determination criteria were determined. All or some PSQA results were reviewed regularly in two‐thirds of the centers. Planning related issues were considered the most frequent source for PSQA failures (40%), whereas the most frequent course of action for a failed PSQA was to review the result and decide whether to proceed to treatment.

Validation of a secondary dose check tool against Monte Carlo and analytical clinical dose calculation algorithms in VMAT

PURPOSE

Patient-specific quality assurance (QA) is very important in radiotherapy, especially for patients with highly conformed treatment plans like VMAT plans. Traditional QA protocols for these plans are time-consuming reducing considerably the time available for patient treatments. In this work, a new MC-based secondary dose check software (SciMoCa) is evaluated and benchmarked against well-established TPS (Monaco and Pinnacle3 ) by means of treatment plans and dose measurements.

METHODS

Fifty VMAT plans have been computed using same calculation parameters with SciMoCa and the two primary TPSs. Plans were validated with measurements performed with a 3D diode detector (ArcCHECK) by translating patient plans to phantom geometry. Calculation accuracy was assessed by measuring point dose differences and gamma passing rates (GPR) from a 3D gamma analysis with 3%-2 mm criteria. Comparison between SciMoCa and primary TPS calculations was made using the same estimators and using both patient and phantom geometry plans.

RESULTS

TPS and SciMoCa calculations were found to be in very good agreement with validation measurements with average point dose differences of 0.7 ± 1.7% and -0.2 ± 1.6% for SciMoCa and two TPSs, respectively. Comparison between SciMoCa calculations and the two primary TPS plans did not show any statistically significant difference with average point dose differences compatible with zero within error for both patient and phantom geometry plans and GPR (98.0 ± 3.0% and 99.0 ± 3.0% respectively) well in excess of the typical 95 % clinical tolerance threshold.

CONCLUSION

This work presents results obtained with a significantly larger sample than other similar analyses and, to the authors' knowledge, compares SciMoCa with a MC-based TPS for the first time. Results show that a MC-based secondary patient-specific QA is a clinically viable, reliable, and promising technique, that potentially allows significant time saving that can be used for patient treatment and a per-plan basis QA that effectively complements traditional commissioning and calibration protocols.

Fiducial detection and registration for 3D IMRT QA with organ-specific dose information

PURPOSE

Two-dimensional (2D) IMRT QA has been widely performed in Radiation Oncology clinic. However, concerns regarding its sensitivity in detecting delivery errors and its clinical meaning have been raised in publications. In this study, a robust methodology of three-dimensional (3D) IMRT QA using fiducial registration and structure-mapping was proposed to acquire organ-specific dose information.

METHODS

Computed tomography (CT) markers were placed on the PRESAGE dosimeter as fiducials before CT simulation. Subsequently, the images were transferred to the treatment planning system to create a verification plan for the examined treatment plan. Patient's CT images were registered to the CT images of the dosimeter for structure mapping according to the positions of the fiducials. After irradiation, the 3D dose distribution was read-out by an optical-CT (OCT) scanner with fiducials shown on the OCT dose images. An automatic localization algorithm was developed in MATLAB to register the markers in the OCT images to those in the CT images of the dosimeter. SlicerRT was used to show and analyze the results. Fiducial registration error was acquired by measuring the discrepancies in 20 fiducial registrations, and thus the fiducial localization error and target registration error (TRE) was estimated.

RESULTS

Dosimetry comparison between the calculated and measured dose distribution in various forms were presented, including 2D isodose lines comparison, 3D isodose surfaces with patient's anatomical structures, 2D and 3D gamma index, dose volume histogram and 3D view of gamma failing points. From the analysis of 20 fiducial registrations, fiducial registration error was measured to be 0.62 mm and fiducial localization error was calculated to be 0.44 mm. Target registration uncertainty of the proposed methodology was estimated to be within 0.3 mm in the area of dose measurement.

CONCLUSIONS

This study proposed a robust methodology of 3D measurement-based IMRT QA for organ-specific dose comparison and demonstrated its clinical feasibility.

Patient-specific quality assurance on a Varian Halcyon linear accelerator using a PTW Octavius 4D device

This study investigates and validates the use of the Octavius 4D system for patient specific quality assurance on Halcyon, which is capable of rotating at 4 revolutions per minute (RPM). A commercially available PTW Octavius 4D system was used for this study which had a maximum rotation speed of 3 RPM. Initial validation included testing the accuracy of the inclinometer, percent depth doses (PDD), output factors, and dose profiles for selected static square fields. The same static fields were also subject to a gamma comparison with the TPS. This was followed by an evaluation of twelve clinical treatment plans and seven non-clinical plans with varying gantry rotation speeds. All testing was completed using detector array measurement times of 200 ms and 100 ms. Inclinometer accuracy was within 0.3° of actual gantry angle. Output factors varied less than 0.6%, PDD differences were no greater than 1.4%, and dose profile differences were less than 2.2%. Gamma pass rates for the static fields were 96.7% (2%/2mm) and 99.7% (3%/3mm). A prototype control unit, which had a maximum rotation speed of 4 RPM was also used to test the clinical and non-clinical plans. For the clinical plans, the mean gamma pass rates (2%/2mm) were 86.1% and 88.1% for the commercial unit and prototype unit respectively. Results using a measurement time of 200 ms were superior to those using 100 ms. For Halcyon deliveries greater than 3 RPM, worst case gamma results for the commercial unit were 28.6% compared to 98.5% using the prototype unit. Accurate patient specific quality assurance results can be obtained using the Octavius 4D system with a Halcyon linac, provided that the system measurement time is kept at 200 ms and the rotation speed of Halycon does not exceed 3 RPM. For higher RPM deliveries, an Octavius 4D unit with 4 RPM rotation capability is recommended.

