Faculty Bibliography

Purpose: Patients receiving myeloablative total body irradiation (TBI) doses >= 12Gy are at risk of developing interstitial pneumonitis. At our institution, TBI transitioned from extended distance opposed Laterals to image-guided VMAT, in an effort to improve coverage while sparing lungs and kidneys. This work presents a dosimetric comparison between 3D Laterals and VMAT.
Method(s): Nine patients were treated with VMAT as part of an ongoing phase II single-arm clinical trial. VMAT patients were CT-simulated supine, with thermoplastic masks for head/neck, chest/abdomen/pelvis and feet. VMAT planning (12Gy (n=6) or 13.2Gy (n=3) in 8-BID fractions) utilizes 6MV multi-isocentric arcs and AP/PA beams to treat the upper and lower body, respectively. Ten 3D Lateral patients were CT-simulated supine with arms positioned/immobilized for lung shielding, with rice compensation between legs/feet. Laterals plan (12Gy in 8-BID fractions) uses 15MV, beam spoiler, head compensation, and subfields to maintain coverage and mean-lungs dose <10.5Gy. Target (Body-5mm, extending 3mm into lungs and kidneys for VMAT; Body-2cm for Laterals) coverage was evaluated at V100%, and D98% (percentage of Rx). Absolute dose to lungs and kidneys were reportedResults: Median Target V100% and D98% for VMAT was 93.2% (Range: 95.6% to 92.1%) and 90.2% (94.3% to 88.3%), whereas for Laterals V100% and D98% was 57.3% (66.5% to 46.3%) and 80.6% (75.5% to 84%). The median Lung mean dose was 7.6Gy (7.3Gy to 7.9Gy) for VMAT. The median mean dose to kidney was 10.4Gy (10.1Gy to 10.7Gy) for VMAT, and 12.5Gy (11.9Gy to 13.5Gy) for Laterals.
Conclusion(s): We have established a VMAT-TBI program for patients requiring myeloablative irradiation. Improvement in target coverage is demonstrated by V100% and D98%, while reducing the mean dose to the lungs significantly from 10.5Gy to 8Gy

Purpose: In-vivo dosimetry for conventional total body irradiation (TBI) utilize point detectors placed along the patient surface to confirm the delivered dose matches prescription dose. However, in the volumetrically modulated arc therapy (VMAT) approach to TBI, the electronic portal imager device (EPID) can be utilized to acquire a 2-dimensional transmission fluence plane. This work explores the relationship between patient setup accuracy with transit in-vivo dosimetry.
Method(s): A total of 192 fields were investigated. Each VMAT plan consisted of four isocenters: head, chest, abdomen, and pelvis. Prior to treatment, the patient was imaged at the head, pelvis, and chest. Optimal couch shifts were determined for each isocenter under image guidance. The optimal IGRT shifts were determined using an inhouse application that minimized dose deviation using criteria established through plan uncertainty analysis performed in Eclipse. Translational couch residuals were recorded and defined as the difference in the global shift calculated and the optimal couch position with shifts. Transit dosimetry was measured per arc, and analyzed using SNC PerFRACTION with a gamma criteria of 10%/5mm, 5%/5mm, and 5%/7mm.
Result(s): Based on plan uncertainty analysis, clinical threshold for couch residuals were set to 7 mm (5 mm for chest isocenter) as there would be minimal impact on target coverage and organ sparing at those levels. Transit dosimetry showed that the average pass rate across all fields was 99.6%, 97.0%, and 99.2% for 10%/5mm, 5%/5mm, and 5%/7mm gamma criteria, respectively. Pearson correlation tests showed that there was weak correlation between gamma criteria and couch residuals. At stringent 3%/5mm gamma criteria, moderate correlation was found between lateral couch residuals for the head and chest and the head and chest arc analysis.
