2024 Guidelines for reporting radiation therapy in veterinary medicine.

Evidence-based medicine drives patient care decision-making; thus, accurate and complete reporting in scientific publications is paramount. A checklist for complete reporting of veterinary radiation therapy was proposed in 2012 using the recommendations of the International Commission of Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU). The purpose of this study is to review the 2012 checklist and propose updates based on changes in technology. Significant technology advancements have gained traction in veterinary medicine, including intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT), both of which have related modality-specific ICRU reporting recommendations. The 2012 checklist and proposed 2024 checklist are then used to assess the completeness of reporting in veterinary radiation oncology publications between 2015 and 2022, of which one hundred and eight publications met the inclusion criteria. Prior to the publication of the 2012 checklist (2005-2010), only nine checklist items showed a good level of completeness in reporting, and from 2015 to 2022, this increased to 16 items. Encouraging and/or requiring the use of reporting checklists at the time of manuscript submission may be responsible for this improvement in reporting. Using the 2024 checklist, which is more relevant to publications discussing IMRT and SRT treatments, only 14 of the analyzed checklist items (34%) show a good level of completeness in reporting, suggesting there is a need for updated guidelines to capture the nuances of advanced techniques. This study proposes a 2024 checklist that can be used as a guideline for future reporting of radiation therapy in veterinary medicine.

AAPM BTSC Report 377: Physicist Brachytherapy Training in 2021-A survey of therapeutic medical physics residency program directors.

BACKGROUND: Brachytherapy (BT) was the first radiotherapeutic technique used to treat human disease and remains an essential modality in radiation oncology. A decline in the utilization of BT as a treatment modality has been observed and reported, which may impact training opportunities for medical physics residents. A survey of therapeutic medical physics residency program directors was performed as part of an assessment of the current state of BT training during residency. METHODS: In March 2021, a survey consisting of 23 questions was designed by a working unit of the Brachytherapy Subcommittee of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) and approved for distribution by the Executive Committee of the AAPM. The survey was distributed to the directors of the Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Education Programs (CAMPEP)-accredited therapeutic medical physics residency programs by the AAPM. The participant response was recorded anonymously in an online platform and then analyzed using MATLAB and Microsoft Excel software. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to the program directors of 110 residency programs. Over the course of 6 weeks, 72 directors accessed the survey online, and 55 fully completed the survey. Individual responses from the directors (including partial submissions) were evaluated and analyzed. Nearly all participating programs (98%) utilize high dose rate BT treatments with 74% using low dose rate BT techniques. All programs treated gynecological sites using BT, and the next most common treatment sites were prostate (80%) and breast (53%). Overall, the residency program directors had a positive outlook toward BT as a radiotherapeutic treatment modality. Caseload and time limitations were identified as primary barriers to BT training by some programs. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the responses of the program directors, it was identified that the residency programs might benefit from additional resources such as virtual BT training, interinstitutional collaborations as well as resident fellowships. Programs might also benefit from additional guidance related to BT-specific training requirements to help program directors attest Authorized Medical Physicist eligibility for graduating residents.

AAPM medical physics practice guideline 13.a: HDR brachytherapy, part A.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education, and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines (MPPGs) will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: (1) Must and must not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. (2) Should and should not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances. Approved by AAPM's Executive Committee April 28, 2022.

Brachytherapy dose-volume histogram commissioning with multiple planning systems.