Patient-specific IMRT QA verification using machine learning and gamma radiomics

Gamma function is the standard methodology for comparing dose distributions. It is calculated in dedicated software, and its results verification is not performed. Thus we developed an automatic tool for patient-specific QA results verification through high accuracy machine learning (ML) models based on the radiomics characteristics extraction from gamma images. We used 158 patient-specific QA tests and extracted 105 radiomics features from each gamma image. Three random forest models were developed (ML I, ML II, and ML III). ML I and ML II verified the gamma image approval using criteria of 2%/2mm/15% threshold and 3%/3mm/15% threshold, respectively. ML III verified if the gamma analyzes software recommended protocol was followed to detect if the TPS grid modification step was done. The models were based on the most important features selected using the mean decreased impurity, and their performances were evaluated. ML I included 25 features. Its accuracy was 0.85 using the test set and 0.84 using dataset B. ML II included 10 features, and its accuracy with the test set was 0.98; the same value was achieved using the never seen data (dataset B). The First-order 10th percentile feature was identified as a feature strongly related to the approved classification. ML III selected 23 features with an accuracy of 0.99 for test set and 0.98 for dataset B. An automatic workflow example for gamma analyses QA results verification could be proposed combining the models to detect grid inconsistencies on software evaluation, followed by the test approval classification.

Correlation between toxicity and dosimetric parameters for adjuvant intensity modulated radiation therapy of breast cancer: a prospective study

ORCID: 0000–0001-6019–7309. In the treatment of breast cancer, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) reportedly reduces the high-dose irradiation of at-risk organs and decreases the frequency of adverse events (AEs). Comparisons with conventional radiotherapy have shown that IMRT is associated with lower frequencies of acute and late-onset AEs. Here, we extended a prospective, observational, single-center study of the safety of IMRT to a second investigating center. Patients scheduled for adjuvant IMRT after partial or total mastectomy were given a dose of 50 Gy (25 fractions of 2 Gy over 5 weeks), with a simultaneous integrated boost in patients having undergone conservative surgery. 300 patients were included in the study, and 288 were analyzed. The median follow-up period was 2.1 years. The 2-year disease-free survival rate [95% CI] was 93.4% [89.2–96.0%]. Most AEs were mild. The most common AEs were skin-related—mainly radiodermatitis [in 266 patients (92.4%)] and hyperpigmentation (in 178 (61.8%)). 35% and 6% of the patients presented with grade 2 acute skin and esophageal toxicity, respectively. Only 4 patients presented with a grade 3 event (radiodermatitis). Smoking (odds ratio) [95% CI] = 2.10 [1.14–3.87]; p = 0.017), no prior chemotherapy (0.52 [0.27–0.98]; p = 0.044), and D98% for subclavicular skin (1.030 [1.001–1.061]; p = 0.045) were associated with grade ≥ 2 acute AEs. In a univariate analysis, the mean dose, (p < 0.0001), D2% (p < 0.0001), D50% (p = 0.037), D95% (p = 0.0005), D98% (p = 0.0007), V30Gy (p < 0.0001), and V45Gy (p = 0.0001) were significantly associated with grade ≥ 1 acute esophageal AEs. In a multivariate analysis, D95% for the skin (p < 0.001), D98% for the subclavicular skin and low D95% for the internal mammary lymph nodes were associated with grade ≥ 1 medium-term AEs. The safety profile of adjuvant IMRT after partial or total mastectomy is influenced by dosimetric parameters.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02281149.

A delivery quality assurance tool based on the actual leaf open times in tomotherapy

PURPOSE

To validate a delivery quality assurance (DQA) protocol for tomotherapy based on the measurement of the leaf open times (LOTs). In addition, to show the correlation between the mean relative LOT discrepancy and the dose deviation in the planning target volume (PTV).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used a LOT measurement algorithm presented in a previous work on our two tomotherapy treatment units (TOMO1 and TOMO2). We generated TomoPhant plans with intentional random LOT discrepancies following Gaussian distributions of -6%, -4%, -2%, 2%, 4%, and 6%. We irradiated them on the Cheese Phantom with two ion chambers and collected the raw data on both our treatment units. Using the raw data, we measured the actual LOTs and verified that the induced discrepancies were highlightable. Then, we calculated the actual dose using Accuray's standalone dose calculator and verified that the calculated dose agreed with the ion chamber measurement. We randomly chose 60 clinical treatment plans, delivered them in air, and collected the raw detector data. We measured the actual LOTs from the raw data and calculated the corresponding dose distributions using Accuray's standalone dose calculator. We assessed the Pearson coefficient correlation of the deviation between expected and actual dose in the PTV (a) with the mean relative LOT discrepancy and (b) with the γ-index pass rate for different tolerances.

RESULTS

The mean relative discrepancy between actual (measured by the algorithm) and expected LOTs on the modified TomoPhant plans was 1.10 ± 0.05% on TOMO1 and 0.02 ± 0.03% on TOMO2, respectively. The agreement between measured and calculated dose was 0.2 ± 0.3% on TOMO1 and 0.1 ± 0.3% on TOMO2, respectively. On clinical plans, the means of the relative LOT discrepancies ranged from -3.0 % to 1.4%. The dose deviation in the PTVs ranged from -1.6% to 2.4%. The Pearson coefficient correlation between the mean relative LOT discrepancy and the dose deviation in the PTV was 0.76 (P ≈ 10^-15 ) on TOMO1 and 0.65 (P ≈ 10^-10 ) on TOMO2, respectively. There was no correlation between the γ-index pass rate and the dose deviation in the PTV.

CONCLUSION

The method made it possible to measure and to correctly highlight the LOT discrepancies on the TomoPhant plans. The dose subsequently calculated was accurate. On clinical plans, the mean LOT discrepancy correlated with the dose deviation in the PTV. This makes the mean LOT discrepancy a handy indicator of the plan quality.

Use of a plastic scintillator detector for patient-specific quality assurance of VMAT SRS

Purpose

To evaluate a scintillator detector for patient‐specific quality assurance of VMAT radiosurgery plans.

Methods

The detector was comprised of a 1 mm diameter, 1 mm high scintillator coupled to an acrylic optical fiber. Sixty VMAT SRS plans for treatment of single targets having sizes ranging from 3 mm to 30.2 mm equivalent diameter (median 16.3 mm) were selected. The plans were delivered to a 20 cm × 20 cm x 15 cm water equivalent plastic phantom having either the scintillator detector or radiochromic film at the center. Calibration films were obtained for each measurement session. The films were scanned and converted to dose using a 3‐channel technique.

