Electronic charting of radiation therapy planning and treatment: Report of Task Group 262.

While most Radiation Oncology clinics have adopted electronic charting in one form or another, no consensus document exists that provides guidelines for safe and effective use of the Radiation Oncology electronic medical records (RO-EMR). Task Group 262 was formed to provide these guidelines as well as to provide recommendations to vendors for improving electronic charting functionality in future. Guidelines are provided in the following areas: Implementation and training for the RO-EMR, acceptance testing and quality assurance (QA) of the RO-EMR, use of the RO-EMR as an information repository, use of the RO-EMR as a workflow manager, electronic charting for brachytherapy and nonstandard treatments, and information technology (IT) considerations associated with the RO-EMR. The report was based on a literature search by the task group, an extensive survey of task group members on their respective RO-EMR practices, an AAPM membership survey on electronic charting, as well as group consensus.

Dosimetric evaluation of MR-derived synthetic-CTs for MR-only proton treatment planning.

PURPOSE: To evaluate proton dose calculation accuracy of optimized pencil beam scanning (PBS) plans on MR-derived synthetic-CTs for prostate patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ten patient datasets with both a CT and an MRI were planned with opposed lateral proton beams optimized to single field uniform dose under an IRB-approved study. The proton plans were created on CT datasets generated by a commercial synthetic CT-based software called MRCAT (MR for Calculating ATtenuation) routinely used in our clinic for photon-based MR-only planning. A standard prescription of 79.2 Gy (RBE) and 68.4 Gy (RBE) was used for intact prostate and prostate bed cases, respectively. Proton plans were first generated and optimized using the MRCAT synthetic-CT (syn-CT), and then recalculated on the planning CT rigidly aligned with the syn-CT (aligned-CT) and a deformed planning CT (deformed-CT), which was deformed to match outer contour between syn-CT and aligned-CT. The same beam arrangement, total MUs, MUs/spot, spot positions were used to recalculate dose on deformed-CT and aligned-CT without renormalization. DVH analysis was performed on aligned-CT, deformed-CT, and syn-CT to compare D98%, V100%, V95% for PTV, PTVeval, and GTV as well as V70Gy, V50Gy for OARs. RESULTS: The relative percentage dose difference between syn-CT and deformed-CT, were (0.17 ± 0.33 %) for PTVeval D98% and (0.07 ± 0.1 %) for CTV D98%. Rectum V70Gy, V50Gy, and Bladder V70Gy were (2.76 ± 4.01 %), (11.6 ± 11.2 %), and (3.41 ± 2.86 %), respectively for the syn-CT, and (3.23 ± 3.63 %), (11.3 ± 8.18 %), and (3.29 ± 2.76 %), respectively for the deformed-CT, and (1.37 ± 1.84 %), (8.48 ± 6.67 %), and (4.91 ± 3.65 %), respectively for aligned-CT. CONCLUSION: Dosimetric analysis shows that MR-only proton planning is feasible using syn-CT based on current clinical margins that account for a range uncertainty.

Impact of daily soft-tissue image guidance to prostate on pelvic lymph node (PLN) irradiation for prostate patients receiving SBRT.

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of using fiducial match for daily image-guidance on pelvic lymph node (PLN) coverage for prostate cancer patients receiving stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). METHODS: Thirty patients underwent SBRT treatment to the prostate and PLN from 2014 to 2016. Each patient received either 800cGy × 5 or 500cGy × 5 to the prostate and 500cGy × 5 to the PLN. A 5 mm clinical target volume (CTV)-to-planning target volume (PTV) margin around the PLN was used for planning. Two registrations with planning computed tomography (PCT) for each of the daily cone beam CTs (CBCTs) were performed: a rigid registration to fiducials and to the bony anatomy. The average translational difference between fiducial and bony match as well as percentage of fractions with differences > 5mm were calculated. Changes in bladder and rectal volume as well as center-of-mass (COM) position from simulation parameters, and their correlation with translational difference were also evaluated. The dosimetric impact of the translational differences was calculated by shifting the plan isocenter. RESULTS: The average translational difference between fiducial and bony match was 0.06 ± 0.82, 2.1 ± 4.1, -2.8 ± 4.3, and 5.5 ± 4.2 mm for lateral, vertical, longitudinal, and vector directions. The average change in bladder and rectal volume from simulation was -67.2 ± 163.04 cc (-12 ± 52%) and -1.6 ± 18.75 (-2 ± 30%) cc. The average change in COM of bladder from the simulation position was 0.34 ± 2.49, 4.4 ± 8.1, and -3.9 ± 7.5 mm along the LR, AP, and SI directions. The corresponding COM change for the rectum was 0.17 ± 1.9, 1.34 ± 3.5, and -0.6 ± 5.2 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The 5 mm margin covered ~75% of fractions receiving PLN irradiation with SBRT, daily CBCT and fiducial-guided setup. The dosimetric impact on PLN coverage was significant in 19% of fractions or 25% of patients. A larger translational shift was due to variation in rectal volume and changes in COM position of the bladder and rectum. A consistent bladder positioning and/or rectum filling compared with presimulation volume were essential for adequate coverage of PLN in a hypofractionated treatment regime.

