A review of nonstandardized applicators digitization in Nucletron™ HDR procedures.

The major errors in HDR procedures were failures to enter the correct treatment distance, which could be caused by either entering wrong transmission lengths or imprecisely digitizing the dwelling positions. Most of those errors were not easily avoidable by enhancing the HDR management level because they were caused by implementations of nonstandardized applicators utilizing transmission tubes of different lengths in standard HDR procedures. We performed this comprehensive study to include all possible situations with different nonstandardized applicators that frequently occurred in HDR procedures, provide corresponding situations with standard applicator as comparisons, list all possible errors and in planning, clarify the confusions in offsets setting, and provide mathematical and quantitative solutions for each given scenarios. Training on HDR procedures with nonstandardized applicators are normally not included in most residential program for medical physics, thus this study could be meaningful in both clinical and educational purpose. At precision of 1 mm, our study could be used as the essential and practical reference for finding the correct treatment length as well as locating the accurate dwelling positions in any HDR procedure with nonstandardized applicators.

Feasibility and Initial Dosimetric Findings for a Randomized Trial Using Dose-Painted Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Defined Targets in Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare dosimetric characteristics with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-identified imaging tumor volume (gross tumor volume, GTV), prostate clinical target volume and planning target volume, and organs at risk (OARs) for 2 treatment techniques representing 2 arms of an institutional phase 3 randomized trial of hypofractionated external beam image guided highly targeted radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Group 1 (n=20) patients were treated before the trial inception with the standard dose prescription. Each patient had an additional treatment plan generated per the experimental arm. A total of 40 treatment plans were compared (20 plans for each technique). Group 2 (n=15) consists of patients currently accrued to the hypofractionated external beam image guided highly targeted radiation therapy trial. Plans were created as per the treatment arm, with additional plans for 5 of the group 2 experimental arm with a 3-mm expansion in the imaging GTV. RESULTS: For all plans in both patient groups, planning target volume coverage ranged from 95% to 100%; GTV coverage of 89.3 Gy for the experimental treatment plans ranged from 95.2% to 99.8%. For both groups 1 and 2, the percent volumes of rectum/anus and bladder receiving 40 Gy, 65 Gy, and 80 Gy were smaller in the experimental plans than in the standard plans. The percent volume at 1 Gy per fraction and 1.625 Gy per fraction were compared between the standard and the experimental arms, and these were found to be equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: The dose per fraction to the OARs can be made equal even when giving a large simultaneous integrated boost to the GTV. The data suggest that a GTV margin may be added without significant dose effects on the OARs.