Comprehensive Australasian multicentre dosimetric intercomparison: Issues, logistics and recommendations

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

The Japan Clinical Oncology Group-Radiation Therapy Study Group (JCOG-RTSG) has initiated several multicenter clinical trials for high-precision radiotherapy, which are presently ongoing. When conducting multi-center clinical trials, a large difference in physical quantities, such as the absolute doses to the target and the organ at risk, as well as the irradiation localization accuracy, affects the treatment outcome. Therefore, the differences in the various physical quantities used in different institutions must be within an acceptable range for conducting multicenter clinical trials, and this must be verified with medical physics consideration. In 2011, Japan's first Medical Physics Working Group (MPWG) in the JCOG-RTSG was established to perform this medical-physics-related verification for multicenter clinical trials. We have developed an auditing method to verify the accuracy of the absolute dose and the irradiation localization. Subsequently, we credentialed the participating institutions in the JCOG multicenter clinical trials that were using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for lungs, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for several disease sites, and proton beam therapy (PT) for the liver. From the verification results, accuracies of the absolute dose and the irradiation localization among the participating institutions of the multicenter clinical trial were assured, and the JCOG clinical trials could be initiated.

Remote dosimetric auditing of clinical trials: The need for vendor specific models to convert images to dose

INTRODUCTION

A previous pilot study has demonstrated the feasibility of a novel image-based approach for remote dosimetric auditing of clinical trials. The approach uses a model to convert in-air acquired intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) images to delivered dose inside a virtual phantom. The model was developed using images from an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) on a Varian linear accelerator. It was tuned using beam profiles and field size factors (FSFs) of a series of square fields measured in water tank. This work investigates the need for vendor specific conversion models for image-based auditing. The EPID measured profile and FSF data for Varian (vendor 1) and Elekta (vendor 2) systems are compared along with the performance of the existing Varian model (VM) and a new Elekta model (EM) for a series of audit IMRT fields measured on vendor 2 systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The EPID measured beam profile and FSF data were studied for the two vendors to quantify and understand their relevant dosimetric differences. Then, an EM was developed converting EPID to dose in the virtual water phantom using a vendor 2 water tank data and images from corresponding EPID. The VM and EM were compared for predicting vendor 2 measured dose in water tank. Then, the performance of the new EM was compared to the VM for auditing of 54 IMRT fields from four vendor 2 facilities. Statistical significance of using vendor specific models was determined.

RESULTS

Observed dosimetry differences between the two vendors suggested developing an EM would be beneficial. The EM performed better than VM for vendor 2 square and IMRT fields. The IMRT audit gamma pass rates were (99.8 ± 0.5)%, (98.6 ± 2.3)% and (97.0 ± 3.0)% at respectively 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm and 2%/2 mm with improvements at most fields compared with using the VM. For the pilot audit, the difference between gamma results of the two vendors was reduced when using vendor specific models (VM: P < 0.0001, vendor specific models: P = 0.0025).

CONCLUSION

A new model was derived to convert images from vendor 2 EPIDs to dose for remote auditing vendor 2 deliveries. Using vendor specific models is recommended to remotely audit systems from different vendors, however, the improvements found were not major.

A virtual dosimetry audit - Towards transferability of gamma index analysis between clinical trial QA groups

PURPOSE

Quality assurance (QA) for clinical trials is important. Lack of compliance can affect trial outcome. Clinical trial QA groups have different methods of dose distribution verification and analysis, all with the ultimate aim of ensuring trial compliance. The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of different processes to inform future dosimetry audit reciprocity.

MATERIALS

Six clinical trial QA groups participated. Intensity modulated treatment plans were generated for three different cases. A range of 17 virtual 'measurements' were generated by introducing a variety of simulated perturbations (such as MLC position deviations, dose differences, gantry rotation errors, Gaussian noise) to three different treatment plan cases. Participants were blinded to the 'measured' data details. Each group analysed the datasets using their own gamma index (γ) technique and using standardised parameters for passing criteria, lower dose threshold, γ normalisation and global γ.

RESULTS

For the same virtual 'measured' datasets, different results were observed using local techniques. For the standardised γ, differences in the percentage of points passing with γ < 1 were also found, however these differences were less pronounced than for each clinical trial QA group's analysis. These variations may be due to different software implementations of γ.

CONCLUSIONS

This virtual dosimetry audit has been an informative step in understanding differences in the verification of measured dose distributions between different clinical trial QA groups. This work lays the foundations for audit reciprocity between groups, particularly with more clinical trials being open to international recruitment.

Dosimetric end-to-end tests in a national audit of 3D conformal radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Independent dosimetry audits improve quality and safety of radiation therapy. This work reports on design and findings of a comprehensive 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) Level III audit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The audit was conducted as onsite audit using an anthropomorphic thorax phantom in an end-to-end test by the Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service (ACDS). Absolute dose point measurements were performed with Farmer-type ionization chambers. The audited treatment plans included open and half blocked fields, wedges and lung inhomogeneities. Audit results were determined as Pass Optimal Level (deviations within 3.3%), Pass Action Level (greater than 3.3% but within 5%) and Out of Tolerance (beyond 5%), as well as Reported Not Scored (RNS). The audit has been performed between July 2012 and January 2018 on 94 occasions, covering approximately 90% of all Australian facilities.

RESULTS

The audit pass rate was 87% (53% optimal). Fifty recommendations were given, mainly related to planning system commissioning. Dose overestimation behind low density inhomogeneities by the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) was identified across facilities and found to extend to beam setups which resemble a typical breast cancer treatment beam placement. RNS measurements inside lung showed a variation in the opposite direction: AAA under-dosed a target beyond lung and over-dosed the lung upstream and downstream of the target. Results also highlighted shortcomings of some superposition and convolution algorithms in modelling large angle wedges.

