Automated segmentation of multiparametric magnetic resonance images for cerebral AVM radiosurgery planning: a deep learning approach.

Stereotactic radiosurgery planning for cerebral arteriovenous malformations (AVM) is complicated by the variability in appearance of an AVM nidus across different imaging modalities. We developed a deep learning approach to automatically segment cerebrovascular-anatomical maps from multiple high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging/angiography (MRI/MRA) sequences in AVM patients, with the goal of facilitating target delineation. Twenty-three AVM patients who were evaluated for radiosurgery and underwent multi-parametric MRI/MRA were included. A hybrid semi-automated and manual approach was used to label MRI/MRAs with arteries, veins, brain parenchyma, cerebral spinal fluid (CSF), and embolized vessels. Next, these labels were used to train a convolutional neural network to perform this task. Imaging from 17 patients (6362 image slices) was used for training, and 6 patients (1224 slices) for validation. Performance was evaluated by Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC). Classification performance was good for arteries, veins, brain parenchyma, and CSF, with DSCs of 0.86, 0.91, 0.98, and 0.91, respectively in the validation image set. Performance was lower for embolized vessels, with a DSC of 0.75. This demonstrates the proof of principle that accurate, high-resolution cerebrovascular-anatomical maps can be generated from multiparametric MRI/MRA. Clinical validation of their utility in radiosurgery planning is warranted.

Operational Insights From the Longitudinal Analysis of a Linear Accelerator Machine Log.

Purpose This study aimed to perform a longitudinal analysis of linear accelerator (linac) technical faults reported with a cloud-based Machine Log system in use in a busy academic clinic and derive operational insights related to linac reliability, clinical utilization, and performance. Methods We queried the Machine Log system for the following parameters: linac type, number of reported technical faults, types of fault, number of faults where the linac was disabled, and estimated clinical downtime. The number of fractions treated and monitor units (MU) delivered were obtained from the record and verify system as metrics of linac utilization and to normalize the number of reported linac faults, facilitating inter-comparison. Two Varian TrueBeam C-arm linacs (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA), one Varian 21iX C-arm linac (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA), and one newly installed Varian Halcyon ring gantry linac (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) were evaluated. The linacs were studied over a 30-month period from September 2017 to March 2020.  Results Over 30 months, comprising 677 clinical days, 1234 faults were reported from all linacs, including 153 "linac down" events requiring rescheduling or cancellation of treatments. The TrueBeam linacs reported nearly twice as many imaging, multileaf collimator (MLC), and beam generation faults per fraction, and MU as the Halcyon. Halcyon experienced fewer beam generation/steering, accessory, and cooling-related faults than the other linacs but reported more computer and networking issues. Although it employs a relatively new MLC design compared to the C-arm linacs and delivers primarily intensity-modulated treatments, Halcyon reported fewer MLC faults than the other linacs. The 21iX linac had the fewest software-related faults but was subject to the most cooling-related faults, which we attributed to extensive use of this linac for treatment techniques with extended beam-on times. Conclusions A longitudinal analysis of a cloud-based Machine Log system yielded operational insights into the utilization, performance, and technical reliability of the linacs in use at our institution. Several trends in linac sub-system reliability were identified and could be attributed to either age, design, clinical use, or operational demands. The results of this analysis will be used as a basis for designing linac quality assurance schedules that reflect actual linac usage and observed sub-system reliability. Such a practice may contribute to a clinic workflow subject to fewer disruptions from linac faults, ultimately improving efficiency and patient safety.

Assessment of the use of different imaging and delivery techniques for cranial treatments on the Halcyon linac.

