A survey of medical dosimetrists' perceptions of efficiency and consistency of auto-contouring software.

Although auto-contouring methods were created to reduce the workload for the radiation oncology team, concern lies in whether auto-contouring can improve efficiency regarding generated contours of a treatment plan. Researchers have measured differences between auto-contouring algorithms and manual contour methods specific to the contouring of organs at risk (OAR). The problem lies in the paucity of literature specific to perceptions of auto-contouring and the impact on workflow efficiency. The purpose of this study was to measure medical dosimetrists' perceptions of how auto-contouring software impacts the treatment planning process. To measure perceptions, researchers surveyed medical dosimetrists about their perspectives on consistency and efficiency of auto-contouring during treatment planning. A (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) survey was created based on the 2 research questions in this study. The survey was distributed through email to 2598 full members of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists (AAMD) who were certified by the MDCB; mostly medical dosimetrists but also included a small group of medical physicists. The email open rate was 39% (1024/2598) but the response rate for those who read the email was only 8.4% (86/1024). Of the survey respondents, 67% (59/86) used auto-contouring software; thus, eligible to complete the remainder of the survey. Majority of participants agreed that auto-contouring software decreases time spent contouring per patient; however, most agreed that manual contouring is more efficient. Therefore, it was inferred that a combination of both auto and manual contouring have an impact on workload efficiency.

Minimizing clearance issues with prone breast patients on Varian linear accelerators through isocenter placement.

The prone position is frequently used for breast irradiation in an effort to minimize dose to normal tissue and reduce skin toxicities. Immobilization required for prone breast irradiation can cause collision issues with the linear accelerator, disrupting treatment and negatively affecting the patient experience. The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine if an isocenter location guideline could be developed to prevent collisions with the prone breast immobilization device and gantry head, while still creating a clinically acceptable treatment plan. Clearance isocenter guidelines were established by measuring clearance between the Civco Horizon breast board and Varian linear accelerator. Fourteen patients with known clearance issues at a single institution were selected for this study and re-planned using clearance isocenter guidelines. Collision plans were compared to clearance plans created within the established clearance threshold through the institutions breast treatment guidelines based on arm II of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 1005 recommendations. Researchers in this study demonstrated clinical relevance by establishing that a clearance isocenter location guideline can be developed to prevent collisions with the prone breast immobilization and gantry head, while still creating a clinically acceptable treatment plan.

A case study of evaluating bilateral lung dose for VMAT treatment planning using a partial sagittal arc.

Radiation pneumonitis (RP) is a potential toxic side effect of thoracic radiotherapy. Optimal planning techniques must maintain tumor coverage while limiting dose to normal lung tissue to reduce the risk of patients developing RP. The addition of a noncoplanar arc may be beneficial by increasing treatment angles and providing an ideal dose distribution for tumor coverage while decreasing dose to organs at risk (OAR). The purpose of this research was to compare the effects on the normal bilateral lung tissue receiving 20 Gy, 10 Gy and 5 Gy (V20, V10, V5) and the mean lung dose (MLD) values when medial lung tumors are treated with 3 partial coplanar arcs vs 2 partial coplanar arcs combined with a partial sagittal arc. Researchers hypothesized that a beam arrangement of 2 partial coplanar arcs and 1 partial sagittal arc would reduce V20, V10, V5, and MLD values when compared to a 3 partial coplanar arc plan. In a retrospective study of 5 patients with bulky, medial right lung lesions without nodal involvement, cases were planned with both a noncoplanar and a coplanar arc geometry. Results were evaluated using a two-tailed t-test to determine the statistical significance (p < 0.05) of changes to total lung volume analyzation metrics when a noncoplanar sagittal arc was incorporated compared to the standard lung treatment using only coplanar arcs. Although some patient cases showed minor improvement in the V20, V10, V5, and MLD metrics, the study results were not statistically significant and showed no advantage with the introduction of an anterior sagittal arc over a coplanar beam arrangement.

Incidence of work related musculoskeletal disorders in medical dosimetry.

