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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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%.

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.

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.

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.

Dosimetric comparison of the Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion and 4C.

OBJECT: The recently introduced Leksell Gamma Knife (LGK) Perfexion is an entirely new system with a different beam geometry compared with the LGK 4C. The new Perfexion system has 192 cobalt-60 sources that are fixed on 8 sectors (each sector has 24 sources). Each sector can be moved independently of the others and can be set to 1 of 5 different positions: 3 positions defining collimator sizes of 4, 8, and 16 mm; an off position (sources are blocked); and a home position. The purpose of this study is to compare the dosimetric characteristics of the GK 4C and the Perfexion models. This comparison is important especially for the treatment of functional disorders when only a single shot with the 4- or 8-mm collimator is used. METHODS: A 160-mm-diameter spherical polystyrene phantom was used for all measurements and calculations. The irradiation geometry consisted of the placement of a single shot at the center of this phantom. Comparisons were made among different dosimetric parameters obtained from calculations performed using Leksell GammaPlan v. 8.0 and measurements performed using film dosimetry. The dosimetric parameters investigated were dose profiles for all collimators in all 3 stereotactic planes (x, y, and z) including the full width at half maximum and the penumbra for each profile, cumulative dose-volume histograms, the volume encompassed by the 50% isodose surface, the mean doses delivered to a defined matrix volume, and relative output factors for all collimator sizes. RESULTS: There was excellent agreement between the dosimetric parameters of GK 4C and Perfexion for the 4- and 8-mm collimators. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that consistent treatments of functional disorders will be delivered using either GK 4C or Perfexion.

A review of 3 current radiosurgery systems.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic radiosurgery and fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy have become widespread techniques applied to the treatment of a variety of intracranial lesions. Rapid evolution of new technologies has now enabled clinicians to treat tumors outside the cranium and down the spinal axis. This review compares 3 commercially available systems in widespread use throughout the world. METHODS: Literature review and interviews with practitioners in the United States were performed to establish data for a comparative analysis of the Gamma Knife (Elekta, Sweden), Novalis (BrainLabs, Germany), and CyberKnife systems (Accuray, Sunnyvale, CA). Cost analyses were deliberately excluded because of the need for detailed cost-benefit analysis beyond the scope of the review. RESULTS: An unbiased comparative analysis was not possible because of the lack of objective data from a standard metric for these systems. Despite this shortcoming, disparate features of each system were compared and contrasted. CONCLUSION: A careful assessment of each system, including its operational features, capabilities, and yearly capacity must be weighed against the composition of the radiosurgery team, the case mix of the practice, and the objectives of the clinical unit to yield the best fit.

Integration of surgery with fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for treatment of nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenomas.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) after surgery in the management of residual or recurrent nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas with respect to tumor control and the development of complications. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The clinical records of patients with nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas who underwent FSRT were retrospectively analyzed. For newly diagnosed tumors, transsphenoidal surgery was performed, and, if residual tumor was identified at 3 months, FSRT was performed. If significant tumor volume persisted, transcranial surgery was performed before FSRT. We originally initiated FSRT with 2-Gy fractions to 46 Gy. We escalated the dose to 50.4 Gy thereafter. As a final modification, we dropped the daily dose to 1.8-Gy fractions delivered within 6 weeks. High-dose conformality and homogeneity was achieved with arc beam shaping and differential beam weighting. The radiographic, endocrinologic, and visual outcomes after FSRT were evaluated. RESULTS: The 68 patients included 36 males and 32 females with an age range of 15-81 years. The median follow-up was 30 months (range, 2-82 months), and the median tumor volume was 6.2 cm(3). Of the 68 patients, 20 were treated to 46 Gy and 48 to 50-52.2 Gy. Most were treated to 50.4 Gy. Eleven patients had recurrent tumors, 54 had residual tumors, and no surgery was performed in 3 patients before FSRT. We noted no radiation-induced acute or late toxicities, except for radiation-induced optic neuropathy in 2 patients. At latest follow-up, the tumor had decreased in size in 26 patients and remained stable in 41 of the 42 remaining patients. Of the 68 patients, 4 (6%) developed hypopituitarism at 6, 11, 12, and 17 months after FSRT. Reviewing available serial Humphrey visual fields, visual fields were objectively improved in 28 patients, and remained stable in 24 patients, and worsened in 2 patients. CONCLUSION: The findings of this analysis support the use of surgery followed by FSRT as a safe, effective, and integrated treatment for nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas. Additional follow-up is needed to document the long-term tumor control rates, preservation rates for vision and pituitary function, and neurocognitive outcomes.