CONCLUSIONS

This audit showed that 3D-CRT dosimetry audits remain relevant and can identify fundamental global and local problems that also affect advanced treatments.

Novel methodologies for dosimetry audits: Adapting to advanced radiotherapy techniques

With new radiotherapy techniques, treatment delivery is becoming more complex and accordingly, these treatment techniques require dosimetry audits to test advanced aspects of the delivery to ensure best practice and safe patient treatment. This review of novel methodologies for dosimetry audits for advanced radiotherapy techniques includes recent developments and future techniques to be applied in dosimetry audits. Phantom-based methods (i.e. phantom-detector combinations) including independent audit equipment and local measurement equipment as well as phantom-less methods (i.e. portal dosimetry, transmission detectors and log files) are presented and discussed. Methodologies for both conventional linear accelerator (linacs) and new types of delivery units, i.e. Tomotherapy, stereotactic devices and MR-linacs, are reviewed. Novel dosimetry audit techniques such as portal dosimetry or log file evaluation have the potential to allow parallel auditing (i.e. performing an audit at multiple institutions at the same time), automation of data analysis and evaluation of multiple steps of the radiotherapy treatment chain. These methods could also significantly reduce the time needed for audit and increase the information gained. However, to maximise the potential, further development and harmonisation of dosimetry audit techniques are required before these novel methodologies can be applied.

An on-site audit system for dosimetry credentialing of intensity-modulated radiotherapy in Japanese Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) clinical trials

PURPOSE

This study was undertaken to analyze the results of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) dosimetry credentialing using a phantom in the Japanese Clinical Oncology Group clinical trials.

METHODS

All measurements were performed on-site. The IMRT phantom consisted of a phantom shell and a module. Two types of structures, including a C-shaped planning target volume (PTV) around a column-shaped organ at risk (OAR), were included in the module. Each participating institution was asked to image, plan, and treat the phantom. A prescription dose of 2Gy should cover 95% of the PTV. The plan should limit the maximum doses to the PTV and OAR to less than 110% and 60%, respectively. The pass criteria were ±3% in terms of chamber dosimetry and a difference in profile position ⩽2mm in the high-dose gradient area of film dosimetry. The positional difference was defined as the largest distance between the measured and calculated positions at doses of 60% or 80%. These tolerances were based on the Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology IMRT guidelines.

RESULTS

Credentialing was performed on a total of 44 treatment machines in 32 institutions from 2009 to 2015. All differences between measured and planned doses at the measurement points of the PTV were within 3%. The means±standard deviations of the positional differences were 1.0±0.4mm and 0.9±0.3mm without and with the phantom shell, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The dose differences and positional differences met the desired criteria in all institutions.

A 2D ion chamber array audit of wedged and asymmetric fields in an inhomogeneous lung phantom

PURPOSE

The Australian Clinical Dosimetry Service (ACDS) has implemented a new method of a nonreference condition Level II type dosimetric audit of radiotherapy services to increase measurement accuracy and patient safety within Australia. The aim of this work is to describe the methodology, tolerances, and outcomes from the new audit.

METHODS

The ACDS Level II audit measures the dose delivered in 2D planes using an ionization chamber based array positioned at multiple depths. Measurements are made in rectilinear homogeneous and inhomogeneous phantoms composed of slabs of solid water and lung. Computer generated computed tomography data sets of the rectilinear phantoms are supplied to the facility prior to audit for planning of a range of cases including reference fields, asymmetric fields, and wedged fields. The audit assesses 3D planning with 6 MV photons with a static (zero degree) gantry. Scoring is performed using local dose differences between the planned and measured dose within 80% of the field width. The overall audit result is determined by the maximum dose difference over all scoring points, cases, and planes. Pass (Optimal Level) is defined as maximum dose difference ≤3.3%, Pass (Action Level) is ≤5.0%, and Fail (Out of Tolerance) is >5.0%.

RESULTS

At close of 2013, the ACDS had performed 24 Level II audits. 63% of the audits passed, 33% failed, and the remaining audit was not assessable. Of the 15 audits that passed, 3 were at Pass (Action Level). The high fail rate is largely due to a systemic issue with modeling asymmetric 60° wedges which caused a delivered overdose of 5%-8%.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACDS has implemented a nonreference condition Level II type audit, based on ion chamber 2D array measurements in an inhomogeneous slab phantom. The powerful diagnostic ability of this audit has allowed the ACDS to rigorously test the treatment planning systems implemented in Australian radiotherapy facilities. Recommendations from audits have led to facilities modifying clinical practice and changing planning protocols.

Regional cancer centre demonstrates voluntary conformity with the national Radiation Oncology Practice Standards

Radiation Oncology Practice Standards have been developed over the last 10 years and were published for use in Australia in 2011. Although the majority of the radiation oncology community supports the implementation of the standards, there has been no mechanism for uniform assessment or governance. North Coast Cancer Institute's public radiation oncology service is provided across three main service centres on the north coast of NSW. With a strong focus on quality management, we embraced the opportunity to demonstrate conformity with the Radiation Oncology Practice Standards. The Local Health District's Clinical Governance units were engaged to perform assessments of our conformity with the standards and this was signed off as complete on 16 December 2013. The process of demonstrating conformity with the Radiation Oncology Practice Standards has enhanced the culture of quality in our centres. We have demonstrated that self-assessment utilising trained auditors is a viable method for centres to demonstrate conformity. National implementation of the Radiation Oncology Practice Standards will benefit individual centres and the broader radiation oncology community to improve the service delivered to our patients.