Initial Clinical Experience With Novel Directional Low-Dose Rate Brachytherapy for Retroperitoneal Sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: A novel Palladium-103 low-dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy device was developed to provide dose-escalation to the tumor bed after resection while shielding adjacent tissues. This multicenter report describes the initial experience with this device in patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with recurrent RPS, prior radiotherapy, and/or concern for positive margins were considered. An LDR brachytherapy dose of 20-60 Gy was administered, corresponding to biologically effective dose values of 15-53 Gy and equivalent dose values of 12-43 Gy. RESULTS: Six patients underwent implantation at four institutions. Of these, five had recurrent disease in the retroperitoneum or pelvic sidewall, one had untreated locally advanced leiomyosarcoma, two had prior external beam radiation therapy at the time of initial diagnosis, and four received neoadjuvant external beam radiation therapy plus brachytherapy. The device was easily implanted and conformed to the treatment area. Median follow-up was 16 mo; radiation was delivered to the at-risk margin with minimal irradiation of adjacent structures. No local recurrences at the site of implantation, device migration, or radiation-related toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The novel LDR directional brachytherapy device successfully delivered a targeted dose escalation to treat RPS high-risk margins. Lack of radiation-related toxicity demonstrates its safety.

Dosimetric perturbations of a lead shield for surface and interstitial high-dose-rate brachytherapy.

In surface and interstitial high-dose-rate brachytherapy with either (60)Co, (192)Ir, or (169)Yb sources, some radiosensitive organs near the surface may be exposed to high absorbed doses. This may be reduced by covering the implants with a lead shield on the body surface, which results in dosimetric perturbations. Monte Carlo simulations in Geant4 were performed for the three radionuclides placed at a single dwell position. Four different shield thicknesses (0, 3, 6, and 10 mm) and three different source depths (0, 5, and 10 mm) in water were considered, with the lead shield placed at the phantom surface. Backscatter dose enhancement and transmission data were obtained for the lead shields. Results were corrected to account for a realistic clinical case with multiple dwell positions. The range of the high backscatter dose enhancement in water is 3 mm for (60)Co and 1 mm for both (192)Ir and (169)Yb. Transmission data for (60)Co and (192)Ir are smaller than those reported by Papagiannis et al (2008 Med. Phys. 35 4898-4906) for brachytherapy facility shielding; for (169)Yb, the difference is negligible. In conclusion, the backscatter overdose produced by the lead shield can be avoided by just adding a few millimetres of bolus. Transmission data provided in this work as a function of lead thickness can be used to estimate healthy organ equivalent dose saving. Use of a lead shield is justified.

Current and Emerging Radiotherapy Options for Uveal Melanoma.

What treatment options are there for patients having uveal melanoma? A randomized, prospective, multi-institutional clinical trial (COMS) showed no difference in survival between brachytherapy and enucleation for medium-sized lesions. With the obvious benefit of retaining the eye, brachytherapy has flourished and many different approaches have been developed such as low-dose-rate sources using alternate low-energy photon-emitting radionuclides, different plaque designs and seed-loading techniques, high-dose-rate brachytherapy sources and applicators, and low- and high-dose-rate beta-emitting sources and applicators. There also have been developments of other radiation modalities like external-beam radiotherapy using linear accelerators with high-energy photons, particle accelerators for protons, and gamma stereotactic radiosurgery. This article examines the dosimetric properties, targeting capabilities, and outcomes of these approaches. The several modalities examined herein have differing attributes and it may be that no single approach would be considered optimal for all patients and all lesion characteristics.

Generation and comparison of 3D dosimetric reference datasets for COMS eye plaque brachytherapy using model-based dose calculations.

PURPOSE: A joint Working Group of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the Australasian Brachytherapy Group (ABG) was created to aid in the transition from the AAPM TG-43 dose calculation formalism, the current standard, to model-based dose calculations. This work establishes the first test cases for low-energy photon-emitting brachytherapy using model-based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs). ACQUISITION AND VALIDATION METHODS: Five test cases are developed: (1) a single model 6711 125 I brachytherapy seed in water, 13 seeds (2) individually and (3) in combination in water, (4) the full Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) 16 mm eye plaque in water, and (5) the full plaque in a realistic eye phantom. Calculations are done with four Monte Carlo (MC) codes and a research version of a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). For all test cases, local agreement of MC codes was within ∼2.5% and global agreement was ∼2% (4% for test case 5). MC agreement was within expected uncertainties. Local agreement of TPS with MC was within 5% for test case 1 and ∼20% for test cases 4 and 5, and global agreement was within 0.4% for test case 1 and 10% for test cases 4 and 5. DATA FORMAT AND USAGE NOTES: Dose distributions for each set of MC and TPS calculations are available online (https://doi.org/10.52519/00005) along with input files and all other information necessary to repeat the calculations. POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS: These data can be used to support commissioning of MBDCAs for low-energy brachytherapy as recommended by TGs 186 and 221 and AAPM Report 372. This work additionally lays out a sample framework for the development of test cases that can be extended to other applications beyond eye plaque brachytherapy.

