Comparison of detector performance in small 6 MV and 6 MV FFF beams using a Versa HD accelerator.

1. BACKGROUND & PURPOSE: Investigate the applicability of a series of detectors in small field dosimetry and the possible differences between their responses to FF and FFF beams. This work extends upon the series of detectors used by other authors to also include metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs) detectors and radiochromic film. We also included a later correction of output factors (OFs) recommended by the recently published IAEA´s code of practice TRS 483 on dosimetry of small static fields used in external beam radiotherapy. 2. MATERIALS & METHODS: The OFs, profiles, and PDDs of 6 MV and 6 MV FFF beams were measured with 11 different detectors using field sizes between 0.6 × 0.6 cm2 and 10 × 10 cm2. 3. RESULTS: The OFs of the FFF beams were lower than those of the FF beams for field sizes larger than 3 × 3 cm2 but higher for field sizes smaller than 3 × 3 cm2. After applying the IAEA´s TRS 483 corrections, the final OFs were compatible with our initial results when considering uncertainties involved. Small-volume detectors are preferable for measuring the penumbra of these small fields where this attribute is higher in the crossline direction than in the inline direction. The R100 of equivalent-quality FFF beams was higher compared to the corresponding flattened beams. 4. CONCLUSIONS: We observed no difference for the dose responses between 6 MV and 6 MV FFF beams for any of the detectors. OF results, profiles and PDDs were clearly consistent with the previously published literature regarding the Versa HD linac. Correcting our first OFs, taken as ratio of detector charges, with the IAEA´s TRS 483 corrections to obtain the final OFs, did not make the former significantly different.

Practical issues regarding angular and energy response in in vivo intraoperative electron radiotherapy dosimetry.

AIM: To estimate angular response deviation of MOSFETs in the realm of intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT), review their energy dependence, and propose unambiguous names for detector rotations. BACKGROUND: MOSFETs have been used in IOERT. Movement of the detector, namely rotations, can spoil results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We propose yaw, pitch, and roll to name the three possible rotations in space, as these unequivocally name aircraft rotations. Reinforced mobile MOSFETs (model TN-502RDM-H) and an Elekta Precise linear accelerator were used. Two detectors were placed in air for the angular response study and the whole set of five detectors was calibrated as usual to evaluate energy dependence. RESULTS: The maximum readout was obtained with a roll of 90° and 4 MeV. With regard to pitch movement, a substantial drop in readout was achieved at 90°. Significant overresponse was measured at 315° with 4 MeV and at 45° with 15 MeV. Energy response is not different for the following groups of energies: 4, 6, and 9 MeV; and 12 MeV, 15 MeV, and 18 MeV. CONCLUSIONS: Our proposal to name MOSFET rotations solves the problem of defining sensor orientations. Angular response could explain lower than expected results when the tip of the detector is lifted due to inadvertent movements. MOSFETs energy response is independent of several energies and differs by a maximum of 3.4% when dependent. This can limit dosimetry errors and makes it possible to calibrate the detectors only once for each group of energies, which saves time and optimizes lifespan of MOSFETs.

Implementation of an intraoperative electron radiotherapy in vivo dosimetry program.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT) is a highly selective radiotherapy technique which aims to treat restricted anatomic volumes during oncological surgery and is now the subject of intense re-evaluation. In vivo dosimetry has been recommended for IOERT and has been identified as a risk-reduction intervention in the context of an IOERT risk analysis. Despite reports of fruitful experiences, information about in vivo dosimetry in intraoperative radiotherapy is somewhat scarce. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to report our experience in developing a program of in vivo dosimetry for IOERT, from both multidisciplinary and practical approaches, in a consistent patient series. We also report several current weaknesses. METHODS: Reinforced TN-502RDM-H mobile metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFETs) and Gafchromic MD-55-2 films were used as a redundant in vivo treatment verification system with an Elekta Precise fixed linear accelerator for calibrations and treatments. In vivo dosimetry was performed in 45 patients in cases involving primary tumors or relapses. The most frequent primary tumors were breast (37 %) and colorectal (29 %), and local recurrences among relapses was 83 %. We made 50 attempts to measure with MOSFETs and 48 attempts to measure with films in the treatment zones. The surgical team placed both detectors with supervision from the radiation oncologist and following their instructions. RESULTS: The program was considered an overall success by the different professionals involved. The absorbed doses measured with MOSFETs and films were 93.8 ± 6.7 % and 97.9 ± 9.0 % (mean ± SD) respectively using a scale in which 90 % is the prescribed dose and 100 % is the maximum absorbed dose delivered by the beam. However, in 10 % of cases we experienced dosimetric problems due to detector misalignment, a situation which might be avoided with additional checks. The useful MOSFET lifetime length and the film sterilization procedure should also be controlled. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to establish an in vivo dosimetry program for a wide set of locations treated with IOERT using a multidisciplinary approach according to the skills of the professionals present and the detectors used; oncological surgeons' commitment is key to success in this context. Films are more unstable and show higher uncertainty than MOSFETs but are cheaper and are useful and convenient if real-time treatment monitoring is not necessary.

