Quality and Safety in Radiation Oncology is the first book to provide an authoritative and evidence-based guide to the understanding and implementation of quality and safety procedures in radiation ...oncology practice. Alongside the rapid growth of technology and radiotherapy treatment options for cancer in recent years, quality and safety standards are not only of the utmost importance but best practices ensuring quality and safety are crucial aspect of modern radiation oncology training. A detailed exploration and review of these standards is a necessary part of radiation oncologist's professional competency, both in the clinical setting and at the study table while preparing for board review and MOC exams.Chapter topics range from fundamental concepts of value and quality to commissioning technology and the use of metrics. They include perspectives on quality and safety from the patient, third-party payers, as well as from the federal government. Other chapters cover prospective testing of quality, training and education, error identification and analysis, incidence reporting, as well as special technology and procedures, including MRI-guided radiation therapy, proton therapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), quality and safety procedures in resource-limited environments, and more.State-of-the-art quality assurance procedures and safety guidelines are the backbone of this unique and essential volume. Physicians, medical physicists, dosimetrists, radiotherapists, hospital administrators, and other healthcare professionals will find this resource an invaluable compendium of best practices in radiation oncology.Key Features:Case examples illustrate best practices and pitfallsSeveral dozen graphs, tables and figures help quantify the discussion of quality and safety throughout the textSection II covers all aspects of quality assurance procedures for the physicist
To quantify the error-detection effectiveness of commonly used quality control (QC) measures.
We analyzed incidents from 2007-2010 logged into a voluntary in-house, electronic incident learning ...systems at 2 academic radiation oncology clinics. None of the incidents resulted in patient harm. Each incident was graded for potential severity using the French Nuclear Safety Authority scoring scale; high potential severity incidents (score >3) were considered, along with a subset of 30 randomly chosen low severity incidents. Each report was evaluated to identify which of 15 common QC checks could have detected it. The effectiveness was calculated, defined as the percentage of incidents that each QC measure could detect, both for individual QC checks and for combinations of checks.
In total, 4407 incidents were reported, 292 of which had high-potential severity. High- and low-severity incidents were detectable by 4.0 ± 2.3 (mean ± SD) and 2.6 ± 1.4 QC checks, respectively (P<.001). All individual checks were less than 50% sensitive with the exception of pretreatment plan review by a physicist (63%). An effectiveness of 97% was achieved with 7 checks used in combination and was not further improved with more checks. The combination of checks with the highest effectiveness includes physics plan review, physician plan review, Electronic Portal Imaging Device-based in vivo portal dosimetry, radiation therapist timeout, weekly physics chart check, the use of checklists, port films, and source-to-skin distance checks. Some commonly used QC checks such as pretreatment intensity modulated radiation therapy QA do not substantially add to the ability to detect errors in these data.
The effectiveness of QC measures in radiation oncology depends sensitively on which checks are used and in which combinations. A small percentage of errors cannot be detected by any of the standard formal QC checks currently in broad use, suggesting that further improvements are needed. These data require confirmation with a broader incident-reporting database.
To characterize the effect of a prostate-rectum spacer on dose to rectum during external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer and to assess for factors correlated with rectal dose reduction.
...Fifty-two patients at 4 institutions were enrolled into a prospective pilot clinical trial. Patients underwent baseline scans and then were injected with perirectal spacing hydrogel and rescanned. Intensity modulated radiation therapy plans were created on both scans for comparison. The objectives were to establish rates of creation of ≥ 7.5 mm of prostate-rectal separation, and decrease in rectal V70 of ≥ 25%. Multiple regression analysis was performed to evaluate the associations between preinjection and postinjection changes in rectal V70 and changes in plan conformity, rectal volume, bladder volume, bladder V70, planning target volume (PTV), and postinjection midgland separation, gel volume, gel thickness, length of PTV/gel contact, and gel left-to-right symmetry.
Hydrogel resulted in ≥7.5-mm prostate-rectal separation in 95.8% of patients; 95.7% had decreased rectal V70 of ≥ 25%, with a mean reduction of 8.0 Gy. There were no significant differences in preinjection and postinjection prostate, PTV, rectal, and bladder volumes. Plan conformities were significantly different before versus after injection (P=.02); plans with worse conformity indexes after injection compared with before injection (n=13) still had improvements in rectal V70. In multiple regression analysis, greater postinjection reduction in V70 was associated with decreased relative postinjection plan conformity (P=.01). Reductions in V70 did not significantly vary by institution, despite significant interinstitutional variations in plan conformity. There were no significant relationships between reduction in V70 and the other characteristics analyzed.
Injection of hydrogel into the prostate-rectal interface resulted in dose reductions to rectum for >90% of patients treated. Rectal sparing was statistically significant across a range of 10 to 75 Gy and was demonstrated within the presence of significant interinstitutional variability in plan conformity, target definitions, and injection results.