PURPOSE: In this work, we investigated the effect on the workflow and setup accuracy of using surface guided radiation therapy (SGRT) for patient setup, megavoltage cone beam CT (MVCBCT) or kilovoltage cone beam CT (kVCBCT) for imaging and fixed IMRT or volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for treatment delivery with the Halcyon linac. METHODS: We performed a retrospective investigation of 272 treatment fractions, using three different workflows. The first and second workflows used MVCBCT and fixed IMRT for imaging and treatment delivery, and the second one also used SGRT for patient setup. The third workflow used SGRT for setup, kVCBCT for imaging and VMAT for delivery. Workflows were evaluated by comparing the number of fractions requiring repeated imaging acquisitions and the time required for setup, imaging and treatment delivery. Setup position accuracy was assessed by comparing the daily kV- or MV- CBCT with the planning CT and measuring the residual rotational errors for pitch, yaw and roll angles. RESULTS: Without the use of SGRT, the imaging fields were delivered more than once on 11.1% of the fractions, while re-imaging was necessary in 5.5% of the fractions using SGRT. The total treatment time, including setup, imaging, and delivery, for the three workflows was 531 ± 157 s, 503 ± 130 s and 457 ± 91 s, respectively. A statistically significant difference was observed when comparing the third workflow with the first two. The total residual rotational errors were 1.96 ± 1.29°, 1.28 ± 0.67° and 1.22 ± 0.76° and statistically significant differences were observed when comparing workflows with and without SGRT. CONCLUSIONS: The use of SGRT allowed for a reduction of re-imaging during patient setup and improved patient position accuracy by reducing residual rotational errors. A reduction in treatment time using kVCBCT with SGRT was observed. The most efficient workflow was the one including kVCBCT and SGRT for setup and VMAT for delivery.

Clinical safety assessment of the Halcyon system.

PURPOSE: The Halcyon consists of precommissioned linear accelerator and treatment planning algorithms that were designed to simplify the acceptance, commissioning, and clinical workflow for image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy. The purpose of this work was to perform a comprehensive safety assessment for the clinical use of the Halcyon. METHODS: Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis was used as the safety assessment tool. As part of the analysis, a number of control loops and control actions are created to describe system function. Safety is assessed by determining unsafe control actions and a corresponding list of causal scenarios that leads to accidents. The scope of the analysis was from the acceptance of the Halcyon to routine patient treatments. All aspects of treating patients were considered including the roles of physicians, physicists, dosimetrists, and therapists. The analysis was completed by four physicists with input from other members of the radiation therapy team. The causal scenarios were summarized using the causality categories from the consensus recommendations for incident learning database structures in radiation oncology (Med Phys, Vol. 39, No. 12, Dec 2012). RESULTS: Twenty-three (23) control loops containing 52 control actions were created for the clinical use of the Halcyon. One hundred forty-four (144) unsafe control actions were identified with 385 associated causal scenarios. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of the causal scenarios were related to equipment technical issues, while 73% of the causal scenarios were predominantly related to procedural issues, human behavior, and organizational management. CONCLUSIONS: For routine clinical use of closed or largely automated radiation therapy equipment, the majority of safety concerns is related to nontechnical issues. The Halcyon and other similar systems may present opportunities to streamline, reduce, or eliminate some traditional equipment commissioning and routine quality assurance activities in exchange for an increased focus on issues related to organizational management, procedures, and human behavior.

Dosimetric study of the plan quality and dose to organs at risk on tangential breast treatments using the Halcyon linac.

PURPOSE: To investigate the plan quality and doses to the heart, contralateral breast (CB), ipsilateral lung (IL), and contralateral lung (CL) in tangential breast treatments using the Halcyon linac with megavoltage setup fields. METHODS: Radiotherapy treatment plans with tangential beams from 25 breast cancer patients previously treated on a C-arm linac were replanned for Halcyon. Thirteen corresponded to right-sided breasts and 12 to left-sided breasts, all with a dose prescription of 50 Gy in 25 fractions. Plans were created with the following setup imaging techniques: low-dose (LD) MVCBCT, high-quality (HQ) MVCBCT, LD-MV and HQ-MV pairs and the imaging dose was included in the plans. Plan quality metric values for the lumpectomy cavity, whole-breast and doses to the organs at risk (OARs) were measured and compared with those from the original plans. RESULTS: No significant differences in plan quality were observed between the original and Halcyon plans. An increase in the mean dose (Mean) for all the organs was observed for the Halcyon plans. For right-sided plans, the accumulated Mean over the 25 fractions in the C-arm plans was 0.4 ± 0.3, 0.2 ± 0.2, 5.4 ± 1.3, and 0.1 ± 0.1 Gy for the heart, CB, IL, and CL, respectively, while values in the MVCBCT-LD Halcyon plans were 1.2 ± 0.2, 0.6 ± 0.1, 6.5 ± 1.4, and 0.4 ± 0.1 Gy, respectively. For left-sided treatments, Mean in the original plans was 0.9 ± 0.2, 0.1 ± 0.0, 4.2 ± 1.2, and 0.0 ± 0.0 Gy, while for the MVCBCT-LD Halcyon plans values were 1.9 ± 0.2, 0.6 ± 0.2, 5.1 ± 1.2, and 0.5 ± 0.2 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Plan quality for breast treatments using Halcyon is similar to the quality for a 6 MV, C-arm plan. For treatments using megavoltage setup fields, the dose contribution to OARs from the imaging fields can be equal or higher than the dose from treatment fields.

