Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Patients with Brain Metastases from Hepatopancreaticobiliary Cancers.

BACKGROUND: The role of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for patients with brain metastases from hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) cancers has yet to be established. The authors present a single-institution experience of patients with HPB cancers who underwent SRS when their cancer spread to the brain. METHODS: We surveyed our Gamma Knife SRS data base of 18,000 patients for the years 1987-2022. In total, 19 metastatic HPB cancer patients (13 male) with 76 brain metastases were identified. The median age at SRS was 61 years (range: 48-83). The primary cancer sites were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, 11 patients), cholangiocarcinoma (CCC, 2 patients), and pancreatic carcinoma (PCC, 6 patients). The median Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) was 80 (range: 50-90). Two patients underwent pre-SRS whole-brain fractionated radiation therapy (WBRT) and eight patients underwent pre-SRS surgical resection. All SRS was delivered in single session. The median margin dose was 18 Gy (range: 15-20). The median cumulative tumor volume was 8.1 cc (range: 1.0-44.2). RESULTS: The median patient overall survival (OS) after SRS was 7 months (range 1-79 months). Four patients had documented local tumor progression after SRS at a median time of 8.5 months (range: 2-15) between SRS and progression. Out of 76 treated tumors, 72 tumors exhibited local control. The local tumor control rate per patient was 78.9%. The local tumor control per tumor was 94.7%. Four patients developed new brain metastases at a median of 6.5 months (range: 2-17) after SRS. No patient experienced adverse radiation effects (AREs). At the last follow-up, 18 patients had died, all from systemic disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: Metastatic spread to the brain from HPB cancers occurs late in the course of the primary disease. In this study, all deceased patients ultimately died from primary disease progression. SRS is a non-invasive strategy that maximally preserves quality of life, and our results reported favorable outcomes compared to the existing literature. SRS should be considered as one of the primary management strategies for patients with brain metastatic spread from HPB cancer.

Recommendations on the practice of calibration, dosimetry, and quality assurance for gamma stereotactic radiosurgery: Report of AAPM Task Group 178.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) formed Task Group 178 (TG-178) to perform the following tasks: review in-phantom and in-air calibration protocols for gamma stereotactic radiosurgery (GSR), suggest a dose rate calibration protocol that can be successfully utilized with all gamma stereotactic radiosurgery (GSR) devices, and update quality assurance (QA) protocols in TG-42 (AAPM Report 54, 1995) for static GSR devices. The TG-178 report recommends a GSR dose rate calibration formalism and provides tabulated data to implement it for ionization chambers commonly used in GSR dosimetry. The report also describes routine mechanical, dosimetric, and safety checks for GSR devices, and provides treatment process quality assurance recommendations. Sample worksheets, checklists, and practical suggestions regarding some QA procedures are given in appendices. The overall goal of the report is to make recommendations that help standardize GSR physics practices and promote the safe implementation of GSR technologies.

Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) for Gamma Knife radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: Gamma Knife radiosurgery is a highly precise and accurate treatment technique for treating brain diseases with low risk of serious error that nevertheless could potentially be reduced. We applied the AAPM Task Group 100 recommended failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) tool to develop a risk-based quality management program for Gamma Knife radiosurgery. METHODS: A team consisting of medical physicists, radiation oncologists, neurosurgeons, radiation safety officers, nurses, operating room technologists, and schedulers at our institution and an external physicist expert on Gamma Knife was formed for the FMEA study. A process tree and a failure mode table were created for the Gamma Knife radiosurgery procedures using the Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion and 4C units. Three scores for the probability of occurrence (O), the severity (S), and the probability of no detection for failure mode (D) were assigned to each failure mode by 8 professionals on a scale from 1 to 10. An overall risk priority number (RPN) for each failure mode was then calculated from the averaged O, S, and D scores. The coefficient of variation for each O, S, or D score was also calculated. The failure modes identified were prioritized in terms of both the RPN scores and the severity scores. RESULTS: The established process tree for Gamma Knife radiosurgery consists of 10 subprocesses and 53 steps, including a subprocess for frame placement and 11 steps that are directly related to the frame-based nature of the Gamma Knife radiosurgery. Out of the 86 failure modes identified, 40 Gamma Knife specific failure modes were caused by the potential for inappropriate use of the radiosurgery head frame, the imaging fiducial boxes, the Gamma Knife helmets and plugs, the skull definition tools as well as other features of the GammaPlan treatment planning system. The other 46 failure modes are associated with the registration, imaging, image transfer, contouring processes that are common for all external beam radiation therapy techniques. The failure modes with the highest hazard scores are related to imperfect frame adaptor attachment, bad fiducial box assembly, unsecured plugs/inserts, overlooked target areas, and undetected machine mechanical failure during the morning QA process. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the FMEA approach for Gamma Knife radiosurgery enabled deeper understanding of the overall process among all professionals involved in the care of the patient and helped identify potential weaknesses in the overall process. The results of the present study give us a basis for the development of a risk based quality management program for Gamma Knife radiosurgery.