Phase II Trial of Five-Fraction Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation Using Noninvasive Image-Guided Breast Brachytherapy.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): NIBB has potential advantages over other APBI techniques by delivering highly conformal radiation with minimal collateral dose to the heart and lung compared with external beam techniques, but unlike other brachytherapy techniques NIBB is non-invasive. Previous data has shown encouraging outcomes using a 10-fraction regimen. To improve efficiency, convenience, and cost, reduction in the fraction number is desirable. Final results of a prospective phase II trial are reported. MATERIALS/METHODS: NIBB APBI was delivered using 28.5Gy in 5 fractions daily over 1 week. Patient eligibility criteria required: invasive carcinoma ≤2.0 cm or DCIS ≤3.0 cm, ER positive (if invasive), lymph node negative, LVI absent, and lumpectomy with margins negative by 2mm. The primary endpoint was grade ≥ 2 subcutaneous fibrosis/induration <30%. Secondary endpoints included any late toxicity, cosmetic outcome, and local control. RESULTS: 40 patients were treated with a median follow-up of 59.7 months. The mean age was 67 years (50-89 years) and tumor size was 1.0cm (0.3-2.0cm). 80% had invasive carcinoma. The mean breast separation with compression was 6.7cm (3.5-8.9cm). The 5-year actuarial local control was 96.6% and overall survival was 96.9%. Grade 2 and 3 late toxicities were 15% and 0%, respectively. The rate of grade 2 subcutaneous fibrosis/induration was 2.5% (+/-2.5%) meeting the study's primary endpoint. The most common late toxicity of any grade was skin telangiectasia; 22.5% grade 1 and 15% grade 2. Only breast separation was associated with telangiectasia risk, p=0.002. Overall cosmetic outcome was excellent, good, and fair/poor in 75%, 25%, and 0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: NIBB APBI delivered in 5 fractions results in a low rate of late toxicity and a high rate of good/excellent cosmetic outcomes. Telangiectasia risk can be minimized by keeping breast separation ≤7.0cm. The local failure rate was appropriately low. Further investigation of this technique is warranted.

AAPM Task Group Report 267: A joint AAPM GEC-ESTRO report on biophysical models and tools for the planning and evaluation of brachytherapy.

Brachytherapy utilizes a multitude of radioactive sources and treatment techniques that often exhibit widely different spatial and temporal dose delivery patterns. Biophysical models, capable of modeling the key interacting effects of dose delivery patterns with the underlying cellular processes of the irradiated tissues, can be a potentially useful tool for elucidating the radiobiological effects of complex brachytherapy dose delivery patterns and for comparing their relative clinical effectiveness. While the biophysical models have been used largely in research settings by experts, it has also been used increasingly by clinical medical physicists over the last two decades. A good understanding of the potentials and limitations of the biophysical models and their intended use is critically important in the widespread use of these models. To facilitate meaningful and consistent use of biophysical models in brachytherapy, Task Group 267 (TG-267) was formed jointly with the American Association of Physics in Medicine (AAPM) and The Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie and the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) to review the existing biophysical models, model parameters, and their use in selected brachytherapy modalities and to develop practice guidelines for clinical medical physicists regarding the selection, use, and interpretation of biophysical models. The report provides an overview of the clinical background and the rationale for the development of biophysical models in radiation oncology and, particularly, in brachytherapy; a summary of the results of literature review of the existing biophysical models that have been used in brachytherapy; a focused discussion of the applications of relevant biophysical models for five selected brachytherapy modalities; and the task group recommendations on the use, reporting, and implementation of biophysical models for brachytherapy treatment planning and evaluation. The report concludes with discussions on the challenges and opportunities in using biophysical models for brachytherapy and with an outlook for future developments.

Brachytherapy evolution as seen today.

While brachytherapy is the oldest form of radiation therapy, it is also a very exciting field from both physics and clinical perspectives. From the physics standpoint, brachytherapy dosimetry is largely being governed by the inverse-square law, leading to an unparalleled dose deposition kernel (dose emitted by a seed or single dwell position), even compared to proton or heavy-ion beamlets. There is slightly more dose beyond the central deposition point, but comparatively very little prior to it, that is, little or no entrance dose! It is easy to sum multiple dwell positions that cover a tumor, and the intensity can be modulated quite effectively using dwell times. From a clinical perspective, what sets brachytherapy apart from other intraoperative modalities (e.g., laser, radiofrequency, cryogenic) is our ability to precisely calculate the energy deposited across the relevant patient geometry, anticipate the effect from known dose-outcome relationships, and deliver that energy with exquisite control and selectively to the target volume while sparing organs at risks. This targeting ability has improved substantially over the last two decades. It is built upon key foundational elements, many of which stem from the research and development within our medical physics community. This article provides an overview of these elements that combine to make brachytherapy a successful and developing radiotherapy modality.