Technical Note: Assessing the performance of monthly CBCT image quality QA.

PURPOSE: To assess the performance of routine cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) quality assurance (QA) at predicting and diagnosing clinically recognizable linac CBCT image quality issues. METHODS: Monthly automated linac CBCT image quality QA data were acquired on eight Varian linacs (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) using the CATPHAN 500 series phantom (The Phantom Laboratory, Inc., Greenwich, NY) and Total QA software (Image Owl, Inc., Greenwich, NY) over 34 months between July 2014 and May 2017. For each linac, the following image quality metrics were acquired: geometric distortion, spatial resolution, Hounsfield Unit (HU) constancy, uniformity, and noise. Quality control (QC) limits were determined by American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) expert consensus documents Task Group (TG-142 and TG-179) and the manufacturer acceptance testing procedure. Clinically recognizable CBCT issues were extracted from the in-house incident learning system (ILS) and service reports. The sensitivity and specificity of CATPHAN QA at predicting clinically recognizable image quality issues was investigated. Sensitivity was defined as the percentage of clinically recognizable CBCT image quality issues that followed a failing CATPHAN QA. Quality assurance results are categorized as failing if one or more image quality metrics are outside the QC limits. The specificity of CATPHAN QA was defined as one minus the fraction of failing CATPHAN QA results that did not have a clinically recognizable CBCT image quality issue in the subsequent month. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated for each image quality metric by plotting the true positive rate (TPR) against the false-positive rate (FPR). RESULTS: Over the study period, 18 image quality issues were discovered by clinicians while using CBCT to set up the patient and five were reported prior to x-ray tube repair. The incidents ranged from ring artifacts to uniformity problems. The sensitivity of the TG-142/179 limits was 17% (four of the prior monthly QC tests detected a clinically recognizable image quality issue). The area under the curve (AUC) calculated for each image quality metric ROC curve was: 0.85 for uniformity, 0.66 for spatial resolution, 0.51 for geometric distortion, 0.56 for noise, 0.73 for HU constancy, and 0.59 for contrast resolution. CONCLUSION: Automated monthly QA is not a good predictor of CBCT image quality issues. Of the available metrics, uniformity has the best predictive performance, but still has a high FPR and low sensitivity. The poor performance of CATPHAN QA as a predictor of image quality problems is partially due to its reliance on region-of-interest (ROI) based algorithms and a lack of a global algorithm such as correlation. The manner in which image quality issues occur (trending toward failure or random) is still not known and should be studied further. CBCT image quality QA should be adapted based on how CBCT is used clinically.

Characterization of the HalcyonTM multileaf collimator system.

