The IAEA remote audit of small field dosimetry for testing the implementation of the TRS-483 code of practice.

BACKGROUND: The TRS­483, an IAEA/AAPM International Code of Practice on dosimetry of small static photon fields, underwent testing via an IAEA coordinated research project (CRP). Alongside small field output factors (OFs) measurements using active dosimeters by CRP participants, the IAEA Dosimetry Laboratory received a mandate to formulate a remote small field dosimetry audit method using its passive dosimetry systems. PURPOSE: This work aimed to develop a small field dosimetry audit methodology employing radiophotoluminescent dosimeters (RPLDs) and radiochromic films. The methodology was subsequently evaluated through a multicenter pilot study with CRP participants. METHODS: The developments included designing and manufacturing a dosimeter holder set and the characterization of an RPLD system for measurements in small photon fields using the new holder. The audit included verification of small field OFs and lateral beam profiles for small fields. At first, treatment planning system (TPS) calculated OFs were checked against a reference data set that was available for conventional linacs. Second, calculated OFs were verified through the RPLD measurement of point doses in a machine-specific reference field, 4 cm × 4 cm, 2 cm × 2 cm, and 1 cm × 1 cm, corresponding size circular fields or nearest achievable field sizes. Lastly, profile checks in in-plane and cross-plane directions were done for the two smallest fields by comparing film measurements with TPS calculations at 20%, 50%, and 80% isodose levels. RESULTS: RPLD correction factors for small field measurements were approximately unity. However, they influenced the dose determination's overall uncertainty in small fields, estimated at 2.30% (k = 1 level). Considering the previous experience in auditing reference beam output following the TRS-398 Code of Practice, the acceptance limit of 5% for the ratio of the dose determined by RPLD to the dose calculated by TPS, DRPLD/DTPS, was considered adequate. The multicenter pilot study included 15 participants from 14 countries (39 beams). Consistent with the previous findings, the results of the OF check against the reference data confirmed that TPSs tend to overestimate OFs for the smallest fields included in this exercise. All except three RPLD measurement results were within the acceptance limit, and the spread of results increased for smaller field sizes. The differences between the film measured and TPS calculated dose profiles were within 3 mm for most of the beams checked; deviated results revealed problems with TPS commissioning and calibration of the treatment unit collimation systems. CONCLUSION: The newly developed small field dosimetry audit methodology proved effective and successfully complemented the CRP OF measurements by participants with RPLD audit results.

50 Years of the IAEA/WHO postal dose audit programme for radiotherapy: what can we learn from 13756 results?

Background: The IAEA/WHO postal dose audit programme has been operating since 1969 with the aim of improving the accuracy and consistency of dosimetry in radiotherapy in low-income and middle-income countries world-wide. This study summarises the 50 years' experience of audits and explores the quality of reference dosimetry in participating radiotherapy centres throughout the years.Material and methods: During the IAEA/WHO postal audits the dose determined from the mailed dosimeter is compared with that stated by the participant. Agreement to within ±5% is regarded acceptable whilst deviations outside ±5% limits trigger follow-up actions. Of particular interest in this study was the dependence of clinical dosimetry quality on factors related to the centre infrastructure and expertise in dosimetry of its staff.Results: The IAEA/WHO dose audit programme noted great increase in the overall percentage of acceptable results from about 50% in its early years to 99% at present, although there is some variability of results amongst participating countries. Whereas results for younger radiotherapy machines show the agreement rate between the measured and the stated doses well above 90%, for those over 20 years old the rate dropped to <80%. Linac dosimetry was always better than 60Co dosimetry and multi-machine centres generally performed better than single machine centres equipped with cobalt alone. Second and subsequent participation in audits showed higher quality dosimetry than the first participation. The implementation of modern dosimetry protocols resulted in more accurate dosimetry than the use of the older protocols.Conclusions: Over the 50 years that the IAEA has accumulated dosimetry audit data, practices in radiotherapy centres have significantly improved. Higher quality dosimetry confirmed in audits is generally associated with better infrastructure and adequate dosimetry expertise of medical physicists in participating centres.

