Navigating the medical physics education and training landscape.

PURPOSE: The education and training landscape has been profoundly reshaped by the ABR 2012/2014 initiative and the MedPhys Match. This work quantifies these changes and summarizes available reports, surveys, and statistics on education and training. METHODS: We evaluate data from CAMPEP-accredited program websites, annual CAMPEP graduate and residency program reports, and surveys on the MedPhys Match and Professional Doctorate degree (DMP). RESULTS: From 2009-2015, the number of graduates from CAMPEP-accredited graduate programs rose from 210 to 332, while CAMPEP-accredited residency positions rose from 60 to 134. We estimate that approximately 60% of graduates of CAMPEP-accredited graduate programs intend to enter clinical practice, however, only 36% of graduates were successful in acquiring a residency position in 2015. The maximum residency placement percentage for a graduate program is 70%, while the median for all programs is only 22%. Overall residency placement percentage for CAMPEP-accredited program graduates from 2011-2015 was approximately 38% and 25% for those with a PhD and MS, respectively. The disparity between the number of clinically oriented graduates and available residency positions is perceived as a significant problem by over 70% of MedPhys Match participants responding to a post-match survey. Approximately 32% of these respondents indicated that prior knowledge of this situation would have changed their decision to pursue graduate education in medical physics. CONCLUSION: These data reveal a substantial disparity between the number of residency training positions and graduate students interested in these positions, and a substantial variability in residency placement percentage across graduate programs. Comprehensive data regarding current and projected supply and demand within the medical physics workforce are needed for perspective on these numbers. While the long-term effects of changes in the education and training infrastructure are still unclear, available survey data suggest that these changes could negatively affect potential entrants to the profession.

A serial 4DCT study to quantify range variations in charged particle radiotherapy of thoracic cancers.

Weekly serial 4DCT scans were acquired under free breathing conditions to assess water-equivalent path length (WEL) variations due to both intrafractional and interfractional changes in tissue thickness and density and to calculate proton dose distributions resulting from anatomical variations observed in serial 4DCT. A template of region of interests (ROIs) was defined on the anterior-posterior (AP) beam's eye view, and WEL measurements were made over these ROIs to quantify chest wall thickness variations. Interfractional proton dose distributions were calculated to assess changes in the expected dose distributions caused by range variations. Mean intrafractional chest wall WEL changes during respiration varied by: -4.1 mm (<-10.2 mm), -3.6 mm (<-7.1 mm), -3.2 mm (<-5.6 mm) and -2.5 mm (<-5.1 mm) during respiration in the ITV, upper, middle and lower lung regions, respectively. The mean interfractional chest wall WEL variation at Week 6 decreased by -4.0 mm (<-8.6 mm), -9.1 mm (<-17.9 mm), -9.4 mm (<-25.3 mm) and -4.5 mm (<-15.6 mm) in the ITV, upper, middle and lower lung regions, respectively. The variations were decomposed into anterior and posterior chest wall thickness changes. Dose overshoot beyond the target was observed when the initial boli was applied throughout the treatment course. This overshoot is due to chest wall thickness variations and target positional variations. The radiological path length can vary significantly during respiration as well as over the course of several weeks of charged particle therapy. Intrafractional/interfractional chest wall thickness changes can be a significant source of range variation in treatment of lung tumors with charged particle beams, resulting in dose distribution perturbations from the initial plan. Consideration of these range variations should be made in choosing the therapeutic charged particle beam range.

Quantifying the interfractional displacement of the gastroesophageal junction during radiation therapy for esophageal cancer.