PURPOSE: To characterize the stacked and staggered dual-layer multileaf collimator (MLC) on the HalcyonTM system. METHODS: The novel MLC assembly was reviewed and compared to the widely used MillenniumTM 120-leaf MLC system. We investigated the MLC positioning stability over 70 days using Machine Performance Check (MPC) data. We evaluated the leaf transmission, penumbra, leaf end effect, and leaf edge effect. Leaf transmission through distal, proximal, and both MLC layers was measured with a Farmer chamber, by comparing an open and a closed field. Leaf penumbra was measured using film for three different MLC-defined field sizes. The leaf end effect was measured with sweeping gap fields of varying gap sizes defined by the distal MLC. The leaf edge effect was evaluated using the Electronic Portal Imaging Device (EPID) for the different banks, gantry positions, and collimator angles. Point dose measurements for 10 test plans were compared to dose predictions of two dose calculation model versions. RESULTS: From MPC data, the largest measured MLC positioning accuracy deviation was within 0.1 mm. The proximal MLC exhibited greater deviations compared to the distal MLC. The distal-and-proximal-combination had reduced inter-leaf and intra-leaf transmission compared to delivery with distal-only. The measured leaf transmission was 0.41% for distal-only, 0.40% for proximal-only, and negligible for distal-and-proximal-combination. The leaf end penumbra was wider compared to the leaf edge penumbra. The leaf end effect was measured to be -0.2 mm. The leaf edge effect showed minimal bank, gantry position, and collimator angle dependence. However, a systematic deviation between measurements and treatment planning system handling of the leaf edge effect was observed. The discrepancy between the measured and predicted dose in the 10 test plans improved with the latest version of the dose calculation algorithm. CONCLUSION: The characteristics of the stacked and staggered dual-layer MLC on the HalcyonTM system were presented.

End-to-end testing of automatic plan optimization using RayStation scripting for hypofractionated multimetastatic brain stereotactic radiosurgery.

For external beam stereotactic radiosurgery of multiple brain metastatic lesions, it is difficult to select optimal treatment isocenters because the orientation and volume of each planning target volume (PTV) and its proximity to critical structures are unique for each patient. The RayStation treatment planning system offers Python-based scripting to optimize the placement of the treatment isocenter by comparing scenario-based plans. This can improve the plan quality by reducing the dose to the normal brain and increasing planning efficiency. The purpose of the current study was to compare the isocenter-optimized plans generated by RayStation with clinical plans created by the Pinnacle treatment planning system and to validate the RayStation treatment planning and delivery with end-to-end testing. Ten patient plans were automatically regenerated using the script in RayStation. For each patient, 4 plans with 4 different types of isocenters were generated: (1) 2 separate isocenters at the PTV centroids, (2) a single isocenter at the mid-point of 2 centroids, (3) a single isocenter at PTV1, and (4) a single isocenter at PTV2. The best plans were compared with paired Pinnacle plans using plan quality parameters, including normal brain volume excluding PTVs receiving 4 Gy (V4Gy), normal brain volume excluding PTVs receiving 12 Gy (V12Gy), maximum dose to the brainstem, homogeneity index, conformity indices, gradient index of each PTV, and monitor units per fraction. All plans were verified with a cylindrical quality assurance phantom, and end-to-end testing was performed with an anthropomorphic head phantom with a radiochromic film. The script was executed within 5-6 minutes to generate 4 scenario-based automatic plans. The homogeneity index and conformity indices showed small but statistically significant improvement with the RayStation plans. The gradient index (3.9 ± 0.9 for Pinnacle and 3.5 ± 0.6 for RayStation, p = 0.04) was also more favorable in the RayStation plans. V12Gy was significantly reduced by 13% and V4Gy was reduced by 5%. The total monitor units per fraction was significantly reduced by 20% for the RayStation plans. Plan optimization time using RayStation was reduced by 64%. The measured doses at each PTV centroid agreed within 3%, and all RayStation plans passed quality assurance verification tests. Scenario-based automatic plan generation using Python scripting helps identify an optimal treatment isocenter to reduce the dose to the normal brain and improve planning efficiency. RayStation plans provided better plan quality, especially lower doses to the normal brain, than Pinnacle plans. Thus, RayStation is a suitable planning modality for hypofractionated stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases.

Tolerance design of patient-specific range QA using the DMAIC framework in proton therapy.