IAEA methodology for on-site end-to-end IMRT/VMAT audits: an international pilot study.

Background: The IAEA has developed and tested an on-site, end-to-end IMRT/VMAT dosimetry audit methodology for head and neck cases using an anthropomorphic phantom. The audit methodology is described, and the results of the international pilot testing are presented.Material and methods: The audit utilizes a specially designed, commercially available anthropomorphic phantom capable of accommodating a small volume ion chamber (IC) in four locations (three in planning target volumes (PTVs) and one in an organ at risk (OAR)) and a Gafchromic film in a coronal plane for the absorbed dose to water and two-dimensional dose distribution measurements, respectively. The audit consists of a pre-visit and on-site phases. The pre-visit phase is carried out remotely and includes a treatment planning task and a set of computational exercises. The on-site phase aims at comparing the treatment planning system (TPS) calculations with measurements in the anthropomorphic phantom following an end-to-end approach. Two main aspects were tested in the pilot study: feasibility of the planning constraints and the accuracy of IC and film results in comparison with TPS calculations. Treatment plan quality was scored from 0 to 100.Results: Forty-two treatment plans were submitted by 14 institutions from 10 countries, with 79% of them having a plan quality score over 90. Seventeen sets of IC measurement results were collected, and the average measured to calculated dose ratio was 0.988 ± 0.016 for PTVs and 1.020 ± 0.029 for OAR. For 13 film measurement results, the average gamma passing rate was 94.1% using criteria of 3%/3 mm, 20% threshold and global gamma.Conclusions: The audit methodology was proved to be feasible and ready to be adopted by national dosimetry audit networks for local implementation.

The influence of errors in small field dosimetry on the dosimetric accuracy of treatment plans.

Background: Dosimetric effects of inaccuracies of output factors (OFs) implemented in treatment planning systems (TPSs) were investigated.Materials and methods: Modified beam models (MBM) for which the OFs of small fields (down to 1 × 1 cm2) were increased by up to 12% compared to the original beam models (OBM) were created for two TPSs. These beam models were used to recalculate treatment plans of different complexity. Treatment plans using stereotactic 3D-conformal (s3D-CRT) for brain metastasis as well as VMAT plans for head and neck and prostate cancer patients were generated. Dose distributions calculated with the MBM and the OBM were compared to measured dose distributions acquired using film dosimetry and a 2D-detector-array. For the s3D-CRT plans the calculated and measured dose at the isocenter was evaluated. For VMAT, gamma pass rates (GPRs) were calculated using global gamma index with 3%/3 mm, 2%/3 mm, 1%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm with a 20% threshold. Contribution of small fields to the total fluence was expressed as the ratio (F) of fluence trough leaf openings smaller than 2 cm to the total fluence.Results: Using film dosimetry for the s3D-CRT plans, the average of the ratio of calculated dose to measured dose at the isocenter was 1.01 and 1.06 for the OBM and MBM model, respectively. A significantly lower GPR of the MBM compared to the OBM was only found for the localized prostate cases (F = 12.4%) measured with the 2D-detector-array and an acceptance criterion of 1%/3 mm.Conclusion: The effects of uncertainties in small field OFs implemented in TPSs are most pronounced for s3D-CRT cases and can be clearly identified using patient specific quality assurance. For VMAT these effects mainly remain undetected using standard patient specific quality assurance. Using tighter acceptance criteria combined with an analysis of the fluence generated by small fields can help identifying inaccuracies of OFs implemented in TPSs.

Testing the methodology for a dosimetric end-to-end audit of IMRT/VMAT: results of IAEA multicentre and national studies.