Results

The mean difference between scintillator and film was ‒0.45% (95% confidence interval ‒0.1% to 0.8%). For target equivalent diameter smaller than the median, the mean difference was 1.1% (95% confidence interval 0.5% to 1.7%). For targets larger than the median, the mean difference was ‒0.2% (95% confidence interval ‒0.7% to 0.1%).

Conclusions

The scintillator detector response is independent of target size for targets as small as 3 mm and is well‐suited for patient‐specific quality assurance of VMAT SRS plans. Further work is needed to evaluate the accuracy for VMAT plans that treat multiple targets using a single isocenter.

Evaluating the sensitivity of Halcyon's automatic transit image acquisition for treatment error detection: A phantom study using static IMRT

PURPOSE

The Varian Halcyon™ electronic portal imaging detector is always in-line with the beam and automatically acquires transit images for every patient with full-field coverage. These images could be used for "every patient, every monitor unit" quality assurance (QA) and eventually adaptive radiotherapy. This study evaluated the imager's sensitivity to potential clinical errors and day-to-day variations from clinical exit images.

METHODS

Open and modulated fields were delivered for each potential error. To evaluate output changes, monitor units were scaled by 2%-10% and delivered to solid water slabs and a homogeneous CIRS phantom. To mimic weight changes, 0.5-5.0 cm of buildup was added to the solid water. To evaluate positioning changes, a homogeneous and heterogeneous CIRS phantom were shifted 2-10 cm and 0.2-1.5 cm, respectively. For each test, mean relative differences (MRDs) and standard deviations in the pixel-difference histograms (σ_RD ) between test and baseline images were calculated. Lateral shift magnitudes were calculated using cross-correlation and edge-detection filtration. To assess patient variations, MRD and σ_RD were calculated from six prostate patients' daily exit images and compared between fractions with and without gas present.

RESULTS

MRDs responded linearly to output and buildup changes with a standard deviation of 0.3%, implying a 1% output change and 0.2 cm changes in buildup could be detected with 2.5σ confidence. Shifting the homogenous phantom laterally resulted in detectable MRD and σ_RD changes, and the cross-correlation function calculated the shift to within 0.5 mm for the heterogeneous phantom. MRD and σ_RD values were significantly associated with the presence of gas for five of the six patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid analyses of automatically acquired Halcyon™ exit images could detect mid-treatment changes with high sensitivity, though appropriate thresholds will need to be set. This study presents the first steps toward developing effortless image evaluation for all aspects of every patient's treatment.

Complexity metrics for IMRT and VMAT plans: a review of current literature and applications

Modulated radiotherapy with multileaf collimators is widely used to improve target conformity and normal tissue sparing. This introduced an additional degree of complexity, studied by multiple teams through different properties. Three categories of complexity metrics were considered in this review: fluence, deliverability and accuracy metrics. The first part of this review is dedicated to the inventory of these complexity metrics. Different applications of these metrics emerged. Influencing the optimizer by integrating complexity metrics into the cost function has been little explored and requires more investigations. In modern treatment planning system, it remains confined to MUs or treatment time limitation. A large majority of studies calculated metrics only for analysis, without plan modification. The main application was to streamline the patient specific quality assurance workload, investigating the capability of complexity metrics to predict patient specific quality assurance results. Additionally complexity metrics were used to analyze behaviour of TPS optimizer, compare TPS, operators and plan properties, and perform multicentre audit. Their potential was also explored in the context of adaptive radiotherapy and automation planning. The second part of the review gives an overview of these studies based on the complexity metrics.

Feasibility of a GATE Monte Carlo platform in a clinical pretreatment QA system for VMAT treatment plans using TrueBeam with an HD120 multileaf collimator

Purpose

To evaluate the quality of patient‐specific complicated treatment plans, including commercialized treatment planning systems (TPS) and commissioned beam data, we developed a process of quality assurance (QA) using a Monte Carlo (MC) platform. Specifically, we constructed an interface system that automatically converts treatment plan and dose matrix data in digital imaging and communications in medicine to an MC dose‐calculation engine. The clinical feasibility of the system was evaluated.

Materials and Methods

A dose‐calculation engine based on GATE v8.1 was embedded in our QA system and in a parallel computing system to significantly reduce the computation time. The QA system automatically converts parameters in volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans to files for dose calculation using GATE. The system then calculates dose maps. Energies of 6 MV, 10 MV, 6 MV flattening filter free (FFF), and 10 MV FFF from a TrueBeam with HD120 were modeled and commissioned. To evaluate the beam models, percentage depth dose (PDD) values, MC calculation profiles, and measured beam data were compared at various depths (D_max, 5 cm, 10 cm, and 20 cm), field sizes, and energies. To evaluate the feasibility of the QA system for clinical use, doses measured for clinical VMAT plans using films were compared to dose maps calculated using our MC‐based QA system.

Results

A LINAC QA system was analyzed by PDD and profile according to the secondary collimator and multileaf collimator (MLC). Values for MC calculations and TPS beam data obtained using CC13 ion chamber (IBA Dosimetry, Germany) were consistent within 1.0%. Clinical validation using a gamma index was performed for VMAT treatment plans using a solid water phantom and arbitrary patient data. The gamma evaluation results (with criteria of 3%/3 mm) were 98.1%, 99.1%, 99.2%, and 97.1% for energies of 6 MV, 10 MV, 6 MV FFF, and 10 MV FFF, respectively.

Conclusions

We constructed an MC‐based QA system for evaluating patient treatment plans and evaluated its feasibility in clinical practice. We observed robust agreement between dose calculations from our QA system and measurements for VMAT plans. Our QA system could be useful in other clinical settings, such as small‐field SRS procedures or analyses of secondary cancer risk, for which dose calculations using TPS are difficult to verify.

Quality assurance of intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment planning using head and neck phantom

Purpose

The purpose of this study is the verification of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) head neck treatment planning with one-dimensional and two-dimensional (2D) dosimeters using imaging and radiation oncology core (IROC) Houston head &amp; neck (H&amp;N) phantom.