PURPOSE: Accounting for interfractional changes in tumor location improves the accuracy of radiation treatment delivery. The purpose of this study was to quantify the interfractional displacement of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) based on standard treatment setup in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Free-breathing four-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) datasets were acquired weekly from 22 patients during treatment for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Scans were registered to baseline (simulation) 4D-CT scans by using bony landmarks. The distance between the center of the GEJ contour on the simulation scan and the mean location of GEJ centers on subsequent scans was used to assess changes in GEJ location between fractions; displacement was also correlated with clinical and respiratory variables. RESULTS: The mean absolute random error was 1.69 mm (range, 0.11-4.11 mm) in the lateral direction, 1.87 mm (range, 0.51-4.09 mm) in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction, and 3.09 mm (range, 0.99-6.16 mm) in the superior-inferior (SI) direction. The mean absolute systemic GEJ displacement between fractions was 2.88 mm lateral (≥ 5 mm in 14%), mostly leftward; 2.90 mm (≥ 5 mm in 14%) AP, mostly anterior; and 6.77 mm (≥ 1 cm in 18%) SI, mostly inferior. Variations in tidal volume and diaphragmatic excursion during treatment correlated strongly with systematic SI GEJ displacement (r = 0.964, p < 0.0001; and r = 0.944, p < 0.0001, respectively) and moderately with systematic AP GEJ displacement (r = 0.678, p = 0.0005; r = 0.758, p < 0.0001, respectively). Systematic displacement in the inferior direction resulted in higher-than-intended doses (≥ 60 Gy) to the GEJ, with increased hot-spot to the adjacent stomach and lung base. CONCLUSION: We found large (>1-cm) interfractional displacements in the GEJ in the SI (especially inferior) direction that was not accounted for when skeletal alignment alone was used for patient positioning. Because systematic displacement in the SI direction had dosimetric impact and correlated with tidal volume, better accounting for depth of breathing is needed to reduce interfractional variability.

Dosimetric effects of jaw tracking in step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

The purpose of this work was to determine the dosimetric benefit to normal tissues by tracking the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) apertures with the photon jaws in step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) on the Varian 2100 platform. Radiation treatment plans for ten thoracic, three pediatric, and three head and neck cancer patients were converted to plans with the jaws tracking each segment's MLC apertures, and compared to the original plans in a commercial radiation treatment planning system (TPS). The change in normal tissue dose was evaluated in the new plan by using the parameters V5, V10, and V20 (volumes receiving 5, 10 and 20 Gy, respectively) in the cumulative dose-volume histogram for the following structures: total lung minus gross target volume, heart, esophagus, spinal cord, liver, parotids, and brainstem. To validate the accuracy of our beam model, MLC transmission was measured and compared to that predicted by the TPS. The greatest changes between the original and new plans occurred at lower dose levels. In all patients, the reduction in V20 was never more than 6.3% and was typically less than 1%; the maximum reduction in V5 was 16.7% and was typically less than 3%. The variation in normal tissue dose reduction was not predictable, and we found no clear parameters that indicated which patients would benefit most from jaw tracking. Our TPS model of MLC transmission agreed with measurements with absolute transmission differences of less than 0.1% and, thus, uncertainties in the model did not contribute significantly to the uncertainty in the dose determination. We conclude that the amount of dose reduction achieved by collimating the jaws around each MLC aperture in step-and-shoot IMRT is probably not clinically significant.

Interfractional reproducibility of lung tumor location using various methods of respiratory motion mitigation.

PURPOSE: To determine interfractional reproducibility of the location of lung tumors using respiratory motion mitigation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Free-breathing four-dimensional computed tomography (CT) data sets and CT data sets during breath hold were acquired weekly for 17 patients undergoing treatment for non-small-cell lung cancer. Distances between the center of the gross tumor volume (GTV) and a reproducible bony reference point under conditions of breath hold on end inspiration (EI) and end expiration (EE) and during free breathing on the 0% phase (corresponding to EI) and 50% phase (corresponding to EE) were analyzed for interfractional reproducibility. Systematic uncertainties in tumor location were determined as the difference in distance between the GTV center on the first CT data set and the mean location of GTV centers on the subsequent data sets. Random uncertainties in tumor location were determined as the standard deviation of the distances between the GTV centers and the bony reference points. Margins to account for systematic and random interfractional variations were estimated based on these uncertainties. RESULTS: Mean values of interfractional setup uncertainties were as follows: systematic uncertainties--EI, 0.3 cm; EE, 0.2 cm; 0% phase, 0.3 cm; and 50% phase, 0.3 cm; and random uncertainties--EI, 0.3 cm; EE, 0.3 cm; 0% phase, 0.3 cm; and 50% phase, 0.3 cm. There does not appear to be any correlation between uncertainties and GTV size, but there appears to be a weak positive correlation between uncertainties and the magnitude of GTV excursion. CONCLUSIONS: Voluntary breath hold and gating on either EI or EE appear to be equally reliable methods of ensuring the reproducibility of lung tumor position. We recommend setup margins of 0.3 cm if using cone-beam CT or kilovoltage X-ray with fiducials and aligning directly to the tumor and 0.8 cm when aligning to a nearby bony surrogate using cone-beam CT or kilovoltage X-ray.