Conclusion(s): Transit dosimetry showed high pass rates using our couch residual tolerances, which confirmed the plan uncertainty analysis performed during treatment planning

The purpose of this work is to establish an automated approach for a multiple isocenter volumetric arc therapy (VMAT)-based TBI treatment planning approach. Five anonymized full-body CT imaging sets were used. A script was developed to automate and standardize the treatment planning process using the Varian Eclipse v15.6 Scripting API. The script generates two treatment plans: a head-first VMAT-based plan for upper body coverage using four isocenters and a total of eight full arcs; and a feet-first AP/PA plan with three isocenters that covers the lower extremities of the patient. PTV was the entire body cropped 5 mm from the patient surface and extended 3 mm into the lungs and kidneys. Two plans were generated for each case: one to a total dose of 1200 cGy in 8 fractions and a second one to a total dose of 1320 cGy in 8 fractions. Plans were calculated using the AAA algorithm and 6 MV photon energy. One plan was created and delivered to an anthropomorphic phantom containing 12 OSLDs for in-vivo dose verification. For the plans prescribed to 1200 cGy total dose the following dosimetric results were achieved: median PTV V100% = 94.5%; median PTV D98% = 89.9%; median lungs Dmean = 763 cGy; median left kidney Dmean = 1058 cGy; and median right kidney Dmean = 1051 cGy. For the plans prescribed to 1320 cGy total dose the following dosimetric results were achieved: median PTV V100% = 95.0%; median PTV D98% = 88.7%; median lungs Dmean = 798 cGy; median left kidney Dmean = 1059 cGy; and median right kidney Dmean = 1064 cGy. Maximum dose objective was met for all cases. The dose deviation between the treatment planning dose and the dose measured by the OSLDs was within ±4%. In summary, we have demonstrated that scripting can produce high-quality plans based on predefined dose objectives and can decrease planning time by automatic target and optimization contours generation, plan creation, field and isocenter placement, and optimization objectives setup.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The treatment couch position of a patient in external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is usually acquired during initial treatment setup. This procedure has shown potential failure modes leading to near misses and adverse events in radiation treatment. This study aims to develop a method to automatically determine the couch position before setting up a patient for initial treatment. METHODS:The Qfix couch-tops (kVue and DoseMax) have embedded reference marks (BBs) indicating its index levels and couch centerline. With the ESAPI, a C# script was programmed to automatically find the couch-top and embedded BBs in the planning CT and derive the treatment couch position according to treatment isocenter of a plan. Couch positions of EBRT plans with the kVue couch-top and SBRT plans using the DoseMax were calculated using the script. The calculation was evaluated by comparing calculated positions with couch coordinates captured during the initial treatment setup after image guidance. The calculations were further compared with daily treatment couch positions post image-guided adjustment for each treatment fraction. RESULTS:For plans using the kVue couch-top for various treatment sites, the median (5-95 percentiles) differences between calculated and captured couch positions were 0.1 (-0.2 - 0.9), 0.5 (-1.1-2.0), 0.10 (-1.3-1.3) cm in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral direction respectively. For the DoseMax couch-top, the median differences were 0.1 (-0.2-0.7), 0.2 (-0.3-1.1), and 0.2 (-0.7-0.9) cm in respective direction. The calculated positions were within 1 and 2 cm from the mean fraction positions for 95% patients on DoseMax and kVue couch-top respectively. CONCLUSIONS:A method that automatically and accurately calculates treatment couch position from simulation CT was implemented in Varian Eclipse for Qfix couch-tops. This technique increases the efficiency of patient setup and enhances patient safety by reducing the risks of positioning errors.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Routine quality assurance (QA) of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans used for image-guided radiotherapy is prescribed by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group (TG)-142 report. For CBCT image quality, TG-142 recommends using clinically established baseline values as QA tolerances. This work examined how image quality parameters vary both across machines of the same model and across different CBCT techniques. Additionally, this work investigated how image quality values are affected by imager recalibration and repeated exposures during routine QA. METHODS:Cone-beam computed tomography scans of the Catphan 604 phantom were taken on four TrueBeam® and one Edge™ linear accelerator using four manufacturer-provided techniques. TG-142 image quality parameters were calculated for each CBCT scan using SunCHECK Machine™. The variability of each parameter with machine and technique was evaluated using a two-way ANOVA test on a dataset consisting of 200 CBCT scans. The impact of imager calibration on image quality parameters was examined for a subset of three machines using an unpaired Student's t-test. The effect of artifacts appearing on CBCTs taken in rapid succession was characterized and an approach to reduce their appearance was evaluated. Additionally, a set of baselines and tolerances for all image quality metrics was presented. RESULTS:All imaging parameters except geometric distortion varied with technique (P < 0.05) and all imaging parameters except slice thickness varied with machine (P < 0.05). Imager calibration can change the expected value of all imaging parameters, though it does not consistently do so. While changes are statistically significant, they may not be clinically significant. Finally, rapid acquisition of CBCT scans can introduce image artifacts that degrade CBCT uniformity. CONCLUSIONS:This work characterized the variability of acquired CBCT data across machines and CBCT techniques along with the impact of imager calibration and rapid CBCT acquisition on image quality.