PURPOSE: To implement the DMAIC (Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control) can be used for customizing the patient-specific QA by designing site-specific range tolerances. METHODS: The DMAIC framework (process flow diagram, cause and effect, Pareto chart, control chart, and capability analysis) were utilized to determine the steps that need focus for improving the patient-specific QA. The patient-specific range QA plans were selected according to seven treatment site groups, a total of 1437 cases. The process capability index, Cpm was used to guide the tolerance design of patient site-specific range. RESULTS: For prostate field, our results suggested that the patient range measurements were capable at the current tolerance level of ±1 mm in clinical proton plans. For other site-specific ranges, we analyzed that the tolerance tends to be overdesigned to insufficient process capability calculated by the patient-specific QA data. The customized tolerances were calculated for treatment sites. Control charts were constructed to simulate the patient QA time before and after the new tolerances were implemented. It is found that the total simulation QA time was decreased on average of approximately 20% after establishing new site-specific range tolerances. We simulated the financial impact of this project. The QA failure for whole process in proton therapy would lead up to approximately 30% increase in total cost. CONCLUSION: DMAIC framework can be used to provide an effective QA by setting customized tolerances. When tolerance design is customized, the quality is reasonably balanced with time and cost demands.

Technical Note: Using k-means clustering to determine the number and position of isocenters in MLC-based multiple target intracranial radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: To present the k-means clustering algorithm as a tool to address treatment planning considerations characteristic of stereotactic radiosurgery using a single isocenter for multiple targets. METHODS: For 30 patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases, the geometric centroids and radii of each met were determined from the treatment planning system. In-house software used this as well as weighted and unweighted versions of the k-means clustering algorithm to group the targets to be treated with a single isocenter, and to position each isocenter. The algorithm results were evaluated using within-cluster sum of squares as well as a minimum target coverage metric that considered the effect of target size. Both versions of the algorithm were applied to an example patient to demonstrate the prospective determination of the appropriate number and location of isocenters. RESULTS: Both weighted and unweighted versions of the k-means algorithm were applied successfully to determine the number and position of isocenters. Comparing the two, both the within-cluster sum of squares metric and the minimum target coverage metric resulting from the unweighted version were less than those from the weighted version. The average magnitudes of the differences were small (-0.2 cm2 and 0.1% for the within cluster sum of squares and minimum target coverage, respectively) but statistically significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The differences between the versions of the k-means clustering algorithm represented an advantage of the unweighted version for the within-cluster sum of squares metric, and an advantage of the weighted version for the minimum target coverage metric. While additional treatment planning considerations have a large influence on the final treatment plan quality, both versions of the k-means algorithm provide automatic, consistent, quantitative, and objective solutions to the tasks associated with SRS treatment planning using a single isocenter for multiple targets.

Insight gained from responses to surveys on reference dosimetry practices.

PURPOSE: To present the results and discuss potential insights gained through surveys on reference dosimetry practices. METHODS: Two surveys were sent to medical physicists to learn about the current state of reference dosimetry practices at radiation oncology clinics worldwide. A short survey designed to maximize response rate was made publicly available and distributed via the AAPM website and a medical physics list server. Another, much more involved survey, was sent to a smaller group of physicists to gain insight on detailed dosimetry practices. The questions were diverse, covering reference dosimetry practices on topics like measurements required for beam quality specification, the actual measurement of absorbed dose and ancillary equipment required like electrometers and environment monitoring measurements. RESULTS: There were 190 respondents to the short survey and seven respondents to the detailed survey. The diversity of responses indicates nonuniformity in reference dosimetry practices and differences in interpretation of reference dosimetry protocols. CONCLUSIONS: The results of these surveys offer insight on clinical reference dosimetry practices and will be useful in identifying current and future needs for reference dosimetry.

Evaluation of a surface imaging system's isocenter calibration methods.