Method

The image of the H&amp;N phantom was obtained by computed tomography scan which was then transferred to Pinnacle@3 treatment planning system (TPS) for treatment planning. The contouring of the target volumes and critical organ were done manually and dose constraints were set for each organ according to IROC prescription. The plan was optimised by adoptive convolution algorithm to meet the IROC criteria and collapse cone convolution algorithm calculated the delivered doses for treatment. Varian Clinac 2110 was used to deliver the treatment plan to the phantom, the process of irradiation and measurement were repeated three times for reproducibility and reliability. The treatment plan was verified by measuring the doses from thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and GafChromic external beam therapy 2 films. The agreement between the planned and delivered doses were checked by calculating the percentage dose differences, analysing their isodose line profiles and 2D gamma maps.

Results

The average percent dose difference of 1·8% was obtained between computed doses by TPS and measured doses from TLDs, however these differences were found to be higher for organ at risk. The film dose profile was well in agreement with the planned dose distribution with distance to agreement of 1·5 mm. The gamma analysis of the computed and recorded doses passed the criteria of 3%/3 mm with passing percentages of &gt;96%, which shows successful authentication of delivered doses for IMRT.

Conclusion

IMRT pre-treatment validation can be done with IROC anthropomorphic phantoms, which is essential for the delivery of modulated radiotherapies. It was concluded that films and TLDs can be used as quality assurance tools for IMRT.

Dose verification of volumetric-modulated arc therapy using one-dimensional and two-dimensional dosimeters

Purpose

To verify dose delivery and quality assurance of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for head and neck (H&amp;N) cancer.

Method

The Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Houston (IROC-H) H&amp;N phantom with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and films, were imaged with computed tomography scan and the reconstructed image was transferred to pinnacle treatment planning system (TPS). On TPS, the planning target volume (PTV), secondary target volume (STV) and organ at risk (OAR) were delineated manually and a treatment plan was made. The dose constraints were determined for the concerned organs according to IROC-H prescription. The treatment plan was optimised using adoptive convolution algorithm to improve dose homogeneity and conformity. The dose calculation was performed using C.C Convolution algorithm and a Varian True Beam linear accelerator was used to deliver the treatment plan to the H&amp;N phantom. The delivered radiation dose to the phantom was measured through TLDs and GafChromic external beam radiotherapy 2 (EBT2) films. The dosimetric performance of the VMAT delivery was studied by analysing percent dose difference, isodose line profile and gamma analysis of the TPS-computed dose and linac-delivered doses.

Result

The percent dose difference of 3.8% was observed between the planned and measured doses of TLDs and a 1.5-mm distance to agreement (DTA) was observed by comparing isodose line profiles. Passed the gamma criteria of 3%/3 mm was with good percentages.

Conclusion

The dosimetric performance of VMAT delivery for a challenging H&amp;N radiotherapy can be verified using TLDs and films embedded in an anthropomorphic H&amp;N phantom.

Impact of Peer Review in the Radiation Treatment Planning Process: Experience of a Tertiary Care University Hospital in Pakistan

PURPOSE

To evaluate and report the frequency of changes in radiation therapy treatment plans after peer review in a simulation review meeting once a week.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between July 1 and August 31, 2016, the radiation plans of 116 patients were discussed in departmental simulation review meetings. All plans were finalized by the primary radiation oncologist before presenting them in the meeting. A team of radiation oncologists reviewed each plan, and their suggestions were documented as no change, major change, minor change, or missing contour. Changes were further classified as changes in clinical target volume, treatment field, or dose. All recommendations were stratified on the basis of treatment intent, site, and technique. Data were analyzed by Statistical Package for the Social Sciences and are presented descriptively.

RESULTS

Out of 116 plans, 26 (22.4%) were recommended for changes. Minor changes were suggested in 15 treatment plans (12.9%) and a major change in 10 (8.6%), and only one plan was suggested for missing contour. The frequency of change recommendations was greater in radical radiation plans than in palliative plans (92.3% v 7.7%). The head and neck was the most common treatment site recommended for any changes (42.3%). Most of the changes were recommended in the technique planned with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (50%). Clinical target volume (73.1%) was identified as the most frequent parameter suggested for any change, followed by treatment field (19.2%) and dose (0.08%).

CONCLUSION

Peer review is an important tool that can be used to overcome deficiencies in radiation treatment plans, with a goal of improved and individualized patient care. Our study reports changes in up to a quarter of radiotherapy plans.

Use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy for nasopharyngeal cancer in Japan: analysis using a national database

Background

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) yields better outcomes and fewer toxicities for radiation therapy (RT) of head and neck cancers (HNCs), including nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC). IMRT is the standard RT treatment and has been widely adopted in Western countries to treat HNCs. However, its uptake in clinical practice among NPC patients has never been studied.

Methods

We investigated the use of IMRT for NPC using data from a nationwide cancer registry to describe the use of IMRT among NPC patients in Japan. We analyzed the data of patients with HNC, including NPC, who underwent IMRT between 2012 and 2014, as recorded in the hospital-based cancer registries linked with insurance claims. We calculated the proportion of patients with NPC who underwent IMRT at each hospital. To evaluate the use of IMRT for NPC, the IMRT use for NPC was compared with the proportion of patients with prostate cancer who underwent IMRT.

Results

Among 508 patients with NPC who underwent RT at one of 87 hospitals, 348 (69%) underwent IMRT. This proportion gradually increased between 2012 and 2014 (62%, 64% and 77%). Meanwhile, 4790 patients with prostate cancer (90%) underwent IMRT. Although some hospitals where IMRT was performed treated many patients with NPC, the proportion of patients with NPC who were treated with IMRT was low.

Conclusions

IMRT has not been widely adopted in Japan for treating NPC. Barriers for adopting its use should be identified to close the gap between the standard and actual medical practice in Japan.

National survey of patient specific IMRT quality assurance in China

BACKGROUND

To analyze and present the China's national survey on patient-specific IMRT quality assurance (QA).

METHODS

A national survey was conducted in all radiotherapy centers in China to collect comprehensive information on status of IMRT QA practice, including machine, technique, equipment, issues and suggestions.