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) account for almost 70 million physician office visits per year in the United States and are the most common workplace injuries. These are conditions involving the nerves, tendons, muscles, and supporting structures of the body. Previous studies have concluded that computer users are at high risk of developing work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSDs). As computer users, medical dosimetrists are at risk of developing WRMSDs, yet there is a lack of information regarding the incidence of WRMSDs among medical dosimetrists. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of WRMSDs and variables of workstation ergonomics that contribute to the increased risk of WRMSDs in medical dosimetrists. A Qualtrics survey was created to support the 3 research questions guiding this study. The survey was distributed to 2,646 full members of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists (AAMD), which included only certified medical dosimetrists (CMDs), via email. The distribution of email surveys sent through the AAMD email distribution list resulted in 988 emails opened, for a contact rate of 37% (988/2646). One hundred sixty-four responses were recorded yielding a completion rate of 17% (164/988). Fifty-five percent (90/163) of participants responded that they have experienced WRMSDs. Forty-four percent (289/652) of responses indicated WRMSDs have a slight or moderate interference on work. Sixty-two percent (94/152) of participants felt that their workstations were not ergonomically designed; even greater 68% (104/153) did not feel their workstations were designed for their individually needs. Of those respondents 64% (98/152) would like to see further adaptations made to their workspaces.

Evaluation of fluence-smoothing feature for three IMRT planning systems.

Commercially available intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) inverse treatment planning systems (ITPS) typically include a smoothing function which allows the user to vary the complexity of delivered beam fluence patterns. This study evaluated the behavior of three ITPSs when varying smoothing parameters. We evaluated four cases treated with IMRT in our clinic: sinonasal carcinoma (SNC), glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), base of tongue carcinoma (BOT), and prostate carcinoma (PST). Varian Eclipse v6.5, BrainLAB BrainScan v5.31, and Nomos Corvus v6.2 ITPSs were studied for the SNC, GBM, and PST sites. Only Eclipse and Corvus were studied for BOT due to field size constraints of the BrainLAB MM3 collimator. For each ITPS, plans were first optimized using vendor- recommended default "smoothing" values. Treatment plans were then reoptimized, exploring various smoothing values. Key metrics recorded included a delivery complexity (DC) metric and the Ian Paddick Conformality Index (IPCI). Results varied widely by vendor with regard to the impact of smoothing on complexity and conformality. Plans run on the Corvus ITPS showed the logically anticipated increase in DC as smoothing was decreased, along with associated improved organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing. Both Eclipse and BrainScan experienced an expected trend for increased DC as smoothing was decreased. However, this increase did not typically result in appreciably improved OAR sparing. For Eclipse and Corvus, and to a much lesser extent BrainScan, increases in smoothing decreased DC but eventually caused unacceptable losses in plan quality. Depending on the ITPS, potential benefits from optimizing fluence smoothing levels can be significant, allowing for increases in either efficiency or conformality. Because of variability in smoothing function behavior by ITPS, it is important that users familiarize themselves with the effects of varying smoothing parameters for their respective ITPS. Based on experience gained here, we provide recommended workflows for each ITPS to best exploit the fluence-smoothing features of the system.

A retrospective evaluation of mixed energy volumetric modulated arc therapy for anal cancers with lymph node involvement.

Applying dual, or mixed photon energies during radiation therapy is a common practice in 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). Mixed photon energies are used to provide uniform dose coverage to a planning target volume (PTV) that ranges in depth from the skin surface. Though the application of mixed photon energies in 3D-CRT was once the convention for treating anal cancers with lymph node involvement (AC-LNI), the advantages offered by volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) prove to be the optimal form of therapy for AC-LNI. Recently, multiple researchers have uncovered benefits in employing multiple photon energies in VMAT planning for prostate cancer. A retrospective study was completed to assess the impact of implementing mixed energy VMAT planning in comparison to conventional single energy VMAT planning for AC-LNI. Data from 20 patients with AC-LNI was collected to analyze the dosimetric effects of mixed energy VMAT treatments in terms of PTV conformity index, PTV homogeneity index, monitor unit usage, and organs at risk sparing. For each patient 3 treatment plans were created: a single energy 6 MV plan, a single energy 10 MV plan, and a mixed 6 MV and 10 MV energy plan. Analysis of the resulting dosimetric outcomes showed statistical significance. The current study concluded that mixed energy VMAT plans have some effect on treating AC-LNI when compared to single energy VMAT plans.