First clinical implementation of Yttrium-90 Disc Brachytherapy after FDA clearance.

PURPOSE: Herein, we study if high-dose-rate (HDR) yttrium-90 (90Y) brachytherapy could be utilized by medical physicists, radiation oncologists, and ophthalmic surgeons. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Yttrium-90 (90Y) beta-emitting brachytherapy sources received United States Food and Drug Administration clearance for episcleral treatment of ocular tumors and benign growths. Dose calibration traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology as well as treatment planning and target delineation methods were established. Single-use systems included a 90Y-disc affixed within specialized, multifunction, handheld applicator. Low-dose-rate to high-dose-rate prescription conversions and depth-dose determinations were performed. Radiation safety was evaluated based on live exposure rates during assembly and surgeries. Clinical data for radiation safety, treatment tolerability, and local control was collected. RESULTS: Practice parameters for the medical physicist, radiation oncologist, and ophthalmic surgeon were defined. Device sterilizations, calibrations, assemblies, surgical methods, and disposals were reproducible and effective. Treated tumors included iris melanoma, iridociliary melanoma, choroidal melanoma, and a locally invasive squamous carcinoma. Mean calculated 90Y disc activity was 14.33 mCi (range 8.8-16.6), prescription dose 27.8 Gy (range 22-30), delivered to depth of 2.3 mm (range 1.6-2.6), at treatment durations of 420 s (7.0 min, range 219 s-773 s). Both insertion and removal were performed during one surgical session. After surgery, each disc-applicator- system was contained for decay in storage. Treatments were well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: HDR 90Y episcleral brachytherapy devices were created, implementation methods developed, and treatments performed on 6 patients. Treatments were single-surgery, rapid, and well-tolerated with short-term follow up.

AAPM WGDCAB Report 372: A joint AAPM, ESTRO, ABG, and ABS report on commissioning of model-based dose calculation algorithms in brachytherapy.

The introduction of model-based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs) in brachytherapy provides an opportunity for a more accurate dose calculation and opens the possibility for novel, innovative treatment modalities. The joint AAPM, ESTRO, and ABG Task Group 186 (TG-186) report provided guidance to early adopters. However, the commissioning aspect of these algorithms was described only in general terms with no quantitative goals. This report, from the Working Group on Model-Based Dose Calculation Algorithms in Brachytherapy, introduced a field-tested approach to MBDCA commissioning. It is based on a set of well-characterized test cases for which reference Monte Carlo (MC) and vendor-specific MBDCA dose distributions are available in a Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine-Radiotherapy (DICOM-RT) format to the clinical users. The key elements of the TG-186 commissioning workflow are now described in detail, and quantitative goals are provided. This approach leverages the well-known Brachytherapy Source Registry jointly managed by the AAPM and the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) Houston Quality Assurance Center (with associated links at ESTRO) to provide open access to test cases as well as step-by-step user guides. While the current report is limited to the two most widely commercially available MBDCAs and only for 192 Ir-based afterloading brachytherapy at this time, this report establishes a general framework that can easily be extended to other brachytherapy MBDCAs and brachytherapy sources. The AAPM, ESTRO, ABG, and ABS recommend that clinical medical physicists implement the workflow presented in this report to validate both the basic and the advanced dose calculation features of their commercial MBDCAs. Recommendations are also given to vendors to integrate advanced analysis tools into their brachytherapy treatment planning system to facilitate extensive dose comparisons. The use of the test cases for research and educational purposes is further encouraged.

Radiobiology for eye plaque brachytherapy and evaluation of implant duration and radionuclide choice using an objective function.