RESULTS

Four hundred and three centers responded to this survey, accounting for 56.92% of all the centers implementing IMRT in China. The total number of medical physicists and the total number of patients treated with IMRT annually in these centers was 1599 and 305,000 respectively. All centers implemented measurement-based verification. Point dose verification and 2D dose verification was implemented in 331 and 399 centers, respectively. Three hundred forty-eight centers had 2D arrays, and 52 centers had detector devices designed to measure VMAT beams. EPID and film were used in 78 and 70 centers, respectively. Seventeen and 20 centers used log file and 3D DVH analysis, respectively. One hundred sixty-eight centers performed measurement-based verification not for each patient based on different selection criteria. The techniques and methods varied significantly in both point dose and dose distribution verification, from evaluation metrics, criteria, tolerance limit, and steps to check failed IMRT QA plans. Major issues identified in this survey were the limited resources of physicists, QA devices, and linacs.

CONCLUSIONS

IMRT QA was implemented in all the surveyed centers. The practice of IMRT QA varied significantly between centers. An increase in personnel, QA devices and linacs is highly desired. National standard, guideline, regulation and training programs are urgently needed in China for consistent and effective implementation of IMRT QA.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost for locally advanced breast cancer: a prospective study on toxicity and quality of life

Radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery and mastectomy with node positive disease has been shown to reduce risk of recurrence and mortality in the treatment of breast cancer. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) after conservative surgery offers several advantages over conventional RT including improved acute and late toxicity and quality of life (QoL). We undertook this study to prospectively evaluate acute (≤90 days after last dose of radiotherapy) and long-term (>90 days) cutaneous, esophageal, and fibrosis toxicity and QoL in breast cancer patients treated by adjuvant IMRT after breast surgery. We included patients with complex volumes for which 3D RT does not allow a good coverage of target volumes and sparing organs at risk. We report here an interim analysis with a median follow-up of 13.1 months (range, 6.5–25.9 months). Most of the acute toxicity was cutaneous (95.9%) and oesophageal (59.6%), and mostly grade 1 and 2. Medium-term cutaneous toxicity rate was 25.6%, and mostly grade 1. Medium-term esophageal toxicity was rare (1.8%). In this series acute oesophageal toxicity was found to be associated with dosimetric factors. QoL was well preserved throughout the study, and aesthetic outcomes were good. Based on these data, tomotherapy may be a favorable alternative to other techniques in patients needing a complex irradiation of the breast and lymph node volumes.

An in-silico quality assurance study of contouring target volumes in thoracic tumors within a cooperative group setting

•

We aimed at quantifying inter-observer Pancoast tumors delineation variability.

•

Experts’ delineations were used to define ground truth.

•

Other observers’ delineations were compared against ground truth.

•

High degree of variability was noted for most target volumes except GTV_P.

•

This unveils potentials for protocol modification for future IMRT studies.

Introduction

Target delineation variability is a significant technical impediment in multi-institutional trials which employ intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), as there is a real potential for clinically meaningful variances that can impact the outcomes in clinical trials. The goal of this study is to determine the variability of target delineation among participants from different institutions as part of Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) Radiotherapy Committee’s multi-institutional in-silico quality assurance study in patients with Pancoast tumors as a “dry run” for trial implementation.

Methods

CT simulation scans were acquired from four patients with Pancoast tumor. Two patients had simulation 4D-CT and FDG-FDG PET-CT while two patients had 3D-CT and FDG-FDG PET-CT. Seventeen SWOG-affiliated physicians independently delineated target volumes defined as gross primary and nodal tumor volumes (GTV_P & GTV_N), clinical target volume (CTV), and planning target volume (PTV).

Six board-certified thoracic radiation oncologists were designated as the ‘Experts’ for this study. Their delineations were used to create a simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) contours using ADMIRE software (Elekta AB, Sweden 2017). Individual participants’ contours were then compared with Experts’ STAPLE contours.

Results

When compared to the Experts’ STAPLE, GTV_P had the best agreement among all participants, while GTV_N showed the lowest agreement among all participants. There were no statistically significant differences in all studied parameters for all TVs for cases with 4D-CT versus cases with 3D-CT simulation scans.

Conclusions

High degree of inter-observer variation was noted for all target volume except for GTV_P, unveiling potentials for protocol modification for subsequent clinically meaningful improvement in target definition. Various similarity indices exist that can be used to guide multi-institutional radiotherapy delineation QA credentialing.

Long-Term Pulmonary Outcomes of a Feasibility Study of Inverse-Planned, Multibeam Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy in Node-Positive Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Regional Nodal Irradiation

PURPOSE

Multibeam intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) enhances the therapeutic index by increasing the dosimetric coverage of the targeted tumor tissues while minimizing volumes of adjacent organs receiving high doses of RT. The tradeoff is that a greater volume of lung is exposed to low doses of RT, raising concern about the risk of radiation pneumonitis (RP).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between July 2010 and January 2013, patients with node-positive breast cancer received inverse-planned, multibeam IMRT to the breast or chest wall and regional nodes, including the internal mammary nodes (IMNs). The primary endpoint was feasibility, predefined by dosimetric treatment planning criteria. Secondary endpoints included the incidence of RP grade 3 or greater and changes in pulmonary function measured with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 scales, pulmonary function tests and community-acquired pneumonia questionnaires, obtained at baseline and 6 months after IMRT. Clinical follow-up was every 6 months for up to 5 years.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 53.4 months (range, 0-82 months). Of 113 patients enrolled, 104 completed follow-up procedures. Coverage of the breast or chest wall and IMN was comprehensive (median 48.1 Gy and 48.9 Gy, respectively). The median volume of lung receiving a high dose (V20Gy) and a low dose (V5) was 29% and 100%, respectively. The overall rate of respiratory toxicities was 10.6% (11/104), including 1 grade 3 RP event (0.96%). No differences were found in pulmonary function test or community-acquired pneumonia scores after IMRT. The 5-year rates of locoregional recurrence-free, disease-free, and overall survival were 93.2%, 63.6%, and 80.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Multibeam IMRT in patients with breast cancer receiving regional nodal irradiation was dosimetrically feasible, based on early treatment planning criteria. Despite the large volume of lung receiving low-dose RT, the incidence of grade 3 RP was remarkably low, justifying inverse-planned IMRT as a treatment modality for patients with high-risk breast cancer in whom conventional RT techniques prove inadequate.