Thoracic target volume delineation using various maximum-intensity projection computed tomography image sets for radiotherapy treatment planning.

PURPOSE: Four-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) is commonly used to account for respiratory motion of target volumes in radiotherapy to the thorax. From the 4D-CT acquisition, a maximum-intensity projection (MIP) image set can be created and used to help define the tumor motion envelope or the internal gross tumor volume (iGTV). The purpose of this study was to quantify the differences in automatically contoured target volumes for usage in the delivery of stereotactic body radiation therapy using MIP data sets generated from one of the four methods: (1) 4D-CT phase-binned (PB) based on retrospective phase calculations, (2) 4D-CT phase-corrected phase-binned (PC-PB) based on motion extrema, (3) 4D-CT amplitude-binned (AB), and (4) cine CT built from all available images. METHODS: MIP image data sets using each of the four methods were generated for a cohort of 28 patients who had prior thoracic 4D-CT scans that exhibited lung tumor motion of at least 1 cm. Each MIP image set was automatically contoured on commercial radiation treatment planning system. Margins were added to the iGTV to observe differences in the final simulated planning target volumes (PTVs). RESULTS: For all patients, the iGTV measured on the MIP generated from the entire cine CT data set (iGTVcine) was the largest. Expressed as a percentage of iGTVcine, 4D-CT iGTV (all sorting methods) ranged from 83.8% to 99.1%, representing differences in the absolute volume ranging from 0.02 to 4.20 cm3; the largest average and range of 4D-CT iGTV measurements was from the PC-PB data set. Expressed as a percentage of PTVcine (expansions applied to iGTVeine), the 4D-CT PTV ranged from 87.6% to 99.6%, representing differences in the absolute volume ranging from 0.08 to 7.42 cm3. Regions of the measured respiratory waveform corresponding to a rapid change of phase or amplitude showed an increased susceptibility to the selection of identical images for adjacent bins. Duplicate image selection was most common in the AB implementation, followed by the PC-PB method. The authors also found that the image associated with the minimum amplitude measurement did not always correlate with the image that showed maximum tumor motion extent. CONCLUSIONS: The authors identified cases in which the MIP generated from a 4D-CT sorting process under-represented the iGTV by more than 10% or up to 4.2 cm3 when compared to the iGTVcine. They suggest utilization of a MIP generated from the full cine CT data set to ensure maximum inclusive tumor extent.

Evaluation of tumor position and PTV margins using image guidance and respiratory gating.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the margins currently used to generate the planning target volume for lung tumors and to determine whether image-guided patient setup or respiratory gating is more effective in reducing uncertainties in tumor position. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Lung tumors in 7 patients were contoured on serial four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) data sets (4-8 4DCTs/patient; 50 total) obtained throughout the course of treatment. Simulations were performed to determine the tumor position when the patient was aligned using skin marks, image-guided setup based on vertebral bodies, fiducials implanted near the tumor, and the actual tumor volume under various scenarios of respiratory gating. RESULTS: Because of the presence of setup uncertainties, the reduction in overall margin needed to completely encompass the tumor was observed to be larger for imaged-guided patient setup than for a simple respiratory-gated treatment. Without respiratory gating and image-guided patient setup, margins ranged from 0.9 cm to 3.1 cm to completely encompass the tumor. These were reduced to 0.7-1.7 cm when image-guided patient setup was simulated and further reduced with respiratory gating. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that if respiratory motion management is used, it should be used in conjunction with image-guided patient setup in order to reduce the overall treatment margin effectively.

Lack of correlation between external fiducial positions and internal tumor positions during breath-hold CT.