PURPOSE: Clinical optimization of Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) eye plaque brachytherapy is currently limited to tumor coverage, consensus prescription dosage, and dose calculations to ocular structures. The biologically effective dose (BED) of temporary brachytherapy treatments is a function of both chosen radionuclide R and implant duration T. This study endeavored to evaluate BED delivered to the tumor volume and surrounding ocular structures as a function of plaque position P, prescription dose, R, and T. METHODS: Plaque-heterogeneity-corrected dose distributions were generated with MCNP5 for the range of currently available COMS plaques loaded with sources using three available low-energy radionuclides. These physical dose distributions were imported into the PINNACLE(3) treatment planning system using the TG-43 hybrid technique and used to generate dose volume histograms for a T = 7 day implant within a reference eye geometry including the ciliary body, cornea, eyelid, foveola, lacrimal gland, lens, optic disc, optic nerve, retina, and tumor at eight standard treatment positions. The equation of Dale and Jones was employed to create biologically effective dose volume histograms (BEDVHs), allowing for BED volumetric analysis of all ROIs. Isobiologically effective prescription doses were calculated for T = 5 days down to 0.01 days, with BEDVHs subsequently generated for all ROIs using correspondingly reduced prescription doses. Objective functions were created to evaluate the BEDVHs as a function of R and T. These objective functions are mathematically accessible and sufficiently general to be applied to temporary or permanent brachytherapy implants for a variety of disease sites. RESULTS: Reducing T from 7 to 0.01 days for a 10 mm plaque produced an average BED benefit of 26%, 20%, and 17% for (103)Pd, (125)I, and (131)Cs, respectively, for all P; 16 and 22 mm plaque results were more position-dependent. (103)Pd produced a 16%-35% BED benefit over (125)I, whereas (131)Cs produced a 3%-7% BED detriment, independent of P, T, and plaque size. Additionally, corresponding organ at risk physical doses were lowest using (103)Pd in all circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that shorter implant durations may correlate with more favorable outcomes compared to 7 day implants when treating small or medium intraocular lesions. The data also indicate that implant duration may be safely reduced if the prescription physical dose is likewise diminished and that (103)Pd offers a substantial radiobiological benefit over (125)I and (131)Cs irrespective of plaque position, implant duration, and tumor size.

BEDVH-A method for evaluating biologically effective dose volume histograms: application to eye plaque brachytherapy implants.

PURPOSE: A method is introduced to examine the influence of implant duration T, radionuclide, and radiobiological parameters on the biologically effective dose (BED) throughout the entire volume of regions of interest for episcleral brachytherapy using available radionuclides. This method is employed to evaluate a particular eye plaque brachytherapy implant in a radiobiological context. METHODS: A reference eye geometry and 16 mm COMS eye plaque loaded with (103)Pd, (125)I, or (131)Cs sources were examined with dose distributions accounting for plaque heterogeneities. For a standardized 7 day implant, doses to 90% of the tumor volume ( (TUMOR)D(90)) and 10% of the organ at risk volumes ( (OAR)D(10)) were calculated. The BED equation from Dale and Jones and published α/ß and µ parameters were incorporated with dose volume histograms (DVHs) for various T values such as T = 7 days (i.e., (TUMOR) (7)BED(10) and (OAR) (7)BED(10)). By calculating BED throughout the volumes, biologically effective dose volume histograms (BEDVHs) were developed for tumor and OARs. Influence of T, radionuclide choice, and radiobiological parameters on (TUMOR)BEDVH and (OAR)BEDVH were examined. The nominal dose was scaled for shorter implants to achieve biological equivalence. RESULTS: (TUMOR)D(90) values were 102, 112, and 110 Gy for (103)Pd, (125)I, and (131)Cs, respectively. Corresponding (TUMOR) (7)BED(10) values were 124, 140, and 138 Gy, respectively. As T decreased from 7 to 0.01 days, the isobiologically effective prescription dose decreased by a factor of three. As expected, (TUMOR) (7)BEDVH did not significantly change as a function of radionuclide half-life but varied by 10% due to radionuclide dose distribution. Variations in reported radiobiological parameters caused (TUMOR) (7)BED(10) to deviate by up to 46%. Over the range of (OAR)α/ß values, (OAR) (7)BED(10) varied by up to 41%, 3.1%, and 1.4% for the lens, optic nerve, and lacrimal gland, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: BEDVH permits evaluation of the relative biological effectiveness for brachytherapy implants. For eye plaques, (TUMOR)BEDVH and (OAR)BEDVH were sensitive to implant duration, which may be manipulated to affect outcomes.

Dose calculation for photon-emitting brachytherapy sources with average energy higher than 50 keV: report of the AAPM and ESTRO.

PURPOSE: Recommendations of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) and the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) on dose calculations for high-energy (average energy higher than 50 keV) photon-emitting brachytherapy sources are presented, including the physical characteristics of specific (192)Ir, (137)Cs, and (60)Co source models. METHODS: This report has been prepared by the High Energy Brachytherapy Source Dosimetry (HEBD) Working Group. This report includes considerations in the application of the TG-43U1 formalism to high-energy photon-emitting sources with particular attention to phantom size effects, interpolation accuracy dependence on dose calculation grid size, and dosimetry parameter dependence on source active length. RESULTS: Consensus datasets for commercially available high-energy photon sources are provided, along with recommended methods for evaluating these datasets. Recommendations on dosimetry characterization methods, mainly using experimental procedures and Monte Carlo, are established and discussed. Also included are methodological recommendations on detector choice, detector energy response characterization and phantom materials, and measurement specification methodology. Uncertainty analyses are discussed and recommendations for high-energy sources without consensus datasets are given. CONCLUSIONS: Recommended consensus datasets for high-energy sources have been derived for sources that were commercially available as of January 2010. Data are presented according to the AAPM TG-43U1 formalism, with modified interpolation and extrapolation techniques of the AAPM TG-43U1S1 report for the 2D anisotropy function and radial dose function.