Clinical workflow for MR-only simulation and planning in prostate.

PURPOSE: To describe the details and experience of implementing a MR-only workflow in the clinic for simulation and planning of prostate cancer patients. METHODS: Forty-eight prostate cancer patients from June 2016 - Dec 2016 receiving external beam radiotherapy were scheduled to undergo MR-only simulation. MR images were acquired for contouring (T2w axial, coronal, sagittal), synthetic-CT generation (3D FFE-based) and fiducial identification (3D bFFE-based). The total acquisition time was 25 min. Syn-CT was generated at the console using commercial software called MRCAT. As part of acceptance testing of the MRCAT package, external laser positioning system QA (< 2 mm) and geometric fidelity QA (< 2 mm within 50 cm LR and 30 cm AP) were performed and baseline values were set. Our current combined CT + MR simulation process was modified to accommodate a MRCAT-based MR-only simulation workflow. An automated step-by-step process using a MIM™ workflow was created for contouring on the MR images. Patient setup for treatment was achieved by matching the MRCAT DRRs with the orthogonal KV radiographs based on either fiducial ROIs or bones. 3-D CBCTs were acquired and compared with the MR/syn-CT to assess the rectum and bladder filling compared to simulation conditions. RESULTS: Forty-two patients successfully underwent MR-only simulation and met all of our institutional dosimetric objectives that were developed based on a CT + MR-based workflow. The remaining six patients either had a hip prosthesis or their large body size fell outside of the geometric fidelity QA criteria and thus they were not candidates for MR-only simulation. A total time saving of ~15 min was achieved with MR-based simulation as compared to CT + MR-based simulation. An automated and organized MIM workflow made contouring on MR much easier, quicker and more accurate compared with combined CT + MR images because the temporal variations in normal structure was minimal. 2D and 3D treatment setup localization based on bones/fiducials using a MRCAT reference image was successfully achieved for all cases. CONCLUSIONS: MR-only simulation and planning with equivalent or superior target delineation, planning and treatment setup localization accuracy is feasible in a clinical setting. Future work will focus on implementing a robust 3D isotropic acquisition for contouring.

Dosimetric and workflow evaluation of first commercial synthetic CT software for clinical use in pelvis.

To evaluate a commercial synthetic CT (syn-CT) software for use in prostate radiotherapy. Twenty-five prostate patients underwent CT and MR simulation scans in treatment position on a 3T MR scanner. A commercially available MR protocol was used that included a T2w turbo spin-echo sequence for soft-tissue contrast and a dual echo 3D mDIXON fast field echo (FFE) sequence for generating syn-CT. A dual-echo 3D FFE B 0 map was used for patient-induced susceptibility distortion analysis and a new 3D balanced-FFE sequence was evaluated for identification of implanted gold fiducial markers and subsequent image-guidance during radiotherapy delivery. Tissues were classified as air, adipose, water, trabecular/spongy bone and compact/cortical bone and assigned bulk HU values. The accuracy of syn-CT for treatment planning was analyzed by transferring the structures and plan from planning CT to syn-CT and recalculating the dose. Accuracy of localization at the treatment machine was evaluated by comparing registration of kV radiographs to either digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) generated from syn-CT or traditional DRRs generated from the planning CT. Similarly, accuracy of setup using CBCT and syn-CT was compared to that using the planning CT. Finally, a MR-only simulation workflow was established and end-to-end testing was completed on five patients undergoing MR-only simulation. Dosimetric comparison between the original CT and syn-CT plans was within 0.5% on average for all structures. The de-novo optimized plans on the syn-CT met institutional clinical objectives for target and normal structures. Patient-induced susceptibility distortion based on B 0 maps was within 1 mm and 0.5 mm in the body and prostate respectively. DRR and CBCT localization based on MR-localized fiducials showed a standard deviation of <1 mm. End-to-end testing and MR simulation workflow was successfully validated. MRI derived synthetic CT can be successfully used for a MR-only planning and treatment for prostate radiotherapy.