The first quality assurance process for validating dose-volume histogram data involving brachytherapy procedures in radiation therapy is presented. The process is demonstrated using both low dose-rate and high dose-rate radionuclide sources. A rectangular cuboid was contoured in five commercially available brachytherapy treatment planning systems. A single radioactive source commissioned for QA testing was positioned coplanar and concentric with one end. Using the brachytherapy dosimetry formalism defined in the AAPM Task Group 43 report series, calculations were performed to estimate dose deposition in partial volumes of the cuboid structure. The point-source approximation was used for a 125I source and the line-source approximation was used for a 192Ir source in simulated permanent and temporary implants, respectively. Hand-calculated, dose-volume results were compared to TPS-generated, dose-volume histogram (DVH) data to ascertain acceptance. The average disagreement observed between hand calculations and the treatment planning system DVH was less than 1% for the five treatment planning systems and less than 5% for 1 cm ≤ r ≤ 5 cm. A reproducible method for verifying the accuracy of volumetric statistics from a radiation therapy TPS can be employed. The process satisfies QA requirements for TPS commissioning, upgrading, and annual testing. We suggest that investigations be performed if the DVH %Vol(TPS) "actual variance" calculations differ by more than 5% at any specific radial distance with respect to %Vol(TG-43), or if the "average variance" DVH %Vol(TPS) calculations differ by more than 2% over all radial distances with respect to %Vol(TG-43).

Daily Quality Assurance Efficiency Evaluation Using SunCHECK Machine and Machine Performance Check.

Purpose To investigate time efficiency, applicability, and accuracy of using a web-based, independent quality assurance (QA) platform and vendor-dependent based system check for daily linear accelerator (LINAC) QA. Methods  Time needed to perform daily QA on a single (n=1) LINAC was collected for three months. Task Group report 142 (TG-142) compliant daily QA included dosimetry checks (four photon, four electron beams); imaging checks (planar kilovolt (kV) & megavolt (MV), kV cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)); and mechanical and safety checks using SunCHECK Machine (SCM) (Sun Nuclear Inc., Melbourne, FL, USA). Additionally, Machine Performance Check (MPC) (Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA) was performed for all energies. Four trained radiation therapists performed daily QA on both platforms. Data were collected to identify the time required to complete both SCM and MPC. Additionally, the two platforms were evaluated on usability and features. Output results were compared to our monthly standard to assess accuracy. Results On average, SCM took 22 minutes with a standard deviation of six minutes and MPC took 15 minutes with a standard deviation of three minutes. MPC output results were impacted due to the beam output being coupled to the beam profile changes. As a result, the two systems on average disagreed by -1.41% after three months despite being baselined at the same time point and output agreeing well initially (average difference of -0.1% across all energies). While there was overlap in the tests performed, SCM tests were more relevant to TG-142 while MPC tests were beneficial to machine service and, with a clear understanding of the limitations of the system, found suitable as a secondary backup to SCM for daily output verification. Conclusions  This work demonstrates that a comprehensive TG-142 daily QA can be designed using SCM and MPC can be added as a beneficial tool and backup for output verification while still maintaining an efficient daily QA process.

Survival and Radiation Dose Differences Between Single Versus Multi-Session Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery in Patients Treated for Multiple (≥10) Brain Metastases.

OBJECTIVE:  To explore whether treatment with multiple Gamma Knife sessions (mGK) resulted in different survival outcomes or cumulative radiation doses compared to single session Gamma Knife (sGK) in patients who have been treated for ≥10 brain metastases (BMs). METHODS:  Thirty-five patients with ≥10 BMs treated with Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery (GK SRS) were identified and separated into sGK vs. mGK cohorts. Survival outcomes and dosimetry data were compared between the two groups. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) classes were used to further stratify patients. RESULTS:  mGK patients survived longer from the first GK treatment (p<0.009). By RPA class, patients with class 1 had a prolonged survival from BM diagnosis than those in classes 2 and 3 (p=0.004). However, survival was not significantly different between the classes from the first GK treatment (p=0.089). Stratified by mGK vs. sGK and RPA classes, sGK patients in RPA class 1 had the longest survival from BM diagnosis but the worst survival from GK treatment. mGK patients in any RPA class had the best survival from the first GK treatment. For patients with RPA class 2+3, mGK was associated with longer survival from both BM diagnosis and first treatment. Statistical but not clinical differences between the mGK vs. sGK groups were observed in the max dose to the targets and cochlea, and the V40Gy whole brain dose. CONCLUSIONS:  mGK may be beneficial if GK is initiated early at first BM diagnosis vs. sGK initiated late. Future research is required to confirm these findings and explore additional areas of interest, such as quality-of-life and economic considerations.