Defining Action Levels for In Vivo Dosimetry in Intraoperative Electron Radiotherapy.

In vivo dosimetry is recommended in intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT). To perform real-time treatment monitoring, action levels (ALs) have to be calculated. Empirical approaches based on observation of samples have been reported previously, however, our aim is to present a predictive model for calculating ALs and to verify their validity with our experimental data. We considered the range of absorbed doses delivered to our detector by means of the percentage depth dose for the electron beams used. Then, we calculated the absorbed dose histograms and convoluted them with detector responses to obtain probability density functions in order to find ALs as certain probability levels. Our in vivo dosimeters were reinforced TN-502RDM-H mobile metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs). Our experimental data came from 30 measurements carried out in patients undergoing IOERT for rectal, breast, sarcoma, and pancreas cancers, among others. The prescribed dose to the tumor bed was 90%, and the maximum absorbed dose was 100%. The theoretical mean absorbed dose was 90.3% and the measured mean was 93.9%. Associated confidence intervals at P = .05 were 89.2% and 91.4% and 91.6% and 96.4%, respectively. With regard to individual comparisons between the model and the experiment, 37% of MOSFET measurements lay outside particular ranges defined by the derived ALs. Calculated confidence intervals at P = .05 ranged from 8.6% to 14.7%. The model can describe global results successfully but cannot match all the experimental data reported. In terms of accuracy, this suggests an eventual underestimation of tumor bed bleeding or detector alignment. In terms of precision, it will be necessary to reduce positioning uncertainties for a wide set of location and treatment postures, and more precise detectors will be required. Planning and imaging tools currently under development will play a fundamental role.

Statistical process control for electron beam monitoring.

PURPOSE: To assess the electron beam monitoring statistical process control (SPC) in linear accelerator (linac) daily quality control. We present a long-term record of our measurements and evaluate which SPC-led conditions are feasible for maintaining control. METHODS: We retrieved our linac beam calibration, symmetry, and flatness daily records for all electron beam energies from January 2008 to December 2013, and retrospectively studied how SPC could have been applied and which of its features could be used in the future. A set of adjustment interventions designed to maintain these parameters under control was also simulated. RESULTS: All phase I data was under control. The dose plots were characterized by rising trends followed by steep drops caused by our attempts to re-center the linac beam calibration. Where flatness and symmetry trends were detected they were less-well defined. The process capability ratios ranged from 1.6 to 9.3 at a 2% specification level. Simulated interventions ranged from 2% to 34% of the total number of measurement sessions. We also noted that if prospective SPC had been applied it would have met quality control specifications. CONCLUSIONS: SPC can be used to assess the inherent variability of our electron beam monitoring system. It can also indicate whether a process is capable of maintaining electron parameters under control with respect to established specifications by using a daily checking device, but this is not practical unless a method to establish direct feedback from the device to the linac can be devised.

Validation of a deformable image registration produced by a commercial treatment planning system in head and neck.

In recent years one of the areas of interest in radiotherapy has been adaptive radiation therapy (ART), with the most efficient way of performing ART being the use of deformable image registration (DIR). In this paper we use the distances between points of interest (POIs) in the computed tomography (CT) and the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition images and the inverse consistence (IC) property to validate the RayStation treatment planning system (TPS) DIR algorithm. This study was divided into two parts: Firstly the distance-accuracy of the TPS DIR algorithm was ascertained by placing POIs on anatomical features in the CT and CBCT images from five head and neck cancer patients. Secondly, a method was developed for studying the implication of these distances on the dose by using the IC. This method compared the dose received by the structures in the CT, and the structures that were quadruply-deformed. The accuracy of the TPS was 1.7 ± 0.8 mm, and the distance obtained with the quadruply-deformed IC method was 1.7 ± 0.9 mm, i.e. the difference between the IC method multiplied by two, and that of the TPS validation method, was negligible. Moreover, the IC method shows very little variation in the dose-volume histograms when comparing the original and quadruply-deformed structures. This indicates that this algorithm is useful for planning adaptive radiation treatments using CBCT in head and neck cancer patients, although these variations must be taken into account when making a clinical decision to adapt a treatment plan.