PURPOSE: For thoracic tumors, if four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) is unavailable, the internal margin can be estimated by use of breath-hold (BH) CT scans acquired at end inspiration (EI) and end expiration (EE). By use of external surrogates for tumor position, BH accuracy is estimated by minimizing the difference between respiratory extrema BH and mean equivalent-phase free breathing (FB) positions. We tested the assumption that an external surrogate for BH accuracy correlates with internal tumor positional accuracy during BH CT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 16 lung cancer patients, 4DCT images, as well as BH CT images at EI and EE, were acquired. Absolute differences between BH and mean equivalent-phase (FB) positions were calculated for both external fiducials and gross tumor volume (GTV) centroids as metrics of external and internal BH accuracy, respectively, and the results were correlated. RESULTS: At EI, the absolute difference between mean FB and BH fiducial displacement correlated poorly with the absolute difference between FB and BH GTV centroid positions on CT images (R(2) = 0.11). Similarly, at EE, the absolute difference between mean FB and BH fiducial displacements correlated poorly with the absolute difference between FB and BH GTV centroid positions on CT images (R(2) = 0.18). CONCLUSIONS: External surrogates for tumor position are not an accurate metric of BH accuracy for lung cancer patients. This implies that care should be taken when using such an approach because an incorrect internal margin could be generated.

Impact of gastric filling on radiation dose delivered to gastroesophageal junction tumors.

PURPOSE: This study examined the impact of gastric filling variation on target coverage of gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) tumors in three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), or IMRT with simultaneous integrated boost (IMRT-SIB) plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight patients previously receiving radiation therapy for esophageal cancer had computed tomography (CT) datasets acquired with full stomach (FS) and empty stomach (ES). We generated treatment plans for 3DCRT, IMRT, or IMRT-SIB for each patient on the ES-CT and on the FS-CT datasets. The 3DCRT and IMRT plans were planned to 50.4 Gy to the clinical target volume (CTV), and the same for IMRT-SIB plus 63.0 Gy to the gross tumor volume (GTV). Target coverage was evaluated using dose-volume histogram data for patient treatments simulated with ES-CT sets, assuming treatment on an FS for the entire course, and vice versa. RESULTS: FS volumes were a mean of 3.3 (range, 1.7-7.5) times greater than ES volumes. The volume of the GTV receiving >or=50.4 Gy (V(50.4Gy)) was 100% in all situations. The planning GTV V(63Gy) became suboptimal when gastric filling varied, regardless of whether simulation was done on the ES-CT or the FS-CT set. CONCLUSIONS: Stomach filling has a negligible impact on prescribed dose delivered to the GEJ GTV, using either 3DCRT or IMRT planning. Thus, local relapses are not likely to be related to variations in gastric filling. Dose escalation for GEJ tumors with IMRT-SIB may require gastric filling monitoring.

Comparing the accuracy of four-dimensional photon dose calculations with three-dimensional calculations using moving and deforming phantoms.

PURPOSE: Four-dimensional (4D) dose calculation algorithms, which explicitly incorporate respiratory motion in the calculation of doses, have the potential to improve the accuracy of dose calculations in thoracic treatment planning; however, they generally require greater computing power and resources than currently used for three-dimensional (3D) dose calculations. The purpose of this work was to quantify the increase in accuracy of 4D dose calculations versus 3D dose calculations. METHODS: The accuracy of each dose calculation algorithm was assessed using measurements made with two phantoms. Specifically, the authors used a rigid moving anthropomorphic thoracic phantom and an anthropomorphic thoracic phantom with a deformable lung insert. To incorporate a clinically relevant range of scenarios, they programed the phantoms to move and deform with two motion patterns: A sinusoidal motion pattern and an irregular motion pattern that was extracted from an actual patient's breathing profile. For each combination of phantom and motion pattern, three plans were created: A single-beam plan, a multiple-beam plan, and an intensity-modulated radiation therapy plan. Doses were calculated using 4D dose calculation methods as well as conventional 3D dose calculation methods. The rigid moving and deforming phantoms were irradiated according to the three treatment plans and doses were measured using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and radiochromic film. The accuracy of each dose calculation algorithm was assessed using measured-to-calculated TLD doses and a gamma analysis. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between the measured-to-calculated TLD ratios among 4D and 3D dose calculations. The gamma results revealed that 4D dose calculations had significantly greater percentage of pixels passing the 5%/3 mm criteria than 3D dose calculations. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate no significant differences in the accuracy between the 4D and the 3D dose calculation methods inside the gross tumor volume. On the other hand, the film results demonstrated that the 4D dose calculations provided greater accuracy than 3D dose calculations in heterogeneous dose regions. The increase in accuracy of the 4D dose calculations was evident throughout the planning target volume.