AlignRT is a surface imaging system that has been utilized for localizing and tracking patient position during radiotherapy. AlignRT has two calibration procedures that can set the system's isocenter called "Monthly Calibration" (MC) and "Isocentre Calibration" (IC). The MC utilizes a calibration plate. In addition to the calibration plate, the IC utilizes a cubic phantom that is imaged with the linac treatment beam to aid in aligning the AlignRT and treatment-beam isocenters. This work evaluated the effects of misaligning the calibration plate during the calibration process. The plate was intentionally shifted away from isocenter ±3.0 mm in the longitudinal and lateral directions and ±1.0 mm in the longitudinal, lateral, and vertical directions. A mock stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatment was used to evaluate the effects of the miscalibrations. An anthropomorphic head phantom was placed in an SRS treatment position and monitored with the AlignRT system. The AlignRT-indicated offsets were recorded at 270°, 315°, 0°, 45°, and 90° couch angles for each intentional misalignment of the calibration plate during the MC. The IC was also performed after each miscalibration, and the measurements were repeated and compared to the previous results. With intentional longitudinal and lateral shifts of ±3.0 mm and ±1.0 mm of the calibration plate, the average indicated offsets at couch rotations of ±90° were 4.3 mm and 1.6 mm, respectively. This was in agreement with the theoretical offset of √2*(shift-of-the-calibration plate). Since vertical shifts were along the rotation axis of the couch, these shifts had little effect on the offsets with changing couch angle. When the IC was applied, the indicated offsets were all within 0.5 mm for all couch angles for each of the miscalibrations. These offsets were in agreement with the known magnitude of couch walkout. The IC method effectively removes the potential miscalibration artifacts of the MC method due to misalignments of the calibration plate.

Clinical efficacy and safety of surface imaging guided radiosurgery (SIG-RS) in the treatment of benign skull base tumors.

Frameless, surface imaging guided radiosurgery (SIG-RS) is a novel platform for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) wherein patient positioning is monitored in real-time through infra-red camera tracking of facial topography. Here we describe our initial clinical experience with SIG-RS for the treatment of benign neoplasms of the skull base. We identified 48 patients with benign skull base tumors consecutively treated with SIG-RS at a single institution between 2009 and 2011. Patients were diagnosed with meningioma (n = 22), vestibular schwannoma (n = 20), or nonfunctional pituitary adenoma (n = 6). Local control and treatment-related toxicity were retrospectively assessed. Median follow-up was 65 months (range 61-72 months). Prescription doses were 12-13 Gy in a single fraction (n = 18), 8 Gy × 3 fractions (n = 6), and 5 Gy × 5 fractions (n = 24). Actuarial tumor control rate at 5 years was 98%. No grade ≥3 treatment-related toxicity was observed. Grade ≤2 toxicity was associated with symptomatic lesions (p = 0.049) and single fraction treatment (p = 0.005). SIG-RS for benign skull base tumors produces clinical outcomes comparable to conventional frame-based SRS techniques while enhancing patient comfort.

A comparison of two prospective risk analysis methods: Traditional FMEA and a modified healthcare FMEA.

PURPOSE: To examine the abilities of a traditional failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and modified healthcare FMEA (m-HFMEA) scoring methods by comparing the degree of congruence in identifying high risk failures. METHODS: The authors applied two prospective methods of the quality management to surface image guided, linac-based radiosurgery (SIG-RS). For the traditional FMEA, decisions on how to improve an operation were based on the risk priority number (RPN). The RPN is a product of three indices: occurrence, severity, and detectability. The m-HFMEA approach utilized two indices, severity and frequency. A risk inventory matrix was divided into four categories: very low, low, high, and very high. For high risk events, an additional evaluation was performed. Based upon the criticality of the process, it was decided if additional safety measures were needed and what they comprise. RESULTS: The two methods were independently compared to determine if the results and rated risks matched. The authors' results showed an agreement of 85% between FMEA and m-HFMEA approaches for top 20 risks of SIG-RS-specific failure modes. The main differences between the two approaches were the distribution of the values and the observation that failure modes (52, 54, 154) with high m-HFMEA scores do not necessarily have high FMEA-RPN scores. In the m-HFMEA analysis, when the risk score is determined, the basis of the established HFMEA Decision Tree™ or the failure mode should be more thoroughly investigated. CONCLUSIONS: m-HFMEA is inductive because it requires the identification of the consequences from causes, and semi-quantitative since it allows the prioritization of high risks and mitigation measures. It is therefore a useful tool for the prospective risk analysis method to radiotherapy.

A treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of a proton arc technique for treating tumors of the para-aortic lymph nodes (PALN). METHOD: In nine patients, a proton arc therapy (PAT) technique was compared with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT) techniques with respect to the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR). PTV coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI) and OAR doses were compared. Organ-specific radiation induced cancer risks were estimated by applying organ equivalent dose (OED) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). RESULTS: The PAT techniques showed better PTV coverage than IMRT and PBT plans. The CI obtained with PAT was 1.19 ± 0.02, which was significantly better than that for the IMRT techniques. The HI was lowest for the PAT plan and highest for IMRT. The dose to the OARs was always below the acceptable limits and comparable for all three techniques. OED results calculated based on a plateau dose-response model showed that the risk of secondary cancers in organs was much higher when IMRT or PBT were employed than when PAT was used. NTCPs of PAT to the stomach (0.29 %), small bowel (0.69 %) and liver (0.38 %) were substantially lower than those of IMRT and PBT. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that there is a potential role for PAT as a commercialized instrument in the future to proton therapy.

Distortion inherent to magnetic resonance imaging can lead to geometric miss in radiosurgery planning.

PURPOSE: Anatomic distortion is present in all magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data because of nonlinearity of gradient fields; it measures up to several millimeters. We evaluated the potential for uncorrected MRI to lead to geometric miss of the target volume in stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-eight SRS cases were studied retrospectively. MRI scans were corrected for gradient nonlinearity distortion in 3 dimensions, and gross tumor volumes (GTVs) were contoured. The manufacturer-specified distortion field was then reapplied to GTV masks to allow measurement of GTV displacement in uncorrected images. The uncorrected GTV was used for SRS planning, and the dose received by the true (corrected) GTV was measured. RESULTS: Median displacement of the GTV resulting from gradient distortion was 1.2 mm (interquartile range, 0.1-2.3 mm), with a minimum of 0 mm and a maximum of 3.9 mm. Eight of the 28 cases met a priori criteria for "geometric miss." CONCLUSIONS: Although MRI distortion is often subtle on visual inspection, there is a significant clinical impact of this distortion on SRS planning. Distortion-corrected MRI should uniformly be used for intracranial radiosurgery planning because uncorrected MRI can lead to potential geometric miss.

Prospective treatment plan-specific action limits for real-time intrafractional monitoring in surface image guided radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: In surface image guided radiosurgery, action limits are created to determine at what point intrafractional motion exhibited by the patient is large enough to warrant intervention. Action limit values remain constant across patients despite the fact that patient motion affects the target coverage of brain metastases differently depending on the planning technique and other treatment plan-specific factors. The purpose of this work was twofold. The first purpose was to characterize the sensitivity of single-met per iso and multimet per iso treatment plans to uncorrected patient motion. The second purpose was to describe a method to prospectively determine treatment plan-specific action limits considering this sensitivity. METHODS: In their surface image guided radiosurgery technique, patient positioning is achieved with a thermoplastic mask that does not cover the patient's face. The patient's exposed face is imaged by a stereoscopic photogrammetry system. It is then compared to a reference surface and monitored throughout treatment. Seventy-two brain metastases (representing 29 patients) were used for this study. Twenty-five mets were treated individually ("single-met per iso plans"), and 47 were treated in a plan simultaneously with at least one other met ("multimet per iso plans"). For each met, the proportion of the gross tumor volume that remained within the 100% prescription isodose line was estimated under the influence of combinations of translations and rotations (0.0-3.0 mm and 0.0°-3.0°, respectively). The target volume and the prescription dose-volume were considered concentric spheres that each encompassed a volume determined from the treatment plan. Plan-specific contour plots and DVHs were created to illustrate the sensitivity of a specific lesion to uncorrected patient motion. RESULTS: Both single-met per iso and multimet per iso plans exhibited compromised target coverage under translations and rotations, though multimet per iso plans were considerably more sensitive to these transformations (2.3% and 39.8%, respectively). Plan-specific contour plots and DVHs were used to illustrate how size, distance from isocenter, and planning technique affect a particular met's sensitivity to motion. CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic radiosurgery treatment plans that treat multiple brain metastases using a common isocenter are particularly susceptible to compromised target coverage as a result of uncorrected patient motion. The use of such a planning technique along with other treatment plan-specific factors should influence patient motion management. A graphical representation of the effect of translations and rotations on any particular plan can be generated to inform clinicians of the appropriate action limit when monitoring intrafractional motion.