Animal studies with ultrahigh dose-rate radiation therapy (FLASH, >40 Gy/s) preferentially spare normal tissues without sacrificing antitumor efficacy compared with conventional dose-rate radiation ...therapy (CONV). At the University of Washington, we developed a cyclotron-generated preclinical scattered proton beam with FLASH dose rates. We present the technical details of our FLASH radiation system and preliminary biologic results from whole pelvis radiation.
A Scanditronix MC50 compact cyclotron beamline has been modified to produce a 48.7 MeV proton beam at dose rates between 0.1 and 150 Gy/s. The system produces a 6 cm diameter scattered proton beam (flat to ± 3%) at the target location. Female C57BL/6 mice 5 to 6 weeks old were used for all experiments. To study normal tissue effects in the distal colon, mice were irradiated using the entrance region of the proton beam to the whole pelvis, 18.5 Gy at different dose rates: control, CONV (0.6-1 Gy/s) and FLASH (50-80 Gy/s). Survival was monitored daily and EdU (5-ethynyl-2´-deoxyuridine) staining was performed at 24- and 96-hours postradiation. Cleaved caspase-3 staining was performed 24-hours postradiation. To study tumor control, allograft B16F10 tumors were implanted in the right flank and received 18 Gy CONV or FLASH proton radiation. Tumor growth and survival were monitored.
After 18.5 Gy whole pelvis radiation, survival was 100% in the control group, 0% in the CONV group, and 44% in the FLASH group (P < .01). EdU staining showed cell proliferation was significantly higher in the FLASH versus CONV group at both 24-hours and 96-hours postradiation in the distal colon, although both radiation groups showed decreased proliferation compared with controls (P < .05). Lower cleaved caspase-3 staining was seen in the FLASH versus conventional group postradiation (P < .05). Comparable flank tumor control was observed in the CONV and FLASH groups.
We present our preclinical FLASH proton radiation system and biologic results showing improved survival after whole pelvis radiation, with equivalent tumor control.
Stereotactic radiation surgery (SRS) is one of the therapeutic modalities currently available to treat cerebral arteriovenous malformations (AVM). Conventionally, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ...MR angiography (MRA) and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) are used in combination to identify the target volume for SRS treatment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of C-arm cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the treatment planning of SRS for cerebral AVMs.
Sixteen consecutive patients treated for brain AVMs at our institution were included in this retrospective study. Prior to treatment, all patients underwent MRA, DSA, and C-arm CBCT. All images were coregistered using the GammaPlan planning system. AVM regions were delineated independently by 2 physicians using either C-arm CBCT or MRA, resulting in 2 volumes: a CBCT volume (VCBCT) and an MRA volume (VMRA). SRS plans were generated based on the delineated regions.
The average volume of treatment targets delineated using C-arm CBCT and MRA were similar, 6.40 cm(3) and 6.98 cm(3), respectively (P=.82). However, significant regions of nonoverlap existed. On average, the overlap of the MRA with the C-arm CBCT was only 52.8% of the total volume. In most cases, radiation plans based on VMRA did not provide adequate dose to the region identified on C-arm CBCT; the mean minimum dose to VCBCT was 29.5%, whereas the intended goal was 45% (P<.001). The mean volume of normal brain receiving 12 Gy or more in C-arm CBCT-based plans was not greater than in the MRA-based plans.
Use of C-arm CBCT images significantly alters the delineated regions of AVMs for SRS planning, compared to that of MRA/MRI images. CT-based planning can be accomplished without increasing the dose to normal brain and may represent a more accurate definition of the nidus, increasing the chances for successful obliteration.
Background:
Lower-dose cone-beam computed tomography protocols for image-guided radiotherapy may permit target localization while minimizing radiation exposure. We prospectively evaluated a ...lower-dose cone-beam protocol for central nervous system image-guided radiotherapy across a multinational pediatrics consortium.
Methods:
Seven institutions prospectively employed a lower-dose cone-beam computed tomography central nervous system protocol (weighted average dose 0.7 mGy) for patients ≤21 years. Treatment table shifts between setup with surface lasers versus cone-beam computed tomography were used to approximate setup accuracy, and vector magnitudes for these shifts were calculated. Setup group mean, interpatient, interinstitution, and random error were estimated, and clinical factors were compared by mixed linear modeling.
Results:
Among 96 patients, with 2179 pretreatment cone-beam computed tomography acquisitions, median age was 9 years (1-20). Setup parameters were 3.13, 3.02, 1.64, and 1.48 mm for vector magnitude group mean, interpatient, interinstitution, and random error, respectively. On multivariable analysis, there were no significant differences in mean vector magnitude by age, gender, performance status, target location, extent of resection, chemotherapy, or steroid or anesthesia use. Providers rated >99% of images as adequate or better for target localization.
Conclusions:
A lower-dose cone-beam computed tomography protocol demonstrated table shift vector magnitude that approximate clinical target volume/planning target volume expansions used in central nervous system radiotherapy. There were no significant clinical predictors of setup accuracy identified, supporting use of this lower-dose cone-beam computed tomography protocol across a diverse pediatric population with brain tumors.
PDF