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.

Learning from the past: a century of accuracy, aspirations, and aspersions in brachytherapy.

The oldest form of radiation therapy, brachytherapy, has been investigated and reported in the scientific and medical literature for well over a century. Known by many names over the years, radium-based, empirical practices evolved over decades to contemporary practice. This includes treatment at various dose rates using multiple radionuclides or even electrically generated photon sources. Predictions or prognostications of what may happen in the future enjoy a history that spans centuries, e.g. those by Nostradamus in the 1500s. In this review article, publications from several eras of past practice between the early 1900s and the late 2010s where the authors address the "future of brachytherapy" are presented, and for many of these publications, one can use the benefit of the intervening years to comment on the accuracy or the inaccuracies inherent in those publications. Finally, recently published papers are reviewed to examine current expectations for the future practice of brachytherapy.

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.

AAPM recommendations on medical physics practices for ocular plaque brachytherapy: Report of task group 221.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) formed Task Group 221 (TG-221) to discuss a generalized commissioning process, quality management considerations, and clinical physics practice standards for ocular plaque brachytherapy. The purpose of this report is also, in part, to aid the clinician to implement recommendations of the AAPM TG-129 report, which placed emphasis on dosimetric considerations for ocular brachytherapy applicators used in the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS). This report is intended to assist medical physicists in establishing a new ocular brachytherapy program and, for existing programs, in reviewing and updating clinical practices. The report scope includes photon- and beta-emitting sources and source:applicator combinations. Dosimetric studies for photon and beta sources are reviewed to summarize the salient issues and provide references for additional study. The components of an ocular plaque brachytherapy quality management program are discussed, including radiation safety considerations, source calibration methodology, applicator commissioning, imaging quality assurance tests for treatment planning, treatment planning strategies, and treatment planning system commissioning. Finally, specific guidelines for commissioning an ocular plaque brachytherapy program, clinical physics practice standards in ocular plaque brachytherapy, and other areas reflecting the need for specialized treatment planning systems, measurement phantoms, and detectors (among other topics) to support the clinical practice of ocular brachytherapy are presented. Expected future advances and developments for ocular brachytherapy are discussed.

Dosimetric characterization of round HDR 192Ir accuboost applicators for breast brachytherapy.

PURPOSE: The AccuBoost brachytherapy system applies HDR 192Ir beams peripherally to the breast using collimating applicators. The purpose of this study was to benchmark Monte Carlo simulations of the HDR 192Ir source, to dosimetrically characterize the round applicators using established Monte Carlo simulation and radiation measurement techniques and to gather data for clinical use. METHODS: Dosimetric measurements were performed in a polystyrene phantom, while simulations estimated dose in air, liquid water, polystyrene and ICRU 44 breast tissue. Dose distribution characterization of the 4-8 cm diameter collimators was performed using radiochromic EBT film and air ionization chambers. RESULTS: The central axis dose falloff was steeper for the 4 cm diameter applicator in comparison to the 8 cm diameter applicator, with surface to 3 cm depth-dose ratios of 3.65 and 2.44, respectively. These ratios did not considerably change when varying the phantom composition from breast tissue to polystyrene, phantom thickness from 4 to 8 cm, or phantom radius from 8 to 15 cm. Dose distributions on the central axis were fitted to sixth-order polynomials for clinical use in a hand calculation spreadsheet (i.e., nomogram). Dose uniformity within the useful applicator apertures decreased as depth-dose increased. CONCLUSIONS: Monte Carlo benchmarking simulations of the HDR 192Ir source using the MCNP5 radiation transport code indicated agreement within 1% of the published results over the radial/angular region of interest. Changes in phantom size and radius did not cause noteworthy changes in the central axis depth-dose. Polynomial fit depth-dose curves provide a simple and accurate basis for a nomogram.