A novel approach to EPID-based 3D volumetric dosimetry for IMRT and VMAT QA

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are relatively complex treatment delivery techniques and require quality assurance (QA) procedures. Pre-treatment dosimetric verification represents a fundamental QA procedure in daily clinical routine in radiation therapy. The purpose of this study is to develop an EPID-based approach to reconstruct a 3D dose distribution as imparted to a virtual cylindrical water phantom to be used for plan-specific pre-treatment dosimetric verification for IMRT and VMAT plans. For each depth, the planar 2D dose distributions acquired in air were back-projected and convolved by depth-specific scatter and attenuation kernels. The kernels were obtained by making use of scatter and attenuation models to iteratively estimate the parameters from a set of reference measurements. The derived parameters served as a look-up table for reconstruction of arbitrary measurements. The summation of the reconstructed 3D dose distributions resulted in the integrated 3D dose distribution of the treatment delivery. The accuracy of the proposed approach was validated in clinical IMRT and VMAT plans by means of gamma evaluation, comparing the reconstructed 3D dose distributions with Octavius measurement. The comparison was carried out using (3%, 3 mm) criteria scoring 99% and 96% passing rates for IMRT and VMAT, respectively. An accuracy comparable to the one of the commercial device for 3D volumetric dosimetry was demonstrated. In addition, five IMRT and five VMAT were validated against the 3D dose calculation performed by the TPS in a water phantom using the same passing rate criteria. The median passing rates within the ten treatment plans was 97.3%, whereas the lowest was 95%. Besides, the reconstructed 3D distribution is obtained without predictions relying on forward dose calculation and without external phantom or dosimetric devices. Thus, the approach provides a fully automated, fast and easy QA procedure for plan-specific pre-treatment dosimetric verification.

Hypofractionated postmastectomy radiotherapy with helical tomotherapy in patients with immediate breast reconstruction: dosimetric results and acute/intermediate toxicity evaluation

The aim of this study was to evaluate the dosimetry and toxicity of hypofractionation in postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in breast cancer (BC) patients. Stage II-III BC patients with implant-based immediate breast reconstruction received PMRT to the chest wall (CW) and to the infra/supraclavicular nodal region (NR) using a 15-fraction schedule (2.67 Gy/fraction) and helical IMRT (Tomotherapy^® System, Accuray Incorporated, Sunnyvale, CA). A score was assigned to each treatment plan in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage of CW and NR and the sparing of the organs at risk (OARs). The total score for each plan was calculated. Toxicity was prospectively assessed according to validated scales. Data from 120 consecutive patients treated in the period 2012-2015 were analysed with a median follow-up from the end of radiotherapy of 13.2 months (range 0.0-35 months). 70.8% (85/120) of the plans had high total scores as a result of an optimal coverage of both CW and RN and optimal sparing of all OARs. The maximum acute toxicity was of grade 2 in 36.7% of the cases. Early late toxicity was mild in the majority of cases. In the study population, helical tomotherapy-based IMRT produced optimal treatment plans in most cases. Acute and late toxicity was mild/moderate. Hypofractionated helical IMRT appears to be safe and feasible in the moderate term for PMRT.

Setup in a clinical workflow and impact on radiotherapy routine of an in vivo dosimetry procedure with an electronic portal imaging device

High conformal techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy are widely used in overloaded radiotherapy departments. In vivo dosimetric screening is essential in this environment to avoid important dosimetric errors. This work examines the feasibility of introducing in vivo dosimetry (IVD) checks in a radiotherapy routine. The causes of dosimetric disagreements between delivered and planned treatments were identified and corrected during the course of treatment. The efficiency of the corrections performed and the added workload needed for the entire procedure were evaluated.

The IVD procedure was based on an electronic portal imaging device. A total of 3682 IVD tests were performed for 147 patients who underwent head and neck, abdomen, pelvis, breast, and thorax radiotherapy treatments. Two types of indices were evaluated and used to determine if the IVD tests were within tolerance levels: the ratio R between the reconstructed and planned isocentre doses and a transit dosimetry based on the γ-analysis of the electronic portal images. The causes of test outside tolerance level were investigated and corrected and IVD test was repeated during subsequent fraction. The time needed for each step of the IVD procedure was registered. Pelvis, abdomen, and head and neck treatments had 10% of tests out of tolerance whereas breast and thorax treatments accounted for up to 25%. The patient setup was the main cause of 90% of the IVD tests out of tolerance and the remaining 10% was due to patient morphological changes. An average time of 42 min per day was sufficient to monitor a daily workload of 60 patients in treatment. This work shows that IVD performed with an electronic portal imaging device is feasible in an overloaded department and enables the timely realignment of the treatment quality indices in order to achieve a patient’s final treatment compliant with the one prescribed.

VMAT radiation-induced nausea and vomiting in adjuvant breast cancer radiotherapy: The incidental effect of low-dose bath exposure

Background and purpose

To investigate the hypothesis on low-dose bath exposure related to radiation-induced nausea and vomiting (RINV) in adjuvant breast volumetric modulated arch therapy (VMAT).

Methods and materials

A total of 106 consecutive breast cancer patients (pts) treated with adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) with VMAT from January 2013 to May 2016 were evaluated retrospectively. For each pt, a planning CT was reimported and the coeliac plexus and gastroesophageal junction with gastric mouth (GEJCPs) were contoured as a new organ at risk (OAR) in the upper abdominal area. RINV was associated with Dmax and Dmean to GEJCPs. Univariate analysis with χ², t-test, and Pearson’s covariance was used for statistical analysis.

Results

Of 106 pts, 64% complained of acute RINV according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.03. RINV was related to Dmax > 10 Gy and Dmean > 3 Gy to GEJCPs (P < 0.005). The radiation breast side and planning target volume (PTV) correlated with RINV.