Pitfalls in normalization for intensity-modulated radiation therapy planning.

Three-dimensional (3D) treatment planning often involves complex combinations of beam energies, treatment fields, and beam modifying devices. Even when a plan is devised that meets many treatment-planning objectives, limitations in the planner's ability to further adjust beam characteristics may require the radiation dose prescription to be normalized to an isodose level that best covers the target volume. While these normalizations help meet the volume coverage goals, they also result in adjustment of the dose delivered to the normal tissues and must be carefully evaluated. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning allows combinations of complex dose patterns, in order to achieve the desired treatment planning goals. These dose patterns are created by defining a set of treatment planning objectives and then allowing the treatment planning computer to create intensity patterns, through the use of moving multileaf collimation that will meet the requested goals. Often, when an IMRT treatment plan is created that meets many of the treatment planning goals but falls short of volume coverage requirements, the planner is tempted to apply normalization principles similar to those utilized with 3D treatment planning. Again, these normalizations help meet the volume coverage goals, but unlike 3D planning situations, may result in avoidable delivery of additional doses to the normal tissues. The focus of this study is to evaluate the effect of application of normalization for IMRT planning using multiple patient situations. Recommendations would favor re-optimization over normalization in most planning situations.

IMRT fluence map editing to control hot and cold spots.

Manually editing intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) fluence maps effectively controls hot and cold spots that the IMRT optimization cannot control. Many times, re-optimizing does not reduce the hot spots or increase the cold spots. In fact, re-optimizing only places the hot and cold spots in different locations. Fluence-map editing provides manual control of dose delivery and provides the best treatment plan possible. Several IMRT treatments were planned using the Varian Eclipse planning system. We compare the effects on dose distributions between fluence-map editing and re-optimization, discuss techniques for fluence-map editing, and analyze differences between fluence editing on one beam vs. multiple beams. When editing a beam's fluence map, it is essential to choose a beam that least affects dose to the tumor and critical structures. Editing fluence maps gives an advantage in treatment planning and provides controlled delivery of IMRT dose.

Optimization of collimator parameters to reduce rectal dose in intensity-modulated prostate treatment planning.

The inability to avoid rectal wall irradiation has been a limiting factor in prostate cancer treatment planning. Treatment planners must not only consider the maximum dose that the rectum receives throughout a course of treatment, but also the dose that any volume of the rectum receives. As treatment planning techniques have evolved and prescription doses have escalated, limitations of rectal dose have remained an area of focus. External pelvic immobilization devices have been incorporated to aid in daily reproducibility and lessen concern for daily patient motion. Internal immobilization devices (such as the intrarectal balloon) and visualization techniques (including daily ultrasound or placement of fiducial markers) have been utilized to reduce the uncertainty of intrafractional prostate positional variation, thus allowing for minimization of treatment volumes. Despite these efforts, prostate volumes continue to abut portions of the rectum, and the necessary volume expansions continue to include portions of the anterior rectal wall within high-dose regions. The addition of collimator parameter optimization (both collimator angle and primary jaw settings) to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) allows greater rectal sparing compared to the use of IMRT alone. We use multiple patient examples to illustrate the positive effects seen when utilizing collimator parameter optimization in conjunction with IMRT to further reduce rectal doses.

Optimization of the primary collimator settings for fractionated IMRT stereotactic radiotherapy.

Advances in field-shaping techniques for stereotactic radiosurgery/radiotherapy have allowed dynamic adjustment of field shape with gantry rotation (dynamic conformal arc) in an effort to minimize dose to critical structures. Recent work evaluated the potential for increased sparing of dose to normal tissues when the primary collimator setting is optimized to only the size necessary to cover the largest shape of the dynamic micro multi leaf field. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is now a treatment option for patients receiving stereotactic radiotherapy treatments. This multisegmentation of the dose delivered through multiple fixed treatment fields provides for delivery of uniform dose to the tumor volume while allowing sparing of critical structures, particularly for patients whose tumor volumes are less suited for rotational treatment. For these segmented fields, the total number of monitor units (MUs) delivered may be much greater than the number of MUs required if dose delivery occurred through an unmodulated treatment field. As a result, undesired dose delivered, as leakage through the leaves to tissues outside the area of interest, will be proportionally increased. This work will evaluate the role of optimization of the primary collimator setting for these IMRT treatment fields, and compare these results to treatment fields where the primary collimator settings have not been optimized.