Clinical implementation and evaluation of the Acuros dose calculation algorithm.

PURPOSE: The main aim of this study is to validate the Acuros XB dose calculation algorithm for a Varian Clinac iX linac in our clinics, and subsequently compare it with the wildely used AAA algorithm. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The source models for both Acuros XB and AAA were configured by importing the same measured beam data into Eclipse treatment planning system. Both algorithms were validated by comparing calculated dose with measured dose on a homogeneous water phantom for field sizes ranging from 6 cm × 6 cm to 40 cm × 40 cm. Central axis and off-axis points with different depths were chosen for the comparison. In addition, the accuracy of Acuros was evaluated for wedge fields with wedge angles from 15 to 60°. Similarly, variable field sizes for an inhomogeneous phantom were chosen to validate the Acuros algorithm. In addition, doses calculated by Acuros and AAA at the center of lung equivalent tissue from three different VMAT plans were compared to the ion chamber measured doses in QUASAR phantom, and the calculated dose distributions by the two algorithms and their differences on patients were compared. Computation time on VMAT plans was also evaluated for Acuros and AAA. Differences between dose-to-water (calculated by AAA and Acuros XB) and dose-to-medium (calculated by Acuros XB) on patient plans were compared and evaluated. RESULTS: For open 6 MV photon beams on the homogeneous water phantom, both Acuros XB and AAA calculations were within 1% of measurements. For 23 MV photon beams, the calculated doses were within 1.5% of measured doses for Acuros XB and 2% for AAA. Testing on the inhomogeneous phantom demonstrated that AAA overestimated doses by up to 8.96% at a point close to lung/solid water interface, while Acuros XB reduced that to 1.64%. The test on QUASAR phantom showed that Acuros achieved better agreement in lung equivalent tissue while AAA underestimated dose for all VMAT plans by up to 2.7%. Acuros XB computation time was about three times faster than AAA for VMAT plans, and computation time for other plans will be discussed at the end. Maximum difference between dose calculated by AAA and dose-to-medium by Acuros XB (Acuros_Dm,m ) was 4.3% on patient plans at the isocenter, and maximum difference between D100 calculated by AAA and by Acuros_Dm,m was 11.3%. When calculating the maximum dose to spinal cord on patient plans, differences between dose calculated by AAA and Acuros_Dm,m were more than 3%. CONCLUSION: Compared with AAA, Acuros XB improves accuracy in the presence of inhomogeneity, and also significantly reduces computation time for VMAT plans. Dose differences between AAA and Acuros_Dw,m were generally less than the dose differences between AAA and Acuros_Dm,m . Clinical practitioners should consider making Acuros XB available in clinics, however, further investigation and clarification is needed about which dose reporting mode (dose-to-water or dose-to-medium) should be used in clinics.

Two-year experience with the commercial Gamma Knife Check software.