Application of systems and control theory-based hazard analysis to radiation oncology.

PURPOSE: Both humans and software are notoriously challenging to account for in traditional hazard analysis models. The purpose of this work is to investigate and demonstrate the application of a new, extended accident causality model, called systems theoretic accident model and processes (STAMP), to radiation oncology. Specifically, a hazard analysis technique based on STAMP, system-theoretic process analysis (STPA), is used to perform a hazard analysis. METHODS: The STPA procedure starts with the definition of high-level accidents for radiation oncology at the medical center and the hazards leading to those accidents. From there, the hierarchical safety control structure of the radiation oncology clinic is modeled, i.e., the controls that are used to prevent accidents and provide effective treatment. Using STPA, unsafe control actions (behaviors) are identified that can lead to the hazards as well as causal scenarios that can lead to the identified unsafe control. This information can be used to eliminate or mitigate potential hazards. The STPA procedure is demonstrated on a new online adaptive cranial radiosurgery procedure that omits the CT simulation step and uses CBCT for localization, planning, and surface imaging system during treatment. RESULTS: The STPA procedure generated a comprehensive set of causal scenarios that are traced back to system hazards and accidents. Ten control loops were created for the new SRS procedure, which covered the areas of hospital and department management, treatment design and delivery, and vendor service. Eighty three unsafe control actions were identified as well as 472 causal scenarios that could lead to those unsafe control actions. CONCLUSIONS: STPA provides a method for understanding the role of management decisions and hospital operations on system safety and generating process design requirements to prevent hazards and accidents. The interaction of people, hardware, and software is highlighted. The method of STPA produces results that can be used to improve safety and prevent accidents and warrants further investigation.

Automating linear accelerator quality assurance.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was 2-fold. One purpose was to develop an automated, streamlined quality assurance (QA) program for use by multiple centers. The second purpose was to evaluate machine performance over time for multiple centers using linear accelerator (Linac) log files and electronic portal images. The authors sought to evaluate variations in Linac performance to establish as a reference for other centers. METHODS: The authors developed analytical software tools for a QA program using both log files and electronic portal imaging device (EPID) measurements. The first tool is a general analysis tool which can read and visually represent data in the log file. This tool, which can be used to automatically analyze patient treatment or QA log files, examines the files for Linac deviations which exceed thresholds. The second set of tools consists of a test suite of QA fields, a standard phantom, and software to collect information from the log files on deviations from the expected values. The test suite was designed to focus on the mechanical tests of the Linac to include jaw, MLC, and collimator positions during static, IMRT, and volumetric modulated arc therapy delivery. A consortium of eight institutions delivered the test suite at monthly or weekly intervals on each Linac using a standard phantom. The behavior of various components was analyzed for eight TrueBeam Linacs. RESULTS: For the EPID and trajectory log file analysis, all observed deviations which exceeded established thresholds for Linac behavior resulted in a beam hold off. In the absence of an interlock-triggering event, the maximum observed log file deviations between the expected and actual component positions (such as MLC leaves) varied from less than 1% to 26% of published tolerance thresholds. The maximum and standard deviations of the variations due to gantry sag, collimator angle, jaw position, and MLC positions are presented. Gantry sag among Linacs was 0.336 ± 0.072 mm. The standard deviation in MLC position, as determined by EPID measurements, across the consortium was 0.33 mm for IMRT fields. With respect to the log files, the deviations between expected and actual positions for parameters were small (<0.12 mm) for all Linacs. Considering both log files and EPID measurements, all parameters were well within published tolerance values. Variations in collimator angle, MLC position, and gantry sag were also evaluated for all Linacs. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the TrueBeam Linac model was shown to be consistent based on automated analysis of trajectory log files and EPID images acquired during delivery of a standardized test suite. The results can be compared directly to tolerance thresholds. In addition, sharing of results from standard tests across institutions can facilitate the identification of QA process and Linac changes. These reference values are presented along with the standard deviation for common tests so that the test suite can be used by other centers to evaluate their Linac performance against those in this consortium.