The application of dynamic field shaping and dynamic dose rate control in conformal rotational treatment of the prostate.

The current philosophy of dose escalation in the treatment of prostate cancer has forced the treatment planner to re-evaluate his/her planning approach. Precise and accurate delivery of dose to the prostate while maintaining the required dose limits to the normal critical structures, such as the rectum, has become increasingly difficult in light of these escalated doses. Conformal treatment techniques allow the treatment planner to precisely shape each individual treatment field so that desired volume coverage and normal tissue sparing can be achieved. In addition to these beam-shaping advantages, adjustment of an individual beam's weighting also helps to create the desired distribution and tissue sparing. Rotational therapy "simulates" treatment with multiple beams and angles, similar to the thought process behind conformal treatment technique. With rotational therapy, however, the treatment planner's inability to provide adequate beam shaping and weighting adjustment has placed limits on its value as a viable planning option. The introduction of computer-controlled treatment machines, which allow dynamic adjustment of the field shape with the rotation of the beam, makes it possible to re-evaluate rotational therapy as a potential option. Similarly, the treatment planner's ability to change field weighting can be accomplished by the application of dynamic dose rate control, allowing a rotational beam to deliver a weighting similar to that possible with conformal fixed-field techniques. Dose-volume histogram data will be used to evaluate doses delivered to the prostate, rectum, and bladder using rotational therapy with dynamic field shape and dynamic dose rate control as a treatment planning option. The dose delivery and normal tissue-sparing potential of this technique compared to coplanar and noncoplanar conformal fixed-field techniques will also be presented.

Intensity-modulated photon arc therapy for treatment of pleural mesothelioma.

Radiotherapy plays a key role in the definitive or adjuvant management of patients with mesothelioma of the pleural surface. Many patients are referred for radiation with intact lung following biopsy or subtotal pleurectomy. Delivery of efficacious doses of radiation to the pleural lining while avoiding lung parenchyma toxicity has been a difficult technical challenge. Using opposed photon fields produce doses in lung that result in moderate-to-severe pulmonary toxicity in 100% of patients treated. Combined photon-electron beam treatment, at total doses of 4250 cGy to the pleural surface, results in two-thirds of the lung volume receiving over 2100 cGy. We have developed a technique using intensity-modulated photon arc therapy (IMRT) that significantly improves the dose distribution to the pleural surface with concomitant decrease in dose to lung parenchyma compared to traditional techniques. IMRT treatment of the pleural lining consists of segments of photon arcs that can be intensity modulated with varying beam weights and multileaf positions to produce a more uniform distribution to the pleural surface, while at the same time reducing the overall dose to the lung itself. Computed tomography (CT) simulation is critical for precise identification of target volumes as well as critical normal structures (lung and heart). Rotational arc trajectories and individual leaf positions and weightings are then defined for each CT plane within the patient. This paper will describe the proposed rotational IMRT technique and, using simulated isodose distributions, show the improved potential for sparing of dose to the critical structures of the lung, heart, and spinal cord.

Forward planning using multileaf collimation as a replacement for patient tissue compensation.

In treatment planning, a dosimetrist may encounter a technique that would best be treated by including some type of compensation to correct for tissue or depth variations throughout the field, allowing for a more homogeneous dose distribution. Recent innovations, such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), have been introduced in an effort to address these issues. In many institutions, however, the treatment planning capabilities available may not accommodate consideration of such new technologies. The treatment planner is therefore left to determine how to incorporate these concepts with the current technologies available. While compensation may be an option, this may not always be possible due to the position of the beam or to actual mechanical restraints. Some institutions may also lack the ability and equipment to consider compensation at all. The answer is forward planning IMRT. This concept combines current forward planning techniques with multiple asymmetrically blocked treatment fields, varying the intensity of the beam from a given orientation to produce the desired treatment plan.