Quantitative assessment of radionuclide production yields in in-beam and offline PET measurements at different proton irradiation facilities.

Objective. Reliable radionuclide production yield data are a prerequisite for positron-emission-tomography (PET) basedin vivoproton treatment verification. In this context, activation data acquired at two different treatment facilities with different imaging systems were analyzed to provide experimentally determined radionuclide yields in thick targets and were compared with each other to investigate the impact of the respective imaging technique.Approach.Homogeneous thick targets (PMMA, gelatine, and graphite) were irradiated with mono-energetic proton pencil-beams at two distinct energies. Material activation was measured (i)in-beamduring and after beam delivery with a double-head prototype PET camera and (ii)offlineshortly after beam delivery with a commercial full-ring PET/CT scanner. Integral as well as depth-resolvedß+-emitter yields were determined for the dominant positron-emitting radionuclides11C,15O,13N and (in-beamonly)10C.In-beamdata were used to investigate the qualitative impact of different monitoring time schemes on activity depth profiles and their quantitative impact on count rates and total activity.Main results.Production yields measured with thein-beamcamera were comparable to or higher compared to respectiveofflineresults. Depth profiles of radionuclide-specific yields obtained from thedouble-headcamera showed qualitative differences to data acquired with thefull-ringcamera with a more convex profile shape. Considerable impact of the imaging timing scheme on the activity profile was observed for gelatine only with a range variation of up to 3.5 mm. Evaluation of the coincidence rate and the total number of observed events in the considered workflows confirmed a strongly decreasing rate in targets with a large oxygen fraction.Significance. The observed quantitative and qualitative differences between the datasets underline the importance of a thorough system commissioning. Due to the lack of reliable cross-section data, in-house phantom measurements are still considered a gold standard for careful characterization of the system response and to ensure a reliable beam range verification.

Operating procedures, risk management and challenges during implementation of adaptive and non-adaptive MR-guided radiotherapy: 1-year single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Main purpose was to describe procedures and identify challenges in the implementation process of adaptive and non-adaptive MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT), especially new risks in workflow due to the new technique. We herein report the single center experience for the implementation of (MRgRT) and present an overview on our treatment practice. METHODS: Descriptive statistics were used to summarize clinical and technical characteristics of treatment and patient characteristics including sites treated between April 2019 and end of March 2020 after ethical approval. A risk analysis was performed to identify risks of the online adaptive workflow. RESULTS: A summary of the processes on the MR-Linac including workflows, quality assurance and possible pitfalls is presented. 111 patients with 124 courses were treated during the first year of MR-guided radiotherapy. The most commonly treated site was the abdomen (42% of all treatment courses). 73% of the courses were daily online adapted and a high number of treatment courses (75%) were treated with stereotactic body irradiation. Only 4/382 fractions could not be treated due to a failing online adaptive quality assurance. In the risk analysis for errors, the two risks with the highest risk priority number were both in the contouring category, making it the most critical step in the workflow. CONCLUSION: Although challenging, establishment of MRgRT as a routinely used technique at our department was successful for all sites and daily o-ART was feasible from the first day on. However, ongoing research and reports will have to inform us on the optimal indications for MRgRT because careful patient selection is necessary as it continues to be a time-consuming treatment technique with restricted availability. After risk analysis, the most critical workflow category was the contouring process, which resembles the need of experienced staff and safety check paths.

Stereotactic radiotherapy for early stage non-small cell lung cancer: current standards and ongoing research.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) allows for the non-invasive and precise delivery of ablative radiation dose. The use and availability of SBRT has increased rapidly over the past decades. SBRT has been proven to be a safe, effective and efficient treatment for early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and is presently considered the standard of care in the treatment of medically or functionally inoperable patients. Evidence from prospective randomized trials on the optimal treatment of patients deemed medically operable remains owing, as three trials comparing SBRT to surgery in this cohort were terminated prematurely due to poor accrual. Yet, SBRT in early stage NSCLC is associated with favorable toxicity profiles and excellent rates of local control, prompting discussion in regard of the treatment of medically operable patients, where the standard of care currently remains surgical resection. Although local control in early stage NSCLC after SBRT is high, distant failure remains an issue, prompting research interest to the combination of SBRT and systemic treatment. Evolving advances in SBRT technology further facilitate the safe treatment of patients with medically or anatomically challenging situations. In this review article, we discuss international guidelines and the current standard of care, ongoing clinical challenges and future directions from the clinical and technical point of view.

Dosimetric and geometric end-to-end accuracy of a magnetic resonance guided linear accelerator.

The introduction of real-time imaging by magnetic resonance guided linear accelerators (MR-Linacs) enabled adaptive treatments and gating on the tumor position. Different end-to-end tests monitored the accuracy of our MR-Linac during the first year of clinical operation. We report on the stability of these tests covering a static, adaptive and gating workflow. Film measurements showed gamma passing rates of 96.4% ± 3.4% for the static tests (five measurements) and for the two adaptive tests 98.9% and 99.99%, respectively (criterion 2%/2mm). The gated point dose measurements in the breathing phantom were 2.7% lower than in the static phantom.

In vitro comparisons of retropulsion and fragmentation efficacy of 2 cordless, handheld pneumatic and electromechanical lithotripsy devices.

OBJECTIVE: To compare, in vitro, probe velocity/displacement, retropulsion, and fragmentation capacity of the cordless electromechanical (LithoBreaker) (hard vs soft probe guide) and pneumatic (StoneBreaker). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Probe velocities/displacements were measured using high-speed resolution camera (100.000 frames/s). The lithotripsy probes were projected through a 7.5F ureteroscope against a nonfrangible led ball placed in a 15F horizontally mounted silicone tube immersed in water bath as an in vitro ureter model. Retropulsion is considered as displacement distance of led ball. Fragmentation efficiency was quantified as number of shots required to break Bego-stone phantoms (hard [15:3] and soft [15:6], average size 7.5 × 5.5 mm) placed on metal mesh into <3-mm fragments. Mean and standard deviation of repetitive measurements were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: StoneBreaker yielded higher probe velocity (22 ± 1.9 m/s) compared with LithoBreaker with hard (14.2 ± 0.5 m/s) and soft (11.5 ± 0.5 m/s) probe. Maximum probe displacement for StoneBreaker was 1.04 mm vs 0.9 mm and 1.1 mm (hard vs soft LithoBreaker-probe, respectively). Retropulsion using 1-mm probes showed no statistical differences. Using harder 2-mm probe decreased Lithobreaker retropulsion significantly compared with Stonebreaker. The amount of shots (1-mm probe) to fragment soft Bego stones was significantly higher for LithoBreaker with soft (mean 31.5 ± 11.31) and hard (mean 21.5 ± 5.29) probe guide vs StoneBreaker (mean 11.2 ± 2.65). Fragmentation efficiency for hard Bego stones showed similar statistically significant outcome. Comparison of the 2 probe guides showed higher velocity linked to harder-probe that improved LithoBreaker fragmentation performance and reduce propulsion. CONCLUSION: Both examined lithotripters are effective in cracking stone phantoms with relatively low pulse number. They produce comparable retropulsions. Fragmentation improved substantially using LithoBreaker with hard probe guide. More tests are required to assess differences in stone clearance time.