Dosimetry of (125)I and (103)Pd COMS eye plaques for intraocular tumors: report of Task Group 129 by the AAPM and ABS.

Dosimetry of eye plaques for ocular tumors presents unique challenges in brachytherapy. The challenges in accurate dosimetry are in part related to the steep dose gradient in the tumor and critical structures that are within millimeters of radioactive sources. In most clinical applications, calculations of dose distributions around eye plaques assume a homogenous water medium and full scatter conditions. Recent Monte Carlo (MC)-based eye-plaque dosimetry simulations have demonstrated that the perturbation effects of heterogeneous materials in eye plaques, including the gold-alloy backing and Silastic insert, can be calculated with reasonable accuracy. Even additional levels of complexity introduced through the use of gold foil "seed-guides" and custom-designed plaques can be calculated accurately using modern MC techniques. Simulations accounting for the aforementioned complexities indicate dose discrepancies exceeding a factor of ten to selected critical structures compared to conventional dose calculations. Task Group 129 was formed to review the literature; re-examine the current dosimetry calculation formalism; and make recommendations for eye-plaque dosimetry, including evaluation of brachytherapy source dosimetry parameters and heterogeneity correction factors. A literature review identified modern assessments of dose calculations for Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) design plaques, including MC analyses and an intercomparison of treatment planning systems (TPS) detailing differences between homogeneous and heterogeneous plaque calculations using the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) TG-43U1 brachytherapy dosimetry formalism and MC techniques. This review identified that a commonly used prescription dose of 85 Gy at 5 mm depth in homogeneous medium delivers about 75 Gy and 69 Gy at the same 5 mm depth for specific (125)I and (103)Pd sources, respectively, when accounting for COMS plaque heterogeneities. Thus, the adoption of heterogeneous dose calculation methods in clinical practice would result in dose differences >10% and warrant a careful evaluation of the corresponding changes in prescription doses. Doses to normal ocular structures vary with choice of radionuclide, plaque location, and prescription depth, such that further dosimetric evaluations of the adoption of MC-based dosimetry methods are needed. The AAPM and American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) recommend that clinical medical physicists should make concurrent estimates of heterogeneity-corrected delivered dose using the information in this report's tables to prepare for brachytherapy TPS that can account for material heterogeneities and for a transition to heterogeneity-corrected prescriptive goals. It is recommended that brachytherapy TPS vendors include material heterogeneity corrections in their systems and take steps to integrate planned plaque localization and image guidance. In the interim, before the availability of commercial MC-based brachytherapy TPS, it is recommended that clinical medical physicists use the line-source approximation in homogeneous water medium and the 2D AAPM TG-43U1 dosimetry formalism and brachytherapy source dosimetry parameter datasets for treatment planning calculations. Furthermore, this report includes quality management program recommendations for eye-plaque brachytherapy.

Report of the Task Group 186 on model-based dose calculation methods in brachytherapy beyond the TG-43 formalism: current status and recommendations for clinical implementation.