Glycerol rhizotomy versus gamma knife radiosurgery for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: an analysis of patients treated at one institution.

BACKGROUND: Medically refractory trigeminal neuralgia (TN) has been treated with a variety of minimally invasive techniques, all of which have been compared with microvascular decompression. For patients not considered good surgical candidates, percutaneous retrogasserian glycerol rhizotomy (GR) and gamma knife (GK) radiosurgery are two minimally invasive techniques in common practice worldwide and used routinely at Jefferson Hospital for Neuroscience. Using a common pain scale outcomes questionnaire, we sought to analyze efficacies and morbidities of both treatments. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between June 1994 and December 2002, 79 patients were treated with GR and 109 patients underwent GK for the treatment of TN. GR was performed with fluoroscopic guidance as an overnight inpatient procedure. GK was performed using a single 4-mm shot positioned at the root exit zone of the trigeminal nerve. Radiation doses of 70-90 Gy prescribed to the 100% isodose line were used. Treatment outcomes including pain response, pain recurrence, treatment failure, treatment-related side effects, and overall patient satisfaction with GK and GR were compared using a common outcomes scale. Using the Barrow Neurologic Institute pain scale, patients were asked to define their level of pain both before and after treatment: I, no pain and no pain medication required; I, occasional pain not requiring medication; IIIa, no pain and pain medication used; IIIb, some pain adequately controlled with medication; IV, some pain not adequately controlled with medication; and V, severe pain with no relief with medication. We used posttreatment scores of I, II, IIIa, and IIIb to identify treatment success, whereas scores of IV and V were considered treatment failure. Results were compiled from respondents and analyzed using SAS software. Statistical comparisons used log-rank test, univariate and multivariate logistic regression, Fisher's exact test, and Wilcoxon test with significance established at p < 0.05. RESULTS: There were 63 evaluable GK patients and 36 evaluable GR patients. The median follow-up time was 34 and 29 months for the GR and GK groups, respectively. The median age was 69 and 70 years and the median number of years with TN pain was 6 and 7 years in the GR and GK groups, respectively. Thirty-one GR (86%) and 58 GK (92%) patients achieved a successful treatment outcome (p = 0.49). The median time to pain relief was < or = 24 h in the GR group and 3 weeks in the GK group (p < 0.001, ordinal logistic regression). Nineteen GR and 26 GK patients experienced pain recurrence or pain never relieved (p = 0.30). The median time to pain recurrence was 5 and 8 months in the GR and GK groups, respectively (p = 0.22). At last follow-up, however, a statistically significant greater number of GR vs. GK patients had failed treatment. Twelve or 33% of GR patients, whereas 8 or 13% of GK patients, had BNI scores of 4 or 5 (p = 0.019, Fisher's exact test). When both initial and late treatment failures were combined, the overall rate of treatment failures was 39% in the GR group and 24% in the GK group (p = 0.023, log-rank). More GR patients developed facial numbness and facial numbness morbidity than GK patients: 19 GR (54%) and 17 GK patients (30%) developed new facial numbness and 12 GR and 7 GK patients reported either somewhat or very bothersome facial numbness (p = 0.018). On multivariate analysis, only treatment with GK and severity of pain before treatment significantly predicted treatment response. GK patients were more likely to have a lower pain score at last follow-up than were GR patients (p = 0.005, OR = 4.3), and patients with pretreatment pain scores of 5 were more likely to have lower posttreatment pain scores than patients with pretreatment pain scores of 4 and lower (p = 0.003, OR = 4.0). CONCLUSION: Despite greater facial numbness morbidity and a higher failure rate, GR provided more immediate pain relief than GK. GR therefore should be considered in patients with disabling trigeminal pain requiring urgent pain relief. For all other patients, GK provides better long-term pain relief with less treatment-related morbidity, and should therefore be considered the preferred treatment for patients with medically refractory trigeminal neuralgia who are not suitable candidates for microvascular nerve decompression.