Introduction: Within an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) co-ordinated research project (CRP), a remote end-to-end dosimetric quality audit for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)/ volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) was developed to verify the radiotherapy chain including imaging, treatment planning and dose delivery. The methodology as well as the results obtained in a multicentre pilot study and national trial runs conducted in close cooperation with dosimetry audit networks (DANs) of IAEA Member States are presented.Material and methods: A solid polystyrene phantom containing a dosimetry insert with an irregular solid water planning target volume (PTV) and organ at risk (OAR) was designed for this audit. The insert can be preloaded with radiochromic film and four thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). For the audit, radiotherapy centres were asked to scan the phantom, contour the structures, create an IMRT/VMAT treatment plan and irradiate the phantom. The dose prescription was to deliver 4 Gy to the PTV in two fractions and to limit the OAR dose to a maximum of 2.8 Gy. The TLD measured doses and film measured dose distributions were compared with the TPS calculations.Results: Sixteen hospitals from 13 countries and 64 hospitals from 6 countries participated in the multicenter pilot study and in the national runs, respectively. The TLD results for the PTV were all within ±5% acceptance limit for the multicentre pilot study, whereas for national runs, 17 participants failed to meet this criterion. All measured doses in the OAR were below the treatment planning constraint. The film analysis identified seven plans in national runs below the 90% passing rate gamma criteria.Conclusion: The results proved that the methodology of the IMRT/VMAT dosimetric end-to-end audit was feasible for its intended purpose, i.e., the phantom design and materials were suitable; the phantom was easy to use and it was robust enough for shipment. Most importantly the audit methodology was capable of identifying suboptimal IMRT/VMAT delivery.

IMRT national audit in Portugal.

PURPOSE: The IAEA newly developed "end-to-end" audit methodology for on-site verification of IMRT dose delivery has been carried out in Portugal in 2018. The main goal was to evaluate the physical aspects of the head and neck (H&N) cancer IMRT treatments. This paper presents the national results. METHODS: All institutions performing IMRT treatments in Portugal, 20 out of 24, have voluntarily participated in this audit. Following the adopted methodology, a Shoulder, Head and Neck End-to-End phantom (SHANE) - that mimics an H&N region, underwent all steps of an IMRT treatment, according to the local practices. The measurements using an ionization chamber placed inside the SHANE phantom at four reference locations (three in PTVs and one in the spinal cord) and an EBT3 film positioned in a coronal plane were compared with calculated doses. FilmQA Pro software was used for film analysis. RESULTS: For ionization chamber measurements, the percent difference was within the specified tolerances of ±5% for PTVs and ±7% for the spinal cord in all participating institutions. Considering film analysis, gamma passing rates were on average 96.9%±2.9% for a criterion of 3%/3 mm, 20% threshold, all above the acceptance limit of 90%. CONCLUSIONS: The national results of the H&N IMRT audit showed a compliance between the planned and the delivered doses within the specified tolerances, confirming no major reasons for concern. At the same time the audit identified factors that contributed to increased uncertainties in the IMRT dose delivery in some institutions resulting in recommendations for quality improvement.

END-TO-END AUDIT: COMPARISON OF TLD AND LITHIUM FORMATE EPR DOSIMETRY.

The aim of this study was to test two different solid state dosimetry systems for the purpose of end-to-end audits of radiotherapy volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique; a lithium formate electron paramagnetic resonance system and a lithium fluoride thermoluminescent dosimetry system. As a complement to the solid state systems, ion chamber measurements were performed. A polystyrene phantom with a planning target volume (PTV) and an organ at risk (OAR) structure was scanned using CT. A VMAT dose plan was optimized to deliver 2 Gy to the target volume and to minimize the dose to the OAR. The different detectors were inserted into the phantom and the planned dose distribution was delivered. The measured doses were compared to the treatment planning system (TPS) calculated doses. Good agreement was found between the TPS calculated and the measured doses, well accepted for the dose determinations in remote dosimetry audits of VMAT treatment technique.

Global availability of dosimetry audits in radiotherapy: The IAEA dosimetry audit networks database.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has established a database describing activities of dosimetry audit networks (DAN) in radiotherapy. Since 2010 the data on different aspects of the dosimetry audit have been collected. This information has allowed for the analysis and comparison of current practices in dosimetry auditing activities worldwide. Overall, 79 organizations in 58 countries confirmed that they offer dosimetry audit services for radiotherapy; however, access of radiotherapy centres to the audit remains insufficient. Increased availability of audits is necessary to improve dosimetry practices, reduce the likelihood of errors and the consequences that would result for patients' health.