Conclusions

RINV in VMAT breast radiotherapy could be a new emerging acute side effect due to a low dose bath to upper abdominal structures such as the GEJCPs. A Dmax < 10 Gy and Dmean < 3 Gy to GEJCPs should be constrained in VMAT planning to minimize RINV risk in breast radiotherapy.

Adherence to ICRU-83 reporting recommendations is inadequate in prostate dosimetry studies

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate if the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) 83 recommendations for reporting dosimetric endpoints are followed in published prostate studies using modulated techniques.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Prostate dosimetry studies using inverse planning techniques were identified through a search of PubMed and EMBASE databases. These studies were analyzed to determine if the endpoints reported followed the recommendations outlined in ICRU-83. A data collection form was completed and any alternative methods of reporting were recorded. Results were analyzed using frequencies, percentages, and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

The ICRU-83 recommendations were not followed in the majority of studies. For the planning target volume, the dose received by 2% of the volume, the dose received by 98% of the volume, and the dose received by 50% of the volume were reported in 22.9%, 18.8%, and 8.3% of studies, respectively. The adherence to reporting for the clinical target volume was below 5% for all specifications. The mean dose, the dose received by a specified volume, and dose received by 2% of the volume for organs at risk were reported in 47.1%, 83.3%, and 16.7%, respectively. The homogeneity index was used in 14.6% of studies. Conformity was discussed in 45.8% of studies. Confidence intervals were included in 37.5% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting recommendations of ICRU-83 were not adhered to in the majority of the dosimetry studies reviewed, highlighting the need for greater diligence for authors and reviewers when publishing planning outcomes for modulated techniques.

Synchronous bilateral breast cancer irradiation: clinical and dosimetrical issues using volumetric modulated arc therapy and simultaneous integrated boost

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present retrospective analysis was to evaluate dosimetric parameters, feasibility and outcome for Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancer (SBBC) patients treated with adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) by Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT).

METHODS

From September 2011 to April 2016, 1100 Breast Cancer (BC) patients were referred to our institution to receive adjuvant breast RT, and those with SBBC were selected for the present analysis. A total of 16 patients were identified. A total dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions was prescribed to the Planning Target Volume of the whole bilateral breast (PTV_BN) with or without the supraclavicular and infraclavicular nodes, while a total dose of 60 Gy in 25 fractions was prescribed to the surgical bed (PTV_boost). Several V _xGy and Dx% parameters were analyzed for the PTVs, together with Conformity and Homogeneity indexes (CI, HI), and for the critical Organs at risk (OARs), lungs and heart first.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 24 months, no acute or late side effects more than grade 2 were observed. All patients are alive without any sign of disease. For target dose coverage, our observed inter-patients averages (±1 sd) were V _{95% Dp} = 96.7 ± 1.6% (96.3 ± 1.8%) to the left (right) PTV_BN, V _{95% Dp} = 98.6 ± 2.7% (99.4 ± 0.9%) to the left (right) PTV_boost, and D _2% = 64.4 ± 1.8 Gy (65.0 ± 2.0 Gy) to the left (right) PTV_boost, respectively. With regard to the heart, the inter-patient average of D _mean was 8.3 ± 3.3 Gy. For the lungs, the inter-patient average of D _mean, V _5 Gy and V _20 Gy were 11.8 ± 2.3 Gy, 78.9 ± 15.3% and 15.7 ± 5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The present retrospective analysis showed the feasibility, tolerability and safety of VMAT in the treatment of SBBC patients. Further studies are necessary to confirm these preliminary data.

IMRT QA: Selecting gamma criteria based on error detection sensitivity

PURPOSE

The gamma comparison is widely used to evaluate the agreement between measurements and treatment planning system calculations in patient-specific intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) quality assurance (QA). However, recent publications have raised concerns about the lack of sensitivity when employing commonly used gamma criteria. Understanding the actual sensitivity of a wide range of different gamma criteria may allow the definition of more meaningful gamma criteria and tolerance limits in IMRT QA. We present a method that allows the quantitative determination of gamma criteria sensitivity to induced errors which can be applied to any unique combination of device, delivery technique, and software utilized in a specific clinic.

METHODS

A total of 21 DMLC IMRT QA measurements (ArcCHECK®, Sun Nuclear) were compared to QA plan calculations with induced errors. Three scenarios were studied: MU errors, multi-leaf collimator (MLC) errors, and the sensitivity of the gamma comparison to changes in penumbra width. Gamma comparisons were performed between measurements and error-induced calculations using a wide range of gamma criteria, resulting in a total of over 20 000 gamma comparisons. Gamma passing rates for each error class and case were graphed against error magnitude to create error curves in order to represent the range of missed errors in routine IMRT QA using 36 different gamma criteria.

RESULTS

This study demonstrates that systematic errors and case-specific errors can be detected by the error curve analysis. Depending on the location of the error curve peak (e.g., not centered about zero), 3%/3 mm threshold = 10% at 90% pixels passing may miss errors as large as 15% MU errors and ±1 cm random MLC errors for some cases. As the dose threshold parameter was increased for a given %Diff/distance-to-agreement (DTA) setting, error sensitivity was increased by up to a factor of two for select cases. This increased sensitivity with increasing dose threshold was consistent across all studied combinations of %Diff/DTA. Criteria such as 2%/3 mm and 3%/2 mm with a 50% threshold at 90% pixels passing are shown to be more appropriately sensitive without being overly strict. However, a broadening of the penumbra by as much as 5 mm in the beam configuration was difficult to detect with commonly used criteria, as well as with the previously mentioned criteria utilizing a threshold of 50%.

CONCLUSIONS

We have introduced the error curve method, an analysis technique which allows the quantitative determination of gamma criteria sensitivity to induced errors. The application of the error curve method using DMLC IMRT plans measured on the ArcCHECK® device demonstrated that large errors can potentially be missed in IMRT QA with commonly used gamma criteria (e.g., 3%/3 mm, threshold = 10%, 90% pixels passing). Additionally, increasing the dose threshold value can offer dramatic increases in error sensitivity. This approach may allow the selection of more meaningful gamma criteria for IMRT QA and is straightforward to apply to other combinations of devices and treatment techniques.