The Gamma Knife Check software is an FDA approved second check system for dose calculations in Gamma Knife radiosurgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and the stability of the commercial software package as a tool for independent dose verification. The Gamma Knife Check software version 8.4 was commissioned for a Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion and a 4C unit at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center in May 2012. Independent dose verifications were performed using this software for 319 radiosurgery cases on the Perfexion and 283 radiosurgery cases on the 4C units. The cases on each machine were divided into groups according to their diagnoses, and an averaged absolute percent dose difference for each group was calculated. The percentage dose difference for each treatment target was obtained as the relative difference between the Gamma Knife Check dose and the dose from the tissue maximum ratio algorithm (TMR 10) from the GammaPlan software version 10 at the reference point. For treatment plans with imaging skull definition, results obtained from the Gamma Knife Check software using the measurement-based skull definition method are used for comparison. The collected dose difference data were also analyzed in terms of the distance from the treatment target to the skull, the number of treatment shots used for the target, and the gamma angles of the treatment shots. The averaged percent dose differences between the Gamma Knife Check software and the GammaPlan treatment planning system are 0.3%, 0.89%, 1.24%, 1.09%, 0.83%, 0.55%, 0.33%, and 1.49% for the trigeminal neuralgia, acoustic neuroma, arteriovenous malformation (AVM), meningioma, pituitary adenoma, glioma, functional disorders, and metastasis cases on the Perfexion unit. The corresponding averaged percent dose differences for the 4C unit are 0.33%, 1.2%, 2.78% 1.99%, 1.4%, 1.92%, 0.62%, and 1.51%, respectively. The dose difference is, in general, larger for treatment targets in the peripheral regions of the skull owing to the difference in the numerical methods used for skull shape simulation in the GammaPlan and the Gamma Knife Check software. Larger than 5% dose differences were observed on both machines for certain targets close to patient skull surface and for certain targets in the lower half of the brain on the Perfexion, especially when shots with 70 and/or 110 gamma angles are used. Out of the 1065 treatment targets studied, a 5% cutoff criterion cannot always be met for the dose differences between the studied versions of the Gamma Knife Check software and the planning system for 40 treatment targets.

Gamma Knife radiosurgery with CT image-based dose calculation.

The Leksell GammaPlan software version 10 introduces a CT image-based segmentation tool for automatic skull definition and a convolution dose calculation algorithm for tissue inhomogeneity correction. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the impact of these new approaches on routine clinical Gamma Knife treatment planning. Sixty-five patients who underwent CT image-guided Gamma Knife radiosurgeries at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center in recent years were retrospectively investigated. The diagnoses for these cases include trigeminal neuralgia, meningioma, acoustic neuroma, AVM, glioma, and benign and metastatic brain tumors. Dose calculations were performed for each patient with the same dose prescriptions and the same shot arrangements using three different approaches: 1) TMR 10 dose calculation with imaging skull definition; 2) convolution dose calculation with imaging skull definition; 3) TMR 10 dose calculation with conventional measurement-based skull definition. For each treatment matrix, the total treatment time, the target coverage index, the selectivity index, the gradient index, and a set of dose statistics parameters were compared between the three calculations. The dose statistics parameters investigated include the prescription isodose volume, the 12 Gy isodose volume, the minimum, maximum and mean doses on the treatment targets, and the critical structures under consideration. The difference between the convolution and the TMR 10 dose calculations for the 104 treatment matrices were found to vary with the patient anatomy, location of the treatment shots, and the tissue inhomogeneities around the treatment target. An average difference of 8.4% was observed for the total treatment times between the convolution and the TMR algorithms. The maximum differences in the treatment times, the prescription isodose volumes, the 12 Gy isodose volumes, the target coverage indices, the selectivity indices, and the gradient indices from the convolution and the TMR 10 calculations are 14.9%, 16.4%, 11.1%, 16.8, 6.9%, and 11.4%, respectively. The maximum differences in the minimum and the mean target doses between the two calculation algorithms are 8.1% and 4.2% of the corresponding prescription doses. The maximum differences in the maximum and the mean doses for the critical structures between the two calculation algorithms are 1.3 Gy and 0.7 Gy. The results from the two skull definition methods with the TMR 10 algorithm agree either within ± 2.5% or 0.3 Gy for the dose values, except for a 4.9% difference in the treatment times for a lower cerebellar lesion. The imaging skull definition method does not affect Gamma Knife dose calculation considerably when compared to the conventional measurement-based skull definition method, except in some extreme cases. Large differences were observed between the TMR 10 and the convolution calculation method for the same dose prescription and the same shot arrangements, indicating that the implementation of the convolution algorithm in routine clinical use might be desirable for optimal dose calculation results.

A Mobile Alert System for Preparing the Delivery of Radiation Mitigators.