A multinational audit of small field output factors calculated by treatment planning systems used in radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: An audit methodology for verifying the implementation of output factors (OFs) of small fields in treatment planning systems (TPSs) used in radiotherapy was developed and tested through a multinational research group and performed on a national level in five different countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Centres participating in this study were asked to provide OFs calculated by their TPSs for 10 × 10 cm2, 6 × 6 cm2, 4 × 4 cm2, 3 × 3 cm2 and 2 × 2 cm2 field sizes using an SSD of 100 cm. The ratio of these calculated OFs to reference OFs was analysed. The action limit was ±3% for the 2 × 2 cm2 field and ±2% for all other fields. RESULTS: OFs for more than 200 different beams were collected in total. On average, the OFs for small fields calculated by TPSs were generally larger than measured reference data. These deviations increased with decreasing field size. On a national level, 30% and 31% of the calculated OFs of the 2 × 2 cm2 field exceeded the action limit of 3% for nominal beam energies of 6 MV and for nominal beam energies higher than 6 MV, respectively. CONCLUSION: Modern TPS beam models generally overestimate the OFs for small fields. The verification of calculated small field OFs is a vital step and should be included when commissioning a TPS. The methodology outlined in this study can be used to identify potential discrepancies in clinical beam models.

Remote beam output audits: a global assessment of results out of tolerance.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Remote beam output audits, which independently measure an institution's machine calibration, are a common component of independent radiotherapy peer review. This work reviews the results and trends of these audit results across several organisations and geographical regions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Beam output audit results from the Australian Clinical Dosimetry Services, International Atomic Energy Agency, Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core, and Radiation Dosimetry Services were evaluated from 2010 to the present. The rate of audit results outside a +/-5% tolerance was evaluated for photon and electron beams as a function of the year of irradiation and nominal beam energy. Additionally, examples of confirmed calibration errors were examined to provide guidance to clinical physicists and auditing bodies. RESULTS: Of the 210,167 audit results, 1323 (0.63%) were outside of tolerance. There was a clear trend of improved audit performance for more recent dates, and while all photon energies generally showed uniform rates of results out of tolerance, low (6 MeV) and high (≥18 MeV) energy electron beams showed significantly elevated rates. Twenty nine confirmed calibration errors were explored and attributed to a range of issues, such as equipment failures, errors in setup, and errors in performing the clinical reference calibration. Forty-two percent of these confirmed errors were detected during ongoing periodic monitoring, and not at the time of the first audit of the machine. CONCLUSIONS: Remote beam output audits have identified, and continue to identify, numerous and often substantial beam calibration errors.

Improving the quality of radiation oncology: 10years' experience of QUATRO audits in the IAEA Europe Region.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The IAEA has developed a methodology for comprehensive quality audits of radiotherapy practices called Quality Assurance Team for Radiation Oncology (QUATRO). This study explores the factors that impacted quality of care among QUATRO audited centres in the IAEA Europe Region. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 31 QUATRO reports collected over 10years include extensive data describing the quality of radiotherapy at the audited centres. A coding key was developed to aggregate and review these data in terms of recommendations for improvement and positive findings (commendations). RESULTS: Overall 759 recommendations and 600 commendations were given. Eight centres recognized as centres of competence differed from other centres mostly because they operated complete quality management systems and were adequately staffed. Other centres had excessive staff workloads and many gaps in the process of care. Insufficient equipment levels were prevalent. Patient centredness, communication, dosimetry, quality control and radiation protection were frequently commended by QUATRO. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis points to barriers to quality care such as insufficient staffing, education/training, equipment and lack of quality management. It highlights the correlation between the human resources availability and quality of care. It has also identified common action items for enhancing quality of radiotherapy programmes in the Region.