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.

Treatment of patients with cardiac pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators during radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To define the practical clinical guidelines that can be implemented by busy radiation oncology departments to minimize the risk of harm to patients with implanted cardiac pacemaker (ICP) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) devices during radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A literature review was conducted to identify the mechanism of potential damage to ICPs and ICDs from exposure to electromagnetic interference and/or ionizing radiation and to assess the published evidence of such device malfunction or failure. Recommendations for patient management were obtained from three major manufacturers. Eighty-seven radiation oncology facilities across the United States and Canada were contacted to determine current practice patterns; 75 centers responded. RESULTS: The published documentation of potential life-threatening malfunction of ICP and ICD devices exposed to electromagnetic interference and ionizing radiation is considerable. However, major discrepancies exist among manufacturer recommendations and wide variations are present among radiation oncology facilities regarding patient management precautions. CONCLUSION: Precautions are necessary to minimize the risk to patients with ICP and ICD devices during radiotherapy. Practical management guidelines are presented that can be readily adopted by any busy clinical radiation oncology practice.

Inverse treatment planning using volume-based objective functions.

The results of optimization of inverse treatment plans depend on a choice of the objective function. Even when the optimal solution for a given cost function can be obtained, a better solution may exist for a given clinical scenario and it could be obtained with a revised objective function. In the approach presented in this work mixed integer programming was used to introduce a new volume-based objective function, which allowed for minimization of the number of under- or overdosed voxels in selected structures. By selecting and prioritizing components of this function the user could drive the computations towards the desired solution. This optimization approach was tested using cases of patients treated for prostate and oropharyngeal cancer. Initial solutions were obtained based on minimization/maximization of the dose to critical structures and targets. Subsequently, the volume-based objective functions were used to locate solutions, which satisfied better clinical objectives particular to each of the cases. For prostate cases, these additional solutions offered further improvements in sparing of the rectum or the bladder. For oropharyngeal cases, families of solutions were obtained satisfying an intensity modulated radiation therapy protocol for this disease site, while offering significant improvement in the sparing of selected critical structures, e.g., parotid glands. An additional advantage of the present approach was in providing a convenient mechanism to test the feasibility of the dose-volume histogram constraints.

The use of mixed-integer programming for inverse treatment planning with pre-defined field segments.

Complex intensity patterns generated by traditional beamlet-based inverse treatment plans are often very difficult to deliver. In the approach presented in this work the intensity maps are controlled by pre-defining field segments to be used for dose optimization. A set of simple rules was used to define a pool of allowable delivery segments and the mixed-integer programming (MIP) method was used to optimize segment weights. The optimization problem was formulated by combining real variables describing segment, weights with a set of binary variables, used to enumerate voxels in targets and critical structures. The MIP method was compared to the previously used Cimmino projection algorithm. The field segmentation approach was compared to an inverse planning system with a traditional beamlet-based beam intensity optimization. In four complex cases of oropharyngeal cancer the segmental inverse planning produced treatment plans, which competed with traditional beamlet-based IMRT plans. The mixed-integer programming provided mechanism for imposition of dose-volume constraints and allowed for identification of the optimal solution for feasible problems. Additional advantages of the segmental technique presented here are: simplified dosimetry, quality assurance and treatment delivery.