BACKGROUND/AIM: A mobile system allowing hospital medical personnel to prepare for the administration of radiation mitigators prior to receiving casualties is desirable. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated a portable spectroscopic personal radiation detector for use as an ambulance-based unit for early detection and identification of gamma radiation. We tested the sensitivity, time-to-identification, and radionuclide identification accuracy rates, change in detector response to vehicle operation, interference from cardiac equipment, and internal versus external radiation source location. RESULTS: We detected radiation sources in each of 119 trials using a humanoid phantom in a moving ambulance with a primary radionuclide identification accuracy of 96%. Typical identification time was around two minutes (149±95 s). CONCLUSION: Our observations suggest this mobile system is a potential pre-hospital arrival tool allowing for rapid preparation of radiation mitigators.

Dose differences between the three dose calculation algorithms in Leksell GammaPlan.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dose differences introduced by the TMR 10 and the convolution dose calculation algorithms in GammaPlan version 10, as compared to the TMR classic algorithm in the previous versions of GammaPlan. Computed axial tomographic images of a polystyrene phantom and a human head were acquired using a GE LightSpeed VCT scanner. A treatment target with a prescription dose of 20 Gy to 50% isodose line was defined in the phantom or the head CT set. The treatment times for single collimator, single shot placements were calculated using the three dose calculation algorithms in GammaPlan version 10. Four comparative studies were conducted: i) the dose matrix position was varied every 10 mm along the x-, y-, z-axes of the stereotactic coordinate system inside the phantom and the treatment times were compared on each matrix for the three collimators of the Gamma Knife Perfexion and the four collimators of the 4C;ii) the study was repeated for the human head CT dataset; iii) the matrix position was varied every 20 mm in the X and the Y directions on the central slice (Z = 100mm) of the head CT and the shot times were compared on each matrix for the 8 mm collimator of both units; a total of 51 matrix positions were identified for each unit; iv) the above comparison was repeated for the head CT transverse slices with Z = 20, 40, 60, 80, 120, 140, and 160 mm. A total of 271 matrix positions were studied. Based on the comparison of the treatment times needed to deliver 20 Gy at 50% isodose line, the equivalent TMR classic dose of the TMR 10 algorithm is roughly a constant for each collimator of the 4C unit and is 97.5%, 98.5%, 98%, and 100% of the TMR 10 dose for the 18 mm, 14 mm, 8 mm, and the 4 mm collimators, respectively. The numbers for the three collimators of the Perfexion change with the shot positions in the range from 99% to 102% for both the phantom and the head CT. The minimum, maximum, and the mean values of the equivalent TMR classic doses of the convolution algorithm on the 271 voxels of the head CT are 99.5%, 111.5%, 106.5% of the convolution dose for the Perfexion, and 99%, 109%, 104.5% for the 4C unit. We identified a maximum decrease in delivered dose of 11.5% for treatment in the superior frontal/parietal vertex region of the head CT for older calculations lacking inhomogeneity correction to account for the greater percentage of the average beam path occupied by bone. The differences in the inferior temporal lobe and the cerebellum/neck regions are significantly less, owing to the counter-balancing effects of both bone and the air cavity inhomogeneities. The dose differences between the TMR 10 and the TMR classic are within ± 2.5% for a single shot placement on both Perfexion and 4C. Dose prescriptions based on the experiences with the TMR classic may need to be adjusted to accommodate the up to 11.5% difference between the convolution and the TMR classic.

The use of strain tensor to estimate thoracic tumors deformation.