Accuracy requirements and uncertainties in radiotherapy: a report of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy technology continues to advance and the expectation of improved outcomes requires greater accuracy in various radiotherapy steps. Different factors affect the overall accuracy of dose delivery. Institutional comprehensive quality assurance (QA) programs should ensure that uncertainties are maintained at acceptable levels. The International Atomic Energy Agency has recently developed a report summarizing the accuracy achievable and the suggested action levels, for each step in the radiotherapy process. Overview of the report: The report seeks to promote awareness and encourage quantification of uncertainties in order to promote safer and more effective patient treatments. The radiotherapy process and the radiobiological and clinical frameworks that define the need for accuracy are depicted. Factors that influence uncertainty are described for a range of techniques, technologies and systems. Methodologies for determining and combining uncertainties are presented, and strategies for reducing uncertainties through QA programs are suggested. The role of quality audits in providing international benchmarking of achievable accuracy and realistic action levels is also discussed. RECOMMENDATIONS: The report concludes with nine general recommendations: (1) Radiotherapy should be applied as accurately as reasonably achievable, technical and biological factors being taken into account. (2) For consistency in prescribing, reporting and recording, recommendations of the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements should be implemented. (3) Each institution should determine uncertainties for their treatment procedures. Sample data are tabulated for typical clinical scenarios with estimates of the levels of accuracy that are practically achievable and suggested action levels. (4) Independent dosimetry audits should be performed regularly. (5) Comprehensive quality assurance programs should be in place. (6) Professional staff should be appropriately educated and adequate staffing levels should be maintained. (7) For reporting purposes, uncertainties should be presented. (8) Manufacturers should provide training on all equipment. (9) Research should aid in improving the accuracy of radiotherapy. Some example research projects are suggested.

Testing the methodology for dosimetry audit of heterogeneity corrections and small MLC-shaped fields: Results of IAEA multi-center studies.

UNLABELLED: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has a long tradition of supporting development of methodologies for national networks providing quality audits in radiotherapy. A series of co-ordinated research projects (CRPs) has been conducted by the IAEA since 1995 assisting national external audit groups developing national audit programs. The CRP 'Development of Quality Audits for Radiotherapy Dosimetry for Complex Treatment Techniques' was conducted in 2009-2012 as an extension of previously developed audit programs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The CRP work described in this paper focused on developing and testing two steps of dosimetry audit: verification of heterogeneity corrections, and treatment planning system (TPS) modeling of small MLC fields, which are important for the initial stages of complex radiation treatments, such as IMRT. The project involved development of a new solid slab phantom with heterogeneities containing special measurement inserts for thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) and radiochromic films. The phantom and the audit methodology has been developed at the IAEA and tested in multi-center studies involving the CRP participants. RESULTS: The results of multi-center testing of methodology for two steps of dosimetry audit show that the design of audit procedures is adequate and the methodology is feasible for meeting the audit objectives. A total of 97% TLD results in heterogeneity situations obtained in the study were within 3% and all results within 5% agreement with the TPS predicted doses. In contrast, only 64% small beam profiles were within 3 mm agreement between the TPS calculated and film measured doses. Film dosimetry results have highlighted some limitations in TPS modeling of small beam profiles in the direction of MLC leave movements. DISCUSSION: Through multi-center testing, any challenges or difficulties in the proposed audit methodology were identified, and the methodology improved. Using the experience of these studies, the participants could incorporate the auditing procedures in their national programs.

Quality audits of radiotherapy centres in Latin America: a pilot experience of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