The charge of Task Group 186 (TG-186) is to provide guidance for early adopters of model-based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs) for brachytherapy (BT) dose calculations to ensure practice uniformity. Contrary to external beam radiotherapy, heterogeneity correction algorithms have only recently been made available to the BT community. Yet, BT dose calculation accuracy is highly dependent on scatter conditions and photoelectric effect cross-sections relative to water. In specific situations, differences between the current water-based BT dose calculation formalism (TG-43) and MBDCAs can lead to differences in calculated doses exceeding a factor of 10. MBDCAs raise three major issues that are not addressed by current guidance documents: (1) MBDCA calculated doses are sensitive to the dose specification medium, resulting in energy-dependent differences between dose calculated to water in a homogeneous water geometry (TG-43), dose calculated to the local medium in the heterogeneous medium, and the intermediate scenario of dose calculated to a small volume of water in the heterogeneous medium. (2) MBDCA doses are sensitive to voxel-by-voxel interaction cross sections. Neither conventional single-energy CT nor ICRU∕ICRP tissue composition compilations provide useful guidance for the task of assigning interaction cross sections to each voxel. (3) Since each patient-source-applicator combination is unique, having reference data for each possible combination to benchmark MBDCAs is an impractical strategy. Hence, a new commissioning process is required. TG-186 addresses in detail the above issues through the literature review and provides explicit recommendations based on the current state of knowledge. TG-43-based dose prescription and dose calculation remain in effect, with MBDCA dose reporting performed in parallel when available. In using MBDCAs, it is recommended that the radiation transport should be performed in the heterogeneous medium and, at minimum, the dose to the local medium be reported along with the TG-43 calculated doses. Assignments of voxel-by-voxel cross sections represent a particular challenge. Electron density information is readily extracted from CT imaging, but cannot be used to distinguish between different materials having the same density. Therefore, a recommendation is made to use a number of standardized materials to maintain uniformity across institutions. Sensitivity analysis shows that this recommendation offers increased accuracy over TG-43. MBDCA commissioning will share commonalities with current TG-43-based systems, but in addition there will be algorithm-specific tasks. Two levels of commissioning are recommended: reproducing TG-43 dose parameters and testing the advanced capabilities of MBDCAs. For validation of heterogeneity and scatter conditions, MBDCAs should mimic the 3D dose distributions from reference virtual geometries. Potential changes in BT dose prescriptions and MBDCA limitations are discussed. When data required for full MBDCA implementation are insufficient, interim recommendations are made and potential areas of research are identified. Application of TG-186 guidance should retain practice uniformity in transitioning from the TG-43 to the MBDCA approach.

GEC-ESTRO ACROP recommendations on calibration and traceability of HE HDR-PDR photon-emitting brachytherapy sources at the hospital level.

The vast majority of radiotherapy departments in Europe using brachytherapy (BT) perform temporary implants of high- or pulsed-dose rate (HDR-PDR) sources with photon energies higher than 50 keV. Such techniques are successfully applied to diverse pathologies and clinical scenarios. These recommendations are the result of Working Package 21 (WP-21) initiated within the BRAchytherapy PHYsics Quality Assurance System (BRAPHYQS) GEC-ESTRO working group with a focus on HDR-PDR source calibration. They provide guidance on the calibration of such sources, including practical aspects and issues not specifically accounted for in well-accepted societal recommendations, complementing the BRAPHYQS WP-18 Report dedicated to low energy BT photon emitting sources (seeds). The aim of this report is to provide a European-wide standard in HDR-PDR BT source calibration at the hospital level to maintain high quality patient treatments.

Evaluation of brachytherapy lung implant dose distributions from photon-emitting sources due to tissue heterogeneities.

PURPOSE: Photon-emitting brachytherapy sources are used for permanent implantation to treat lung cancer. However, the current brachytherapy dose calculation formalism assumes a homogeneous water medium without considering the influence of radiation scatter or tissue heterogeneities. The purpose of this study was to determine the dosimetric effects of tissue heterogeneities for permanent lung brachytherapy. METHODS: The MCNP5 v1.40 radiation transport code was used for Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. Point sources with energies of 0.02, 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 MeV were simulated to cover the range of pertinent brachytherapy energies and to glean dosimetric trends independent of specific radionuclide emissions. Source positions from postimplant CT scans of five patient implants were used for source coordinates, with dose normalized to 200 Gy at the center of each implant. With the presence of fibrosis (around the implant), cortical bone, lung, and healthy tissues, dose distributions and (PTV)DVH were calculated using the MCNP ∗FMESH4 tally and the NIST mass-energy absorption coefficients. This process was repeated upon replacing all tissues with water. For all photon energies, 10(9) histories were simulated to achieve statistical errors (k = 1) typically of 1%. RESULTS: The mean PTV doses calculated using tissue heterogeneities for all five patients changed (compared to dose to water) by only a few percent over the examined photon energy range, as did PTV dose at the implant center. The (PTV)V(100) values were 81.2%, 90.0% (as normalized), 94.3%, 93.9%, 92.7%, and 92.2% for 0.02, 0.03, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 MeV source photons, respectively. Relative to water, the maximum bone doses were higher by factors of 3.7, 5.1, 5.2, 2.4, 1.2, and 1.0 The maximum lung doses were about 0.98, 0.94, 0.91, 0.94, 0.97, and 0.99. Relative to water, the maximum healthy tissue doses at the mediastinal position were higher by factors of 9.8, 2.2, 1.3, 1.1, 1.1, and 1.1. However, the maximum doses to these healthy tissues were only 3.1, 7.2, 11.3, 10.9, 9.0, and 8.1 Gy while maximum bone doses were 66, 177, 236, 106, 49, and 39 Gy, respectively. Similarly, maximum lung doses were 55, 66, 73, 74, 73, and 73 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current brachytherapy dose calculation formalism overestimates PTV dose and significantly underestimates doses to bone and healthy tissue. Further investigation using specific brachytherapy source models and patient-based CT datasets as MC input may indicate whether the observed trends can be generalized for low-energy lung brachytherapy dosimetry.