PURPOSE: Respiration-induced kinematics of thoracic tumors suggests a simple analogy with elasticity, where a strain tensor is used to characterize the volume of interests. The application of the biomechanical framework allows for the objective determination of tumor characteristics. METHODS: Four-dimensional computed tomography provides the snapshots of the patient's anatomy at the end of inspiration and expiration. Image registration was used to obtain the displacement vector fields and deformation fields, which allows one for the determination of the strain tensor. Its departure from the identity matrix gauges the departure of the medium from rigidity. The tensorial characteristic of each GTV voxel was determined and averaged. To this end, the standard Euclidean matrix norm as well as the Log-Euclidean norm were employed. Tensorial anisotropy was gauged with the fractional anisotropy measure which is based on the normalized variance of the tensors eigenvalues. Anisotropy was also evaluated with the geodesic distance in the Log-Euclidean framework of a given strain tensor to its closest isotropic counterpart. RESULTS: The averaged strain tensor was determined for each of the 15 retrospectively analyzed thoracic GTVs. The amplitude of GTV motion varied from 0.64 to 4.21 with the average of 1.20 cm. The GTV size ranged from 5.16 to 149.99 cc with the average of 43.19 cc. The tensorial analysis shows that deformation is inconsiderable and that the tensorial anisotropy is small. The Log-Euclidean distance of averaged strain tensors from the identity matrix ranged from 0.06 to 0.31 with the average of 0.19. The Frobenius distance from the identity matrix is similar and ranged from 0.06 to 0.35 with the average of 0.21. Their fractional anisotropy ranged from 0.02 to 0.12 with the average of 0.07. Their geodesic anisotropy ranged from 0.03 to 0.16 with the average of 0.09. These values also indicate insignificant deformation. CONCLUSIONS: The tensorial framework allows for direct measurements of tissue deformation. It goes beyond the evaluation of deformation via comparison of shapes. It is an independent and objective determination of tissue properties. This methodology can be used to determine possible changes in lung properties due to radiation therapy and possible toxicities.

Interceptor and Phantom Trials of EDNS at UPMC.

University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) installed an Emergency Department Notification System (EDNS) in one of its hospitals. The system, manufactured by Thermo Fisher Scientific (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., 81 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02454), consists of four NaI(Tl) scintillation detectors, a 2.5 L PVT gamma counter, a 512 channels multi-channel analyzer, a system controller, and a database-monitoring server. We evaluated a portable Interceptor Interceptor™ hand-held detector (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., 81 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02454) as part of the system for potential ambulancebased early detection and warning unit. We present the minimum detectable activity, distance, and isotope identification success rates along with the change in detector response to various radioisotope sources placed in a Rando® humanoid phantom. (The Phantom Laboratory. P.O. Box 511, Salem, NY 12865-0511 USA). The present paper reports these results.

Implementation of remote 3-dimensional image guided radiation therapy quality assurance for radiation therapy oncology group clinical trials.

PURPOSE: To report the process and initial experience of remote credentialing of three-dimensional (3D) image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) as part of the quality assurance (QA) of submitted data for Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) clinical trials; and to identify major issues resulting from this process and analyze the review results on patient positioning shifts. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Image guided radiation therapy datasets including in-room positioning CT scans and daily shifts applied were submitted through the Image Guided Therapy QA Center from institutions for the IGRT credentialing process, as required by various RTOG trials. A centralized virtual environment is established at the RTOG Core Laboratory, containing analysis tools and database infrastructure for remote review by the Physics Principal Investigators of each protocol. The appropriateness of IGRT technique and volumetric image registration accuracy were evaluated. Registration accuracy was verified by repeat registration with a third-party registration software system. With the accumulated review results, registration differences between those obtained by the Physics Principal Investigators and from the institutions were analyzed for different imaging sites, shift directions, and imaging modalities. RESULTS: The remote review process was successfully carried out for 87 3D cases (out of 137 total cases, including 2-dimensional and 3D) during 2010. Frequent errors in submitted IGRT data and challenges in the review of image registration for some special cases were identified. Workarounds for these issues were developed. The average differences of registration results between reviewers and institutions ranged between 2 mm and 3 mm. Large discrepancies in the superior-inferior direction were found for megavoltage CT cases, owing to low spatial resolution in this direction for most megavoltage CT cases. CONCLUSION: This first experience indicated that remote review for 3D IGRT as part of QA for RTOG clinical trials is feasible and effective. The magnitude of registration discrepancy between institution and reviewer was presented, and the major issues were investigated to further improve this remote evaluation process.

Performance characteristics of a novel radioactive isotope detection and notification system designed for use in hospitals.