Failure mode and effect analysis oriented to risk-reduction interventions in intraoperative electron radiation therapy: the specific impact of patient transportation, automation, and treatment planning availability.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Industrial companies use failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) to improve quality. Our objective was to describe an FMEA and subsequent interventions for an automated intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT) procedure with computed tomography simulation, pre-planning, and a fixed conventional linear accelerator. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A process map, an FMEA, and a fault tree analysis are reported. The equipment considered was the radiance treatment planning system (TPS), the Elekta Precise linac, and TN-502RDM-H metal-oxide-semiconductor-field-effect transistor in vivo dosimeters. Computerized order-entry and treatment-automation were also analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty-seven potential modes and effects were identified and classified into 'treatment cancellation' and 'delivering an unintended dose'. They were graded from 'inconvenience' or 'suboptimal treatment' to 'total cancellation' or 'potentially wrong' or 'very wrong administered dose', although these latter effects were never experienced. Risk priority numbers (RPNs) ranged from 3 to 324 and totaled 4804. After interventions such as double checking, interlocking, automation, and structural changes the final total RPN was reduced to 1320. CONCLUSIONS: FMEA is crucial for prioritizing risk-reduction interventions. In a semi-surgical procedure like IOERT double checking has the potential to reduce risk and improve quality. Interlocks and automation should also be implemented to increase the safety of the procedure.

In vivo dosimetry in intraoperative electron radiotherapy: microMOSFETs, radiochromic films and a general-purpose linac.

INTRODUCTION: In vivo dosimetry is desirable for the verification, recording, and eventual correction of treatment in intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT). Our aim is to share our experience of metal oxide semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs) and radiochromic films with patients undergoing IOERT using a general-purpose linac. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used MOSFETs inserted into sterile bronchus catheters and radiochromic films that were cut, digitized, and sterilized by means of gas plasma. In all, 59 measurements were taken from 27 patients involving 15 primary tumors (seven breast and eight non-breast tumors) and 12 relapses. Data were subjected to an outliers' analysis and classified according to their compatibility with the relevant doses. Associations were sought regarding the type of detector, breast and non-breast irradiation, and the radiation oncologist's assessment of the difficulty of detector placement. At the same time, 19 measurements were carried out at the tumor bed with both detectors. RESULTS: MOSFET measurements ([Formula: see text] = 93.5 %, sD = 6.5 %) were not significantly shifted from film measurements ([Formula: see text] = 96.0 %, sD = 5.5 %; p = 0.109), and no associations were found (p = 0.526, p = 0.295, and p = 0.501, respectively). As regards measurements performed at the tumor bed with both detectors, MOSFET measurements ([Formula: see text] = 95.0 %, sD = 5.4 % were not significantly shifted from film measurements ([Formula: see text] = 96.4 %, sD = 5.0 %; p = 0.363). CONCLUSION: In vivo dosimetry can produce satisfactory results at every studied location with a general-purpose linac. Detector choice should depend on user factors, not on the detector performance itself. Surgical team collaboration is crucial to success.

An innovative tool for intraoperative electron beam radiotherapy simulation and planning: description and initial evaluation by radiation oncologists.

PURPOSE: Intraoperative electron beam radiation therapy (IOERT) involves a modified strategy of conventional radiation therapy and surgery. The lack of specific planning tools limits the spread of this technique. The purpose of the present study is to describe a new simulation and planning tool and its initial evaluation by clinical users. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The tool works on a preoperative computed tomography scan. A physician contours regions to be treated and protected and simulates applicator positioning, calculating isodoses and the corresponding dose--volume histograms depending on the selected electron energy. Three radiation oncologists evaluated data from 15 IOERT patients, including different tumor locations. Segmentation masks, applicator positions, and treatment parameters were compared. RESULTS: High parameter agreement was found in the following cases: three breast and three rectal cancer, retroperitoneal sarcoma, and rectal and ovary monotopic recurrences. All radiation oncologists performed similar segmentations of tumors and high-risk areas. The average applicator position difference was 1.2 ± 0.95 cm. The remaining cancer sites showed higher deviations because of differences in the criteria for segmenting high-risk areas (one rectal, one pancreas) and different surgical access simulated (two rectal, one Ewing sarcoma). CONCLUSIONS: The results show that this new tool can be used to simulate IOERT cases involving different anatomic locations, and that preplanning has to be carried out with specialized surgical input.

Retroperitoneal tumour radiotherapy: clinical improvements using kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography.

We present a clinical case of a patient diagnosed with a retroperitoneal sarcoma, which received preoperative treatment with daily verification via computed tomography obtained with kilovoltage cone beam. We compare the benefit of this treatment compared to other conventional treatment without image guiding, reporting quantitative results.