Accuracy assessment of the superposition principle for evaluating dose distributions of elongated and curved 103Pd and 192Ir brachytherapy sources.

PURPOSE: The current brachytherapy dose calculation formalism determines clinical dose distributions using the superposition principle. However, this approach cannot account for intersource attenuation for extended brachytherapy sources such as elongated and curved sources. The purpose of this study is to determine the line segment length required for optimal accuracy of dose calculations in the vicinity of elongated and curved 103Pd and 192Ir sources using the superposition technique intrinsic to the AAPM TG-43 formalism. METHODS: Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were performed in water for 103Pd and 192Ir sources with linear, toroidal, and hairpin geometries. Dose distributions for 0.1-8.0 cm line segments from MC simulations were entered into treatment planning system (TPS) using the TG-43 approach with 0.05 cm spatial resolution. Line source dose distributions were benchmarked using MC-to-MC comparisons with the superposition principle, TPS-to-TPS fluence map comparisons, and MC-to-TPS gamma-index comparisons. Toroidal and hairpin geometries were constructed using line segments in the TPS, then TPS-calculated dose distributions were compared to the MC-simulation results. Gamma-index comparisons were performed in the iba(Dosimetry) Omni-Pro I'mRT software using 2 mm distance-to-agreement Ad and 2% dose error deltaD criteria, with a passing rate of > or = 98% of pixels meeting the gamma < or = 1.00 tolerance deemed acceptable. RESULTS: For the MC-to-MC superposition check for line source, the average ratio of the superposition to the solid source length was 1.051 for 103Pd and 1.009 for 192Ir through the whole volume with maximum ratios of 1.34 and 1.32, respectively. TPS-to-TPS comparisons between a solid line source and multiple line segments also provided good agreement. The MC-to-TPS benchmarking indicated where the gamma-index comparison failed were inside the source and within 0.25 cm of the source long-axis. Excluding these regions, 99.6% and 99.9% of the 57 600 in-plane pixels satisfied the gamma-index criteria for 103Pd and 192Ir, respectively. The optimal line segment length for both 103Pd and 192Ir toroidal sources was about 0.5 cm or one-fifth of the torus diameter, whichever was smaller. For all toroidal geometries and all line segment lengths examined, at least 98.9% and 100.0% pixels met the gamma-index criteria for 103Pd and 192Ir, respectively. For both 103Pd and 192Ir hairpin source, all geometric variations had passing rates exceeding 99.2%. However, the best results were obtained from 0.4 cm line segments on the curved part for 103Pd while it was independent of line segment length for 192Ir. CONCLUSIONS: A method for using a conventional TPS for brachytherapy treatment planning of elongated and curvilinear brachytherapy sources was developed and benchmarked. This method was evaluated using a gamma-index comparison technique, where appropriate pass-rate criteria were identified. Using a variety of subsegment lengths, the total length for a straight-line source was generally reproduced with accuracy improving as subsegment length increased, approaching the total straight-line length. Toroidal sources were similarly modeled with line segments, and an accuracy tradeoff was found between geometric errors and simulating dose anisotropy along the long-axes. The gamma-index comparison method to analyze the results was shown to be more powerful than point-wise comparison methods, and more versatile than dose ratios on the same plane.

Dosimetry revisited for the HDR 192Ir brachytherapy source model mHDR-v2.

PURPOSE: Recently, the manufacturer of the HDR 192Ir mHDR-v2 brachytherapy source reported small design changes (referred to herein as mHDR-v2r) that are within the manufacturing tolerances but may alter the existing dosimetric data for this source. This study aimed to (1) check whether these changes affect the existing dosimetric data published for this source; (2) obtain new dosimetric data in close proximity to the source, including the contributions from 192Ir electrons and considering the absence of electronic equilibrium; and (3) obtain scatter dose components for collapsed cone treatment planning system implementation. METHODS: Three different Monte Carlo (MC) radiation transport codes were used: MCNP5, PENELOPE2008, and GEANT4. The source was centrally positioned in a 40 cm radius water phantom. Absorbed dose and collision kerma were obtained using 0.1 mm (0.5 mm) thick voxels to provide high-resolution dosimetry near (far from) the source. Dose-rate distributions obtained with the three MC codes were compared. RESULTS: Simulations of mHDR-v2 and mHDR-v2r designs performed with three radiation transport codes showed agreement typically within 0.2% for r > or = 0.25 cm. Dosimetric contributions from source electrons were significant for r < 0.25 cm. The dose-rate constant and radial dose function were similar to those from previous MC studies of the mHDR-v2 design. The 2D anisotropy function also coincided with that of the mHDR-v2 design for r > or = 0.25 cm. Detailed results of dose distributions and scatter components are presented for the modified source design. CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of these results to prior MC studies showed agreement typically within 0.5% for r > or = 0.25 cm. If dosimetric data for r < 0.25 cm are not needed, dosimetric results from the prior MC studies will be adequate.