Recently, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) Cancer Centers has installed an Emergency Department Notification System (EDNS) in one of its hospitals. This system, manufactured by Thermo Fisher Scientific (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., 81 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02454), was designed to discriminate non-medical radioactive isotopes from medical radioactive isotopes routinely used in nuclear medicine and radiation treatments. It is modular in nature and consists of four NaI(Tl) scintillation detectors, a 512 channels multi-channel analyzer, a system controller, and a database-monitoring server. A series of tests were carried out to evaluate the performance characteristics of this system using a variety of radioactive sources of varying activities. These included measurements of minimum detectable activity, detector response distance to various source activities, detector response to different speeds of a moving radioisotope, and single and multiple radioisotope identification and classification. Measured results show that the system is capable of identifying radioactive sources of nominal activity 0.13 MBq (3.5 µCi) and higher in a relatively short period of time (<11.1 s). The database-monitoring server could send an alarm signal to appropriate personnel when the analysis of the results indicated the presence of a non-medical or threat radioisotope. The present paper reports these results.

Physical characterization and comparison of two commercially available micro-MLCs.

In this study, the physical characteristics (penumbra width variation with the source size and shape, interleaf leakage, transmission through the leaves, and the tongue-and-groove effect) of two linear accelerators (BrainLAB's Novalis and Elekta's Synergy-S Beam Modulator) have been investigated. For similar square fields (about 4.5 cm x 4.5 cm) with source-to-surface/skin-distance (SSD) ranging from 90 cm to 115 cm and measurements taken at the depth of D(max)=1.5 cm for 6 MV photon beam. The Novalis MLC has penumbra width of 2.4 ± 0.11 mm-2.8 ± 0.11 mm at the leaf-end and 2.2 ± 0.1 mm-2.7 ± 0.1 mm on the leaf-side; and those for the Synergy-S MLC are 4.4 ± 0.17 mm-5.2 ± 0.2 mm and 3.0 ± 0.12 mm-3.5 ± 0.12 mm. Upon rotating the Synergy-S collimator by 90 ° (i.e., shifting the leaf movement to the gun-target direction), significant reduction of the leaf-end penumbra width (17%) and increase of leaf-side penumbra width (28%) suggest an elliptical shape of the radiation source spot. Similar rotation of the collimator yielded reduction of the penumbras on both leaf-end (34%) and leaf-side (28%) for Novalis, indicating that the Novalis has a more symmetric source size. For all the field sizes and settings, BrainLAB's Novalis µMLC produce a smaller penumbra for simple square fields compared to the Elekta's Synergy-S. However, this difference became less pronounced for leaf-side penumbra and also for circular fields. The tongue-and-groove effect of the Novalis (23 ± 0.9%) is slightly smaller than that of the Synergy-S (25 ± 1%); while the interleaf leakage and leakage directly through leaves for Synergy-S (1.6 ± 0.07% & 0.9 ± 0.04%) are lower than that of Novalis (2 ± 0.08% & 1.3 ± 0.05%).

Assessment of variation in Elekta plastic spherical-calibration phantom and its impact on the Leksell Gamma Knife calibration.

PURPOSE: Traditionally, the dose-rate calibration (output) of the Leksell Gamma Knife (LGK) unit is performed using a 160 mm diameter plastic spherical phantom provided by the vendor of the LGK, Elekta Instrument AB. The purpose of this study was to evaluate variations in the Elekta spherical phantom and to assess its impact and use for the LGK calibration. METHODS: Altogether, 13 phantoms from six different centers were acquired, 10 of these phantoms were manufactured within the past 10 years and the last 3 approximately 15-20 years ago. To assess variation in phantoms, the diameter and mass densities were measured. To assess the impact on LGK calibration, the output of two models of LGK (LGK Perfexion and LGK 4C) were measured under identical irradiation conditions using all 13 phantoms for each LGK model. RESULTS: The mean measured deviation in diameter from expected nominal 160 mm for 13 phantoms was 0.51 mm (range of 0.09-1.51 mm). The mean measured phantom mass density for 13 phantoms was 1.066 +/- 0.019 g/cm3 (range of 1.046-1.102 g/cm3). The percentage deviation of output for individual phantom from mean of 13 phantom outputs ranged from -0.37% to 0.55% for LGK Perfexion. Similarly, the percentage deviation of output for individual phantom from mean of 13 phantom outputs ranged from -0.72% to 0.47% for LGK 4C. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that small variations in terms of phantom size and mass density of the phantom material do not have a significant impact on dose-rate measurements of the Leksell Gamma Knife. Also, date of manufacture of the phantom did not show up to be a significant factor in this study.