The purpose of this feasibility study is to develop a fully automated procedure capable of generating treatment plans with multiple fractionation schemes to improve speed, robustness, and standardization of plan quality. A fully automated script was implemented for spinal stereotactic radiosurgery/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SRS/SBRT) plan generation using Eclipse v15.6 API. The script interface allows multiple dose/fractionation plan requests, planning target volume (PTV) expansions, as well as information regarding distance/overlap between spinal cord and targets to drive decision-making. For each requested plan, the script creates the course, plans, field arrangements, and automatically optimizes and calculates dose. The script was retrospectively applied to ten computed tomography (CT) scans of previous cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine SBRT patients. Three plans were generated for each patient - simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) 1800/1600 cGy to gross tumor volume (GTV)/PTV in one fraction; SIB 2700/2100 cGy to GTV/PTV in three fractions; and 3000 cGy to PTV in five fractions. Plan complexity and deliverability patient-specific quality assurance (QA) was performed using ArcCHECK with an Exradin A16 chamber inserted. Dose objectives were met for all organs at risk (OARs) for each treatment plan. Median target coverage was GTV V100% = 87.3%, clinical target volume (CTV) V100% = 95.7% and PTV V100% = 88.0% for single fraction plans; GTV V100% = 95.6, CTV V100% = 99.6% and PTV V100% = 97.2% for three fraction plans; and GTV V100% = 99.6%, CTV V100% = 99.1% and PTV V100% = 97.2% for five fraction plans. All plans (n = 30) passed patient-specific QA (>90%) at 2%/2 mm global gamma. A16 chamber dose measured at isocenter agreed with planned dose within 3% for all cases. Automatic planning for spine SRS/SBRT through scripting increases efficiency, standardizes plan quality and approach, and provides a tool for target coverage comparison of different fractionation schemes without the need for additional resources.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study is to quantify dosimetric changes throughout the delivery of oropharyngeal cancer treatment and to investigate the application of statistical process control (SPC) for the management of significant deviations during the course of radiotherapy. METHODS:Thirteen oropharyngeal cancer patients with daily cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) were retrospectively reviewed. Cone beam computed tomography images of every other fraction were imported to the Velocity software and registered to planning CT using the 6 DOF (degrees of freedom) couch shifts generated during patient setup. Using Velocity "Adaptive Monitoring" module, the setup-corrected CBCT was matched to planning CT using a deformable registration. Volumes and dose metrics at each fraction were calculated and rated with plan values to evaluate interfractional dosimetric variations using a SPC framework. T-tests between plan and fraction volumes were performed to find statistically insignificant fractions. Average upper and lower process capacity limits (UCL, LCL) of each dose metric were derived from these fractions using conventional SPC guidelines. RESULTS:Gross tumor volume (GTV) and organ at risk (OAR) volumes in the first 13 fractions had no significant changes from the pretreatment planning CT. The GTV and the parotid glands subsequently decreased by 10% at the completion of treatment. There were 3-4% increases in parotid mean doses, but no significant differences in dose metrics of GTV and other OARs. The changes were organ and patient dependent. Control charts for various dose metrics were generated to assess the metrics at each fraction for individual patient. CONCLUSIONS:Daily CBCT could be used to monitor dosimetric variations of targets and OARs resulting from volume changes and tissue deformation in oropharyngeal cancer radiotherapy. Treatment review with the guidance of a SPC tool allows for an objective and consistent clinical decision to apply adaptive radiotherapy.