Treatment planning of a skin-sparing conical breast brachytherapy applicator using conventional brachytherapy software.

PURPOSE: AccuBoost is a noninvasive image-guided technique for the delivery of partial breast irradiation to the tumor bed and currently serves as an alternate to conventional electron beam boost. To irradiate the target volume while providing dose sparing to the skin, the round applicator design was augmented through the addition of an internally truncated conical shield and the reduction of the source to skin distance. METHODS: Brachytherapy dose distributions for two types of conical applicators were simulated and estimated using Monte Carlo (MC) methods for radiation transport and a conventional treatment planning system (TPS). MC-derived and TPS-generated dose volume histograms (DVHs) and dose distribution data were compared for both the conical and round applicators for benchmarking purposes. RESULTS: Agreement using the gamma-index test was > or = 99.95% for distance to agreement and dose accuracy criteria of 2 mm and 2%, respectively. After observing good agreement, TPS DVHs and dose distributions for the conical and round applicators were obtained and compared. Brachytherapy dose distributions generated using Pinnacle for ten CT data sets showed that the parallel-opposed beams of the conical applicators provided similar PTV coverage to the round applicators and reduced the maximum dose to skin, chest wall, and lung by up to 27%, 42%, and 43%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Brachytherapy dose distributions for the conical applicators have been generated using MC methods and entered into the Pinnacle TPS via the Tufts technique. Treatment planning metrics for the conical AccuBoost applicators were significantly improved in comparison to those for conventional electron beam breast boost.

Comparison of dose calculation methods for brachytherapy of intraocular tumors.

PURPOSE: To investigate dosimetric differences among several clinical treatment planning systems (TPS) and Monte Carlo (MC) codes for brachytherapy of intraocular tumors using 125I or 103Pd plaques, and to evaluate the impact on the prescription dose of the adoption of MC codes and certain versions of a TPS (Plaque Simulator with optional modules). METHODS: Three clinical brachytherapy TPS capable of intraocular brachytherapy treatment planning and two MC codes were compared. The TPS investigated were Pinnacle v8.0dp1, BrachyVision v8.1, and Plaque Simulator v5.3.9, all of which use the AAPM TG-43 formalism in water. The Plaque Simulator software can also handle some correction factors from MC simulations. The MC codes used are MCNP5 v1.40 and BrachyDose/EGSnrc. Using these TPS and MC codes, three types of calculations were performed: homogeneous medium with point sources (for the TPS only, using the 1D TG-43 dose calculation formalism); homogeneous medium with line sources (TPS with 2D TG-43 dose calculation formalism and MC codes); and plaque heterogeneity-corrected line sources (Plaque Simulator with modified 2D TG-43 dose calculation formalism and MC codes). Comparisons were made of doses calculated at points-of-interest on the plaque central-axis and at off-axis points of clinical interest within a standardized model of the right eye. RESULTS: For the homogeneous water medium case, agreement was within approximately 2% for the point- and line-source models when comparing between TPS and between TPS and MC codes, respectively. For the heterogeneous medium case, dose differences (as calculated using the MC codes and Plaque Simulator) differ by up to 37% on the central-axis in comparison to the homogeneous water calculations. A prescription dose of 85 Gy at 5 mm depth based on calculations in a homogeneous medium delivers 76 Gy and 67 Gy for specific 125I and 103Pd sources, respectively, when accounting for COMS-plaque heterogeneities. For off-axis points-of-interest, dose differences approached factors of 7 and 12 at some positions for 125I and 103Pd, respectively. There was good agreement (approximately 3%) among MC codes and Plaque Simulator results when appropriate parameters calculated using MC codes were input into Plaque Simulator. Plaque Simulator and MC users are perhaps at risk of overdosing patients up to 20% if heterogeneity corrections are used and the prescribed dose is not modified appropriately. CONCLUSIONS: Agreement within 2% was observed among conventional brachytherapy TPS and MC codes for intraocular brachytherapy dose calculations in a homogeneous water environment. In general, the magnitude of dose errors incurred by ignoring the effect of the plaque backing and Silastic insert (i.e., by using the TG-43 approach) increased with distance from the plaque's central-axis. Considering the presence of material heterogeneities in a typical eye plaque, the best method in this study for dose calculations is a verified MC simulation.