BACKGROUND: In Latin America radiotherapy quality varies significantly among hospitals, where highly equipped academic centers coexist with others not meeting minimal requirements. In 2007, the International Atomic Energy Agency published guidelines for auditing radiotherapy centers, known as the "Quality Assurance Team for Radiation Oncology" (QUATRO) audits. The present report summarizes a pilot experience with QUATRO audits to 12 radiotherapy centres. METHODS: The findings from QUATRO audits conducted in 12 radiotherapy centres in Latin America between 2008 and 2013 were analysed. Events representing weaknesses or gaps in the process of radiotherapy were recorded. Relevant data for estimating human and technological needs of visited centres were processed. The main difficulties and strengths faced by institutions were also documented. RESULTS: All 12 radiotherapy centres were successfully audited following the QUATRO method. IAEA provided a dosimetry kit for quality control. Forty percent of audited institutions were immersed in a health system that did not recognize cancer as a public health priority problem. With few exceptions, local training programs for physicists and technologists were scarce and research was not an activity of interest among physicians. Centres were provided with sufficient staff to meet the local demand, both in the case of radiation oncologists, physicists and radiation therapists. Three centres lacking the minimum infrastructure were identified. Three institutions did not perform gynaecological brachytherapy, and one installation delivered around 900 teletherapy treatments annually without simulation, planning or dosimetry equipment for that purpose. Recommendations to centres were classified as related to personnel, infrastructure, processes and institutional organizational aspects. Many recommendations warned governments about the evident need for allocating more budgetary resources to radiotherapy. Most recommendations pointed out different aspects related to strengthen human resources training and technological support to the audited centres. Scheduled follow-up visits were also stressed. CONCLUSION: The QUATRO audits proved to be a valuable tool for identifying weaknesses in infrastructure, human resources and procedures in radiotherapy centres. Follow-up visits conducted by the IAEA or by regional or local organizations are necessary in order to evaluate outcomes and sustainability of implemented recommendations.

Global harmonization of quality assurance naming conventions in radiation therapy clinical trials.

PURPOSE: To review the various radiation therapy quality assurance (RTQA) procedures used by the Global Clinical Trials RTQA Harmonization Group (GHG) steering committee members and present the harmonized RTQA naming conventions by amalgamating procedures with similar objectives. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A survey of the GHG steering committee members' RTQA procedures, their goals, and naming conventions was conducted. The RTQA procedures were classified as baseline, preaccrual, and prospective/retrospective data capture and analysis. After all the procedures were accumulated and described, extensive discussions took place to come to harmonized RTQA procedures and names. RESULTS: The RTQA procedures implemented within a trial by the GHG steering committee members vary in quantity, timing, name, and compliance criteria. The procedures of each member are based on perceived chances of noncompliance, so that the quality of radiation therapy planning and treatment does not negatively influence the trial measured outcomes. A comparison of these procedures demonstrated similarities among the goals of the various methods, but the naming given to each differed. After thorough discussions, the GHG steering committee members amalgamated the 27 RTQA procedures to 10 harmonized ones with corresponding names: facility questionnaire, beam output audit, benchmark case, dummy run, complex treatment dosimetry check, virtual phantom, individual case review, review of patients' treatment records, and protocol compliance and dosimetry site visit. CONCLUSIONS: Harmonized RTQA harmonized naming conventions, which can be used in all future clinical trials involving radiation therapy, have been established. Harmonized procedures will facilitate future intergroup trial collaboration and help to ensure comparable RTQA between international trials, which enables meta-analyses and reduces RTQA workload for intergroup studies.

Detector to detector corrections: a comprehensive experimental study of detector specific correction factors for beam output measurements for small radiotherapy beams.