3D VMAT Verification Based on Monte Carlo Log File Simulation with Experimental Feedback from Film Dosimetry

A model based on a specific phantom, called QuAArC, has been designed for the evaluation of planning and verification systems of complex radiotherapy treatments, such as volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). This model uses the high accuracy provided by the Monte Carlo (MC) simulation of log files and allows the experimental feedback from the high spatial resolution of films hosted in QuAArC. This cylindrical phantom was specifically designed to host films rolled at different radial distances able to take into account the entrance fluence and the 3D dose distribution. Ionization chamber measurements are also included in the feedback process for absolute dose considerations. In this way, automated MC simulation of treatment log files is implemented to calculate the actual delivery geometries, while the monitor units are experimentally adjusted to reconstruct the dose-volume histogram (DVH) on the patient CT. Prostate and head and neck clinical cases, previously planned with Monaco and Pinnacle treatment planning systems and verified with two different commercial systems (Delta4 and COMPASS), were selected in order to test operational feasibility of the proposed model. The proper operation of the feedback procedure was proved through the achieved high agreement between reconstructed dose distributions and the film measurements (global gamma passing rates > 90% for the 2%/2 mm criteria). The necessary discretization level of the log file for dose calculation and the potential mismatching between calculated control points and detection grid in the verification process were discussed. Besides the effect of dose calculation accuracy of the analytic algorithm implemented in treatment planning systems for a dynamic technique, it was discussed the importance of the detection density level and its location in VMAT specific phantom to obtain a more reliable DVH in the patient CT. The proposed model also showed enough robustness and efficiency to be considered as a pre-treatment VMAT verification system.

Impact of Neuroradiology-Based Peer Review on Head and Neck Radiotherapy Target Delineation

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

While standard guidelines assist in target delineation for head and neck radiation therapy planning, the complex anatomy, varying patterns of spread, unusual or advanced presentations, and high risk of treatment-related toxicities produce continuous interpretive challenges. In 2007, we instituted weekly treatment planning quality assurance rounds as a joint enterprise of head and neck radiation oncology and neuroradiology. Here we describe its impact on head and neck radiation therapy target delineation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For 7 months, treatment planning quality assurance included 80 cases of definitive (48%) or postoperative (52%) head and neck radiation therapy. The planning CT and associated target volumes were reviewed in comparison with diagnostic imaging studies. Alterations were catalogued.

RESULTS

Of the 80 cases, 44 (55%) were altered, and of these, 61% had clinically significant changes resulting in exclusion or inclusion of a distinct area or structure. Reasons for alteration included the following: gross or extant tumor, 26/44 (59%); elective or postoperative coverage, 25/44 (57%); lymph nodes, 13/44 (30%); bone, 7/44 (16%); skull base, 7/44 (16%); normal organs, 5/44 (11%); perineural, 3/44 (7%); distant metastasis, 2/44 (5%); and eye, 1/44 (2%). Gross tumor changes ranged from 0.5% to 133.64%, with a median change in volume of 5.95 mm³ (7.86%). Volumes were more likely to be increased (73%) than decreased (27%).

CONCLUSIONS

A collaborative approach to head and neck treatment planning quality assurance has an impact. Cases likely to have challenging patterns of infiltrative, intracranial, nodal, orbital, or perineural spread warrant intensive imaging-based review in collaboration with a diagnostic neuroradiologist.

Survival and quality of life in oropharyngeal cancer patients treated with primary chemoradiation after salivary gland transfer

Objectives:

Salivary gland transfer surgery can reduce xerostomia in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing primary chemoradiation. A potential drawback of salivary gland transfer is the treatment delay associated with the surgery, and its complications. This study aimed to determine whether the treatment delay affects patient survival and to evaluate patient quality of life after salivary gland transfer.

Methods:

A retrospective analysis of 138 patients (salivary gland transfer group, n = 58; non-salivary gland transfer group, n = 80) was performed. Patient survival was compared between these groups using multivariate analysis. Salivary gland transfer patients were further evaluated for surgical complications and for quality of life using the head and neck module of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire.

Results:

Salivary gland transfer and non-salivary gland transfer patients had comparable baseline clinical characteristics. Salivary gland transfer patients experienced a median treatment delay of 16.5 days before chemoradiation (p = 0.035). Multivariate analysis showed that this did not, however, correspond to a survival disadvantage (p = 0.24 and p = 0.97 for disease-free and disease-specific survival, respectively). A very low complication rate was reported for the salivary gland transfer group (1.7 per cent). Questionnaire scores for the item ‘xerostomia’ were very low in salivary gland transfer patients.

Conclusion:

The treatment delay associated with salivary gland transfer surgery does not negatively affect patient survival. Oropharyngeal squamous cell patients have an excellent quality of life after salivary gland transfer.

American College of Radiology (ACR) Radiation Oncology Practice Accreditation: A pattern of change

PURPOSE

The American College of Radiology (ACR) Radiation Oncology Practice Accreditation (ROPA) program has accredited more than 600 sites since 2006, including practices within academic, hospital-based, and freestanding settings. The purpose of this report is to evaluate and compare patterns of change in common deficiencies over time.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The ACR database was queried to analyze the common deficiencies noted by the ACR ROPA program between 2012 and 2014. Deficiencies were ranked and compared to the top 10 items that were reported in 2006.

RESULTS

Between 2012 and 2014, 272 new applications and 306 renewals were received. Timely verification of port films, documentation of physician peer review, inclusion of essential elements of a treatment prescription, evidence of a final physicist chart review, documentation of weekly treatment visits, and inclusion of key elements of brachytherapy documentation all improved when compared with 2000-2005. Deficiencies ranked higher on the current review compared with the previous analysis included documentation of a robust quality assurance program, missing elements from the history and physical documentation, and documentation of follow-up visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of changes in patterns of deficiencies across radiation oncology practices reflects changes in our field such as the growing reliance on electronic records and imaging. Accreditation continues to play an integral role in establishing national standards and a nonpunitive, peer-reviewed method to evaluate a practice's compliance with national quality guidelines.