An approach to using conventional brachytherapy software for clinical treatment planning of complex, Monte Carlo-based brachytherapy dose distributions.

Certain brachytherapy dose distributions, such as those for LDR prostate implants, are readily modeled by treatment planning systems (TPS) that use the superposition principle of individual seed dose distributions to calculate the total dose distribution. However, dose distributions for brachytherapy treatments using high-Z shields or having significant material heterogeneities are not currently well modeled using conventional TPS. The purpose of this study is to establish a new treatment planning technique (Tufts technique) that could be applied in some clinical situations where the conventional approach is not acceptable and dose distributions present cylindrical symmetry. Dose distributions from complex brachytherapy source configurations determined with Monte Carlo methods were used as input data. These source distributions included the 2 and 3 cm diameter Valencia skin applicators from Nucletron, 4-8 cm diameter AccuBoost peripheral breast brachytherapy applicators from Advanced Radiation Therapy, and a 16 mm COMS-based eye plaque using 103Pd, 125I, and 131Cs seeds. Radial dose functions and 2D anisotropy functions were obtained by positioning the coordinate system origin along the dose distribution cylindrical axis of symmetry. Origin:tissue distance and active length were chosen to minimize TPS interpolation errors. Dosimetry parameters were entered into the PINNACLE TPS, and dose distributions were subsequently calculated and compared to the original Monte Carlo-derived dose distributions. The new planning technique was able to reproduce brachytherapy dose distributions for all three applicator types, producing dosimetric agreement typically within 2% when compared with Monte Carlo-derived dose distributions. Agreement between Monte Carlo-derived and planned dose distributions improved as the spatial resolution of the fitted dosimetry parameters improved. For agreement within 5% throughout the clinical volume, spatial resolution of dosimetry parameter data < or = 0.1 cm was required, and the virtual brachytherapy source data set included over 5000 data points. On the other hand, the lack of consideration for applicator heterogeneity effect caused conventional dose overestimates exceeding an order of magnitude in regions of clinical interest. This approach is rationalized by the improved dose estimates. In conclusion, a new technique was developed to incorporate complex Monte Carlo-based brachytherapy dose distributions into conventional TPS. These results are generalizable to other brachytherapy source types and other TPS.

Evaluation of high-energy brachytherapy source electronic disequilibrium and dose from emitted electrons.

PURPOSE: The region of electronic disequilibrium near photon-emitting brachytherapy sources of high-energy radionuclides (60Co, 137CS, 192Ir, and 169Yb) and contributions to total dose from emitted electrons were studied using the GEANT4 and PENELOPE Monte Carlo codes. METHODS: Hypothetical sources with active and capsule materials mimicking those of actual sources but with spherical shape were examined. Dose contributions due to source photons, x rays, and bremsstrahlung; source beta-, Auger electrons, and internal conversion electrons; and water collisional kerma were scored. To determine if conclusions obtained for electronic equilibrium conditions and electron dose contribution to total dose for the representative spherical sources could be applied to actual sources, the 192Ir mHDR-v2 source model (Nucletron B.V., Veenendaal, The Netherlands) was simulated for comparison to spherical source results and to published data. RESULTS: Electronic equilibrium within 1% is reached for 60Co, 137CS, 192Ir, and 169Yb at distances greater than 7, 3.5, 2, and 1 mm from the source center, respectively, in agreement with other published studies. At 1 mm from the source center, the electron contributions to total dose are 1.9% and 9.4% for 60Co and 192Ir, respectively. Electron emissions become important (i.e., > 0.5%) within 3.3 mm of 60Co and 1.7 mm of 192Ir sources, yet are negligible over all distances for 137Cs and 169Yb. Electronic equilibrium conditions along the transversal source axis for the mHDR-v2 source are comparable to those of the spherical sources while electron dose to total dose contribution are quite different. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic equilibrium conditions obtained for spherical sources could be generalized to actual sources while electron contribution to total dose depends strongly on source dimensions, material composition, and electron spectra.