Daily image guidance with cone-beam computed tomography for head-and-neck cancer intensity-modulated radiotherapy: a prospective study.

PURPOSE: To report on a prospective clinical trial of the use of daily kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) to evaluate the interfraction and residual error motion of patients undergoing intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients were treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy with an Elekta linear accelerator using a mounted CBCT scanner. CBCT was performed before every treatment, and translational (but not rotational) corrections were performed. At least once per week, a CBCT scan was obtained after intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Variations were measured in the medial-lateral, superoinferior, and anteroposterior dimensions, as well as in the rotation around these axes. RESULTS: A total of 28 consecutive patients (1,013 CBCT scans) were studied. The average interfraction shift was 1.4 +/- 1.4, 1.7 +/- 1.9, and 1.8 +/- 2.1 mm in the medial-lateral, superoinferior, and anteroposterior dimensions, respectively. The corresponding average residual error shifts were 0.7 +/- 0.8, 0.9 +/- 0.9, and 0.9 +/- 0.9 mm. These data indicate that in the absence of daily CBCT image-guided radiotherapy, a clinical target volume to planning target volume margin of 3.9, 4.1, and 4.9 mm is needed in the medial-lateral, superoinferior, and anteroposterior dimensions, respectively. With daily CBCT, corresponding margins of 1.6, 2.5, and 1.9 mm should be acceptable. Subgroup analyses showed that larynx cancers and/or intratreatment weight loss indicate a need for slightly larger clinical target volume to planning target volume margins. CONCLUSION: The results of our study have shown that image-guided radiotherapy using CBCT for head-and-neck cancer is effective. These data suggest it allows a reduction in the clinical target volume to planning target volume margins by about 50%, which could facilitate future studies of dose escalation and/or improved toxicity reduction. Caution is particularly warranted for cases in which the targets are mobile (e.g., the tongue).

Measurement of relative output factors for the 8 and 4 mm collimators of Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion by film dosimetry.

Three types of films, Kodak EDR2, Gafchromic EBT, and Gafchromic MD-V2-55, were used to measure relative output factors of 4 and 8 mm collimators of the Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion. The optical density to dose calibration curve for each of the film types was obtained by exposing the films to a range of known doses. Ten data points were acquired for each of the calibration curves in the dose ranges from 0 to 4 Gy, 0 to 8 Gy, and 0 to 80 Gy for Kodak EDR2, Gafchromic EBT, and Gafchromic MD-V2-55 films, respectively. For the measurement of relative output factors, five films of each film type were exposed to a known dose. All films were scanned using EPSON EXPRESSION 10000 XL scanner with 200 dpi resolution in 16 bit gray scale for EDR2 film and 48 bit color scale for Gafchromic films. The scanned images were imported in the red channel for both Gafchromic films. The background corrections from an unexposed film were applied to all films. The output factors obtained from film measurements were in a close agreement both with the Monte Carlo calculated values of 0.924 and 0.805 for 8 and 4 mm collimators, respectively. These values are provided by the vendor and used as default values in the vendor's treatment planning system. The largest differences were noted for the Kodak EDR 2 films (-2.1% and -4.5% for 8 and 4 mm collimators, respectively). The best agreement observed was for EBT Gafchromic film (-0.8% and +0.6% differences for 8 and 4 mm collimators, respectively). Based on the present values, no changes in the default relative output factor values were made in the treatment planning system.

Unintended attenuation in the Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion calibration-phantom adaptor and its effect on dose calibration.

The calibration of Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion (LGK PFX) is performed using a spherical polystyrene phantom 160 mm in diameter, which is provided by the manufacturer. This is the same phantom that has been used with LGK models U, B, C, and 4C. The polystyrene phantom is held in irradiation position by an aluminum adaptor, which has stainless steel side-fixation screws. The phantom adaptor partially attenuates the beams from sectors 3 and 7 by 3.2% and 4.6%, respectively. This unintended attenuation introduces a systematic error in dose calibration. The overall effect of phantom-adaptor attenuation on output calibration of the LGK PFX unit is to underestimate output by about 1.0%.

Report on a randomized trial comparing two forms of immobilization of the head for fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy.

Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) requires accurate and reproducible immobilization of the patient's head. This randomized study compared the efficacy of two commonly used forms of immobilization used for SRT. Two routinely used methods of immobilization, which differ in their approach to reproduce the head position from day to day, are the Gill-Thomas-Cosman (GTC) frame and the BrainLab thermoplastic mask. The GTC frame fixates on the patient's upper dentition and thus is in direct mechanical contact with the cranium. The BrainLab mask is a two-part masking system custom fitted to the front and back of the patient's head. After patients signed an IRB-approved informed consent form, eligible patients were randomized to either GTC frame or mask for their course of SRT. Patients were treated as per standard procedure; however, prior to each treatment a set of digital kilovolt images (ExacTrac, BrainLabAB, Germany) was taken. These images were fused with reference digitally reconstructed radiographs obtained from treatment planning CT to yield lateral, longitudinal, and vertical deviations of isocenter and head rotations about respective axes. The primary end point of the study was to compare the two systems with respect to mean and standard deviations using the distance to isocenter measure. A total of 84 patients were enrolled (69 patients evaluable with detailed positioning data). A mixed-effect linear regression and two-tiled t test were used to compare the distance measure for both the systems. There was a statistically significant (p < 0.001) difference between mean distances for these systems, suggesting that the GTC frame was more accurate. The mean 3D displacement and standard deviations were 3.17+1.95 mm for mask and 2.00+1.04 mm for frame. Both immobilization techniques were highly effective, but the GTC frame was more accurate. To optimize the accuracy of SRT, daily kilovolt image guidance is recommended with either immobilization system.

Toward dose optimization for fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for acoustic neuromas: comparison of two dose cohorts.

PURPOSE: To describe our initial experience of fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy dose reduction comparing two dose cohorts with examination of tumor control rates and serviceable hearing preservation rates. METHODS AND MATERIALS: After institutional review board approval, we initiated a retrospective chart review to study the hearing outcomes and tumor control rates. All data were entered into a JMP, version 7.01, statistical spreadsheet for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 89 patients with serviceable hearing had complete serial audiometric data available for analysis. The higher dose cohort included 43 patients treated to 50.4 Gy with a median follow-up (latest audiogram) of 53 weeks and the lower dose cohort included 46 patients treated to 46.8 Gy with a median follow-up of 65 weeks. The tumor control rate was 100% in both cohorts, and the pure tone average was significantly improved in the low-dose cohort (33 dB vs. 40 dB, p = 0.023, chi-square). When the patient data were analyzed at comparable follow-up points, the actuarial hearing preservation rate was significantly longer for the low-dose cohort than for the high-dose cohort (165 weeks vs. 79 weeks, p = .0318, log-rank). Multivariate analysis revealed the dose cohort (p = 0.0282) and pretreatment Gardner-Robertson class (p = 0.0215) to be highly significant variables affecting the hearing outcome. CONCLUSION: A lower total dose at 46.8 Gy was associated with a 100% local control tumor rate and a greater hearing preservation rate. An additional dose reduction is justified to achieve the optimal dose that will yield the greatest hearing preservation rate without compromising tumor control for these patients.

Quality assurance procedures for stereotactic body radiation therapy.

Cranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and radiotherapy (SRT) are established treatment modalities. Initial implementations of these techniques rigidly attached frames to the patient's head for single-fraction treatments. The head frame accommodates an external fiducial marker system that is a reliable reference for targets within the cranium and accurately links the imaging equipment used for treatment planning to the treatment device. Fractionated SRT treatments use noninvasive "relocatable"-type head immobilization that fixes to the patient's head and face features. Clearly defined quality assurance (QA) procedures exist for both cranial SRS and SRT but are not as well developed for extracranial SRT. Procedures for demonstrating the geometric relationship between the planning imaging and treatment have to some degree copied the techniques used for intracranial stereotactic irradiation. However, there are some unique QA issues that are specific to extracranial irradiation. One major consideration is the large number of methodologies available for stereotactic body radiation therapy. In addition to the variety of integrated image-guided frameless systems, there are immobilization devices (called body frame systems) that use a fiducial reference system similar to the cranial devices. This article describes generic QA approaches that can be adapted to the various stereotactic body radiation therapy methodologies.