The Kelowna template for combined intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy for gynecologic malignancies: Design, application, treatment planning, dosimetric and treatment outcomes.

PURPOSE: We report the feasibility, experience, and early outcomes of the combined intracavitary and interstitial dedicated applicator using the Kelowna GYN template (Varian, Palo Alto, CA). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The Kelowna GYN template is CT compatible and used for the treatment of gynecologic cancers. In cases with patients that have an intact uterus, a modified applicator system using the Kelowna GYN template and a 3D printed adapter piece allows for compatibility with an intrautaerine tandem. RESULTS: We reviewed the treatment course of 23 patients comprising of 86 fractions of HDR treatment. Median D90 for cervical tumors (n = 7) was 82.4 Gy (range 77.7-92.6); for postoperative cervical tumors (n = 2) was 73.9 Gy (range 72.0-5.8); for vaginal tumors (n = 4) was 85.8 Gy (range 79.8-88.1); for recurrent endometrial (n = 10) was 86.9 Gy (range 74.8-103.2). Median EQD2 D2cc for bladder was 72.4 Gy (range 47.7-99.4), for rectum was 61.2 Gy (range 52.4-80.6), and for sigmoid colon of 50.5 Gy (44.3-66.9). At a median follow-up of 12 months, 2 patients had a local recurrence. Two patients had distant recurrence: one with carcinomatosis at 6 months, and one with pulmonary metastases at 3 months. No patients had late grade three toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Our single institutional experience supports the use of the Kelowna template as a robust system as a combined IC-IS applicator resulting in versatile and reproducible implants for a variety of gynecologic malignancies.

Gynecologic interstitial brachytherapy curriculum using a low-cost phantom with ultrasound workshop and a treatment planning workshop is effective.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): Standardized simulation training geared towards interstitial brachytherapy (IS BT) for gynecologic malignancies is lacking in radiation oncology resident education. We developed and implemented a curriculum for IS BT training with (1) lecture on equipment, workflow, and guidelines, (2) hands-on ultrasound-guided IS BT workshop, and (3) treatment planning workshop. METHODS AND MATERIAL: The cost in materials of each phantom was approximately $66. After a lecture, two alternating workshops were performed. The first session consisted of a hands-on ultrasound-guided IS BT workshop with one resident imaging the phantom with a transabdominal ultrasound probe and the other resident implanting the phantom with needles. A second session consisted of a hands-on treatment planning workshop using BrachyVision and an l-Q spreadsheet with the following objectives: coverage goal, meeting D2cc constraints, and minimizing V200. The primary outcome was improvement in knowledge assessed with Likert-style questions and objective knowledge-based questions (KBQs). RESULTS: Four of the seven medical residents that participated in this curriculum had prior IS BT experience. Residents reported significantly improved knowledge regarding gynecologic IS BT equipment and procedure, evaluating gynecologic anatomy using ultrasound, CT simulation, contouring, and plan review (overall median pre-session subjective score 2 (1) -(3) versus post-session score 4 (3) -(4, p < 0.01). Residents demonstrated improvement in answering KBQs correctly from 44% correct at baseline to 88% after completion of the curriculum (p < 0.01). All residents "Agree" and "Strongly Agree" the session was an effective learning experience. CONCLUSIONS: Residents participating in phantom training with an ultrasound curriculum and a treatment planning session is effective for improving knowledge and skills in IS BT for radiation oncology residents.