Application of holographic display in radiotherapy treatment planning II: a multi-institutional study.

We hypothesized that use of a true 3D display providing easy visualization of patient anatomy and dose distribution would lead to the production of better quality radiation therapy treatment plans. We report on a randomized prospective multi-institutional study to evaluate a novel 3D display for treatment planning.The Perspecta Spatial 3D System produces 360 degrees holograms by projecting crosssectional images on a diffuser screen rotating at 900 rpm. Specially-developed software allows bi-directional transfer of image and dose data between Perspecta and the Pinnacle planning system.Thirty-three patients previously treated at three institutions were included in this IRB-approved study. Patient data were de-identified, randomized, and assigned to different planners. A physician at each institution reviewed the cases and established planning objectives. Two treatment plans were then produced for each patient, one based on the Pinnacle system alone and another in conjunction with Perspecta. Plan quality was then evaluated by the same physicians who established the planning objectives. All plans were viewable on both Perspecta and Pinnacle for review. Reviewing physicians were blinded to the planning device used. Data from a 13-patient pilot study were also included in the analysis.Perspecta plans were considered better in 28 patients (61%), Pinnacle in 14 patients (30%), and both were equivalent in 4 patients. The use of non-coplanar beams was more common with Perspecta plans (82% vs. 27%). The mean target dose differed by less than 2% between rival plans. Perspecta plans were somewhat more likely to have the hot spot located inside the target (43% vs. 33%). Conversely, 30% of the Pinnacle plans had the hot spot outside the target compared with 18% for Perspecta plans. About 57% of normal organs received less dose from Perspecta plans. No statistically significant association was found between plan preference and planning institution or planner.The study found that use of the holographic display leads to radiotherapy plans preferred in a majority of cases over those developed with 2D displays. These data indicate that continued development of this technology for clinical implementation is warranted.

COMS eye plaque brachytherapy dosimetry simulations for 103Pd, 125I, and 131Cs.

Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were performed to estimate brachytherapy dose distributions for Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) eye plaques. Brachytherapy seed models 200, 6711, and CS-1 Rev2 carrying 103Pd, 125I, and 131Cs radionuclides, respectively, were modeled and benchmarked against previously published values. Calculated dose rate constants MClambda were 0.684, 0.924, and 1.052 cGy h(-1) U(-1) (+/- 2.6%, k = 1 uncertainty) for models 200, 6711, and CS-1 Rev2, respectively. The seeds were distributed into 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22 mm-diameter COMS eye plaques. Simulations were performed in both heterogeneous and homogeneous environments, where the latter were in-water and the former included the silastic seed carrier insert and gold-alloy plaque. MC-based homogenous central axis dose distributions agreed within 2% +/- 1% (+/- 1 s.d.) to hand-calculated values. For heterogeneous simulations, notable photon attenuation was observed, with dose reduction at 5 mm of 19%, 11%, and 9% for 103Pd, 125I, and 131Cs, respectively. A depth-dependent correction factor was derived to correct homogenous central-axis dose distributions for plaque component heterogeneities, which were found to be significant at short radial distances.

Equivalent phantom sizes and shapes for brachytherapy dosimetric studies of 192Ir and 137Cs.