Verification of four-dimensional photon dose calculations.

Recent work in the area of thoracic treatment planning has been focused on trying to explicitly incorporate patient-specific organ motion in the calculation of dose. Four-dimensional (4D) dose calculation algorithms have been developed and incorporated in a research version of a commercial treatment planning system (Pinnacle3, Philips Medical Systems, Milpitas, CA). Before these 4D dose calculations can be used clinically, it is necessary to verify their accuracy with measurements. The primary purpose of this study therefore was to evaluate and validate the accuracy of a 4D dose calculation algorithm with phantom measurements. A secondary objective was to determine whether the performance of the 4D dose calculation algorithm varied between different motion patterns and treatment plans. Measurements were made using two phantoms: A rigid moving phantom and a deformable phantom. The rigid moving phantom consisted of an anthropomorphic thoracic phantom that rested on a programmable motion platform. The deformable phantom used the same anthropomorphic thoracic phantom with a deformable insert for one of the lungs. Two motion patterns were investigated for each phantom: A sinusoidal motion pattern and an irregular motion pattern extracted from a patient breathing profile. A single-beam plan, a multiple-beam plan, and an intensity-modulated radiation therapy plan were created. Doses were calculated in the treatment planning system using the 4D dose calculation algorithm. Then each plan was delivered to the phantoms and delivered doses were measured using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and film. The measured doses were compared to the 4D-calculated doses using a measured-to-calculated TLD ratio and a gamma analysis. A relevant passing criteria (3% for the TLD and 5% /3 mm for the gamma metric) was applied to determine if the 4D dose calculations were accurate to within clinical standards. All the TLD measurements in both phantoms satisfied the passing criteria. Furthermore, 42 of the 48 evaluated films fulfilled the passing criteria. All films that did not pass the criteria were from the rigid phantom moving with irregular motion. The author concluded that if patient breathing is reproducible, the 4D dose calculations are accurate to within clinically acceptable standards. Furthermore, they found no statistically significant differences in the performance of the 4D dose calculation algorithm between treatment plans.

Respiratory gating with EPID-based verification: the MDACC experience.

We have investigated the feasibility and accuracy of using a combination of internal and external fiducials for respiratory-gated image-guided radiotherapy of liver tumors after screening for suitable patients using a mock treatment. Five patients were enrolled in the study. Radio-opaque fiducials implanted adjacent to the liver tumor were used for daily online positioning using either electronic portal or kV images. Patient eligibility was assessed by determining the degree of correlation between the external and internal fiducials as analyzed during a mock treatment. Treatment delivery was based on the modification of conventional amplitude-based gating. Finally, the accuracy of respiratory-gated treatment using an external fiducial was verified offline using the cine mode of an electronic portal imaging device. For all patients, interfractional contribution to the random error was 2.0 mm in the supero-inferior direction, which is the dominant direction of motion due to respiration, while the interfractional contribution to the systematic error was 0.9 mm. The intrafractional contribution to the random error was 1.0 mm. One of the significant advantages to this technique is improved patient set-up using implanted fiducials and gated imaging. Daily assessment of images acquired during treatment verifies the accuracy of the delivered treatment and uncovers problems in patient set-up.

Potential dosimetric benefits of four-dimensional radiation treatment planning.

PURPOSE: To determine the extent of dosimetric differences between conventional three-dimensional (3D) dose calculations and four-dimensional (4D) dose calculations based on deformation of organ models. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Four-dimensional dose calculations were retrospectively performed on computed tomography data sets for 15 patients with Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, using a model-based deformable registration algorithm on a research version of a commercial radiation treatment planning system. Target volume coverage and doses to critical structures calculated using the 4D methodology were compared with those calculated using conventional 3D methodology. RESULTS: For 11 of 15 patients, clinical target volume coverage was comparable in the 3D and 4D calculations, whereas for 7 of 15 patients, planning target volume coverage was comparable. For the other patients, the 4D calculation indicated a difference in target volume dose sufficiently great to warrant replanning. No correlations could be established between differences in 3D and 4D calculations and gross tumor volume size or extent of motion. Negligible differences were observed between 3D and 4D dose-volume relationships for normal anatomic structures. CONCLUSIONS: Use of 4D dose calculations, when possible, helps ensure that target volumes will not be underirradiated when respiratory motion may affect the dose distribution.