Correlation of Planned Dose to Area Postrema and Dorsal Vagal Complex with Clinical Symptoms of Nausea and Vomiting in Oropharyngeal Cancer (OPC) patients treated with radiation alone using IMRT.

OBJECTIVE: To correlate the planned dose to the nausea center (NC) - area postrema (AP) and dorsal vagal complex (DVC) - with nausea and vomiting symptoms in OPC patients treated with IMRT without chemotherapy. We also investigated whether it was possible to reduce doses to the NC without significant degradation of the clinically accepted treatment plan. METHODS: From 11/04 to 4/09, 37 OPC patients were treated with definitive or adjuvant IMRT without chemotherapy. Of these, only 23 patients had restorable plans and were included in this analysis. We contoured the NC with the assistance of an expert board-certified neuroradiologist. We searched for correlation between the delivered dose to the NC and patient-reported nausea and vomiting during IMRT. We used one-paired t-test: two-sample assuming equal variances to compare differences in dose to NC between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. We then replanned each case to determine if reduced dose to the NC could be achieved without compromising coverage to target volumes, increasing unwarranted hotspots or increasing dose to surrounding critical normal tissues. RESULTS: Acute symptoms of nausea were as follows: Grade 0 (n=6), Grade 1 (n=13), Grade 2 (n=3), and Grade 3 (n=1). Patients with no complaints of nausea had a median dose to the DVC of 34.2 Gy (range 4.6-46.6 Gy) and AP of 32.6 Gy (range 7.0-41.4Gy); whereas those with any complaints of nausea had a median DVC dose of 40.4 Gy (range 19.3-49.4 Gy) and AP dose of 38.7 Gy (range 16.7-46.8 Gy) (p=0.04). Acute vomiting was as follows: Grade 0 (n=17), Grade 1 (n=4), Grade 2 (n=1), and Grade 3 (n=1). There was no significant difference in DVC or AP dose among those with and without vomiting symptoms (p=0.28).Upon replanning of each case to minimize dose to the NC, we were, on average, able to reduce the radiation dose to AP by 18% and DVC by 17%; while the average dose variations to the PTV coverage, brainstem, cord, temporal lobes, and cochlea were never greater than 3%. Hotspots increased by 2% for 3 patients while hotspots for remaining patients were less than 2% variation. CONCLUSION: For OPC cancer patients treated with IMRT without chemotherapy, dose to AP and DVC may be associated with development of nausea. We were able to show that reducing doses substantially to the NC is achievable without significant alteration of the clinically accepted plan and may reduce the incidence and grade of nausea. As symptoms of nausea can be devastating to patients, one can consider routine contouring and constraining of the NC to minimize chances of having this complication.

Bilateral phrenic nerve dysfunction: a late complication of mantle radiation.

Neurologic complications from radiotherapy can be immediate or can occur many years after treatment. A known complication of radiotherapy to the supraclavicular and axillary lymph nodes is brachial plexus neuropathy. Although not a common injury, phrenic nerve dysfunction has been reported in association with radiation-induced brachial neuropathy. We describe a patient who developed asymmetric diaphragmatic weakness secondary to phrenic nerve paralysis 37 years after receiving mantle radiation for Hodgkin lymphoma. The patient did not have an associated brachial plexus neuropathy or a secondary malignancy involving the phrenic nerves. A radiation-induced injury was the most likely cause.

Acute skin toxicity following stereotactic body radiation therapy for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: who's at risk?

PURPOSE: We examined the rate of acute skin toxicity within a prospectively managed database of patients treated for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and investigated factors that might predict skin toxicity. METHODS: From May 2006 through January 2008, 50 patients with Stage I NSCLC were treated at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center with 60 Gy in three fractions or 44-48 Gy in four fractions. Patients were treated with multiple coplanar beams (3-7, median 4) with a 6 MV linac using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and dynamic multileaf collimation. Toxicity grading was performed and based on the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Effects. Factors associated with Grade 2 or higher acute skin reactions were calculated by Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: After a minimum 3 months of follow-up, 19 patients (38%) developed Grade 1, 4 patients (8%) Grade 2, 2 patients (4%) Grade 3, and 1 patient Grade 4 acute skin toxicity. Factors associated with Grade 2 or higher acute skin toxicity included using only 3 beams (p = 0.0007), distance from the tumor to the posterior chest wall skin of less than 5 cm (p = 0.006), and a maximum skin dose of 50% or higher of the prescribed dose (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: SBRT can be associated with significant skin toxicity. One must consider the skin dose when evaluating the treatment plan and consider the bolus effect of immobilization devices.