The impact of phantom size and shape in brachytherapy dosimetry was assessed using Monte Carlo methods in liquid water for 192Ir and 137Cs point sources. This is needed since differences in published dosimetry data, both measurements and simulations, employ a variety of phantom sizes and shapes which can cause dose differences exceeding 30% near the phantom periphery. Spheres of radius, Rsph, 10-40 cm were examined to determine the equivalent spherical phantom size to a variety of cylinder and cube sizes, Rcyl and Rcube, respectively. These sizes ranged from 10 to 30 cm. The equivalent Rsph for a given size cylinder or cube was determined using a figure of merit (FOM) function to minimize differences between radial dose functions, g(r). Using the FOM approach, a linear fit (R2 > 0.99) was obtained for the equivalent Rsph for a given size cylinder or cube. The equivalent phantom for a cylinder, of 40 cm diameter and length 40 cm, is a sphere of 21 cm in radius and the equivalent phantom for a cube of 30 cm on each side is a sphere of 17.5 in radius. When normalizing all results to r=1 cm for g(r) comparisons of phantom shape, the absolute dose rates were equivalent within 0.1% for Rsph > or =10 cm for both 192Ir and 137Cs. Correlation factors to permit comparisons of unbounded g(r) data for r < or =15 cm in 20 published datasets resulted in agreement generally within 2%. Residual differences with four datasets were attributed to methodological uncertainties in the published references.

The impact of prescription depth, dose rate, plaque size, and source loading on the central axis using 103Pd, 125I, and 131Cs.

PURPOSE: Modern dosimetry data are not available for Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study-based eye plaques. This report aims to provide these data for eye plaques ranging from 10 to 22 mm, and for three different low-energy, photon-emitting radionuclides. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Recent publications on brachytherapy dosimetry parameters for 103Pd, 125I, and 131Cs were evaluated for use as eye plaque reference data. These data were entered into the Pinnacle treatment planning system for 3D calculations of brachytherapy dose distributions along the central axis for depths ranging from -1 to 10 mm based on the origin positioned at the inner sclera. In accordance with the original Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study protocol and in the absence of radionuclide-specific heterogeneity factors, inhomogeneity corrections were not applied. RESULTS: As expected due to the mean photon energies, 103Pd, 125I, and 131Cs provided increasingly penetrating dose distributions. Dose distribution tables were prepared for fully loaded plaques and for plaques with the central source(s) removed. Over the entire range of central axis depths, and for all plaque sizes and loadings, 131Cs produced minimal outer scleral doses. Similarly, 103Pd generally produced more favorable dose distributions than 125I for depths less than 4mm. CONCLUSIONS: A modern analysis of eye plaque dosimetry evaluated dose as a function of lesion height and applicator size, and showed dependence on radionuclide selection and implant duration. For a fixed dose at the prescription point, we observed higher scleral dose corresponded with lower photon energy for a variety of plaque sizes and lesion heights.

Supplement to the 2004 update of the AAPM Task Group No. 43 Report.

Since publication of the 2004 update to the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group No. 43 Report (TG-43U1), several new low-energy photon-emitting brachytherapy sources have become available. Many of these sources have satisfied the AAPM prerequisites for routine clinical use as of January 10, 2005, and are posted on the Joint AAPM/RPC Brachytherapy Seed Registry. Consequently, the AAPM has prepared this supplement to the 2004 AAPM TG-43 update. This paper presents the AAPM-approved consensus datasets for these sources, and includes the following 125I sources: Amersham model 6733, Draximage model LS-1, Implant Sciences model 3500, IBt model 1251L, IsoAid model IAI-125A, Mentor model SL-125/ SH-125, and SourceTech Medical model STM1251. The Best Medical model 2335 103Pd source is also included. While the methodology used to determine these data sets is identical to that published in the AAPM TG-43U1 report, additional information and discussion are presented here on some questions that arose since the publication of the TG-43U1 report. Specifically, details of interpolation and extrapolation methods are described further, new methodologies are recommended, and example calculations are provided. Despite these changes, additions, and clarifications, the overall methodology, the procedures for developing consensus data sets, and the dose calculation formalism largely remain the same as in the TG-43U1 report. Thus, the AAPM recommends that the consensus data sets and resultant source-specific dose-rate distributions included in this supplement be adopted by all end users for clinical treatment planning of low-energy photon-emitting brachytherapy sources. Adoption of these recommendations may result in changes to patient dose calculations, and these changes should be carefully evaluated and reviewed with the radiation oncologist prior to implementation of the current protocol.