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study is to provide a comprehensive set of detector specific correction factors for beam output measurements for small beams, for a wide range of real time and passive detectors. The detector specific correction factors determined in this study may be potentially useful as a reference data set for small beam dosimetry measurements. METHODS: Dose response of passive and real time detectors was investigated for small field sizes shaped with a micromultileaf collimator ranging from 0.6 × 0.6 cm(2) to 4.2 × 4.2 cm(2) and the measurements were extended to larger fields of up to 10 × 10 cm(2). Measurements were performed at 5 cm depth, in a 6 MV photon beam. Detectors used included alanine, thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs), stereotactic diode, electron diode, photon diode, radiophotoluminescent dosimeters (RPLDs), radioluminescence detector based on carbon-doped aluminium oxide (Al2O3:C), organic plastic scintillators, diamond detectors, liquid filled ion chamber, and a range of small volume air filled ionization chambers (volumes ranging from 0.002 cm(3) to 0.3 cm(3)). All detector measurements were corrected for volume averaging effect and compared with dose ratios determined from alanine to derive a detector correction factors that account for beam perturbation related to nonwater equivalence of the detector materials. RESULTS: For the detectors used in this study, volume averaging corrections ranged from unity for the smallest detectors such as the diodes, 1.148 for the 0.14 cm(3) air filled ionization chamber and were as high as 1.924 for the 0.3 cm(3) ionization chamber. After applying volume averaging corrections, the detector readings were consistent among themselves and with alanine measurements for several small detectors but they differed for larger detectors, in particular for some small ionization chambers with volumes larger than 0.1 cm(3). CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate how important it is for the appropriate corrections to be applied to give consistent and accurate measurements for a range of detectors in small beam geometry. The results further demonstrate that depending on the choice of detectors, there is a potential for large errors when effects such as volume averaging, perturbation and differences in material properties of detectors are not taken into account. As the commissioning of small fields for clinical treatment has to rely on accurate dose measurements, the authors recommend the use of detectors that require relatively little correction, such as unshielded diodes, diamond detectors or microchambers, and solid state detectors such as alanine, TLD, Al2O3:C, or scintillators.

Dosimetric inter-institutional comparison in European radiotherapy centres: Results of IAEA supported treatment planning system audit.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: One of the newer audit modalities operated by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) involves audits of treatment planning systems (TPS) in radiotherapy. The main focus of the audit is the dosimetry verification of the delivery of a radiation treatment plan for three-dimensional (3D) conformal radiotherapy using high energy photon beams. The audit has been carried out in eight European countries - Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Serbia, Slovakia, Poland and Portugal. The corresponding results are presented. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The TPS audit reviews the dosimetry, treatment planning and radiotherapy delivery processes using the 'end-to-end' approach, i.e. following the pathway similar to that of the patient, through imaging, treatment planning and dose delivery. The audit is implemented at the national level with IAEA assistance. The national counterparts conduct the TPS audit at local radiotherapy centres through on-site visits. TPS calculated doses are compared with ion chamber measurements performed in an anthropomorphic phantom for eight test cases per algorithm/beam. A set of pre-defined agreement criteria is used to analyse the performance of TPSs. RESULTS: TPS audit was carried out in 60 radiotherapy centres. In total, 190 data sets (combination of algorithm and beam quality) have been collected and reviewed. Dosimetry problems requiring interventions were discovered in about 10% of datasets. In addition, suboptimal beam modelling in TPSs was discovered in a number of cases. CONCLUSIONS: The TPS audit project using the IAEA methodology has verified the treatment planning system calculations for 3D conformal radiotherapy in a group of radiotherapy centres in Europe. It contributed to achieving better understanding of the performance of TPSs and helped to resolve issues related to imaging, dosimetry and treatment planning.

In vivo dosimetry in external beam radiotherapy.

In vivo dosimetry (IVD) is in use in external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) to detect major errors, to assess clinically relevant differences between planned and delivered dose, to record dose received by individual patients, and to fulfill legal requirements. After discussing briefly the main characteristics of the most commonly applied IVD systems, the clinical experience of IVD during EBRT will be summarized. Advancement of the traditional aspects of in vivo dosimetry as well as the development of currently available and newly emerging noninterventional technologies are required for large-scale implementation of IVD in EBRT. These new technologies include the development of electronic portal imaging devices for 2D and 3D patient dosimetry during advanced treatment techniques, such as IMRT and VMAT, and the use of IVD in proton and ion radiotherapy by measuring the decay of radiation-induced radionuclides. In the final analysis, we will show in this Vision 20∕20 paper that in addition to regulatory compliance and reimbursement issues, the rationale for in vivo measurements is to provide an accurate and independent verification of the overall treatment procedure. It will enable the identification of potential errors in dose calculation, data transfer, dose delivery, patient setup, and changes in patient anatomy. It is the authors' opinion that all treatments with curative intent should be verified through in vivo dose measurements in combination with pretreatment checks.