Task Group 101 of the AAPM has prepared this report for medical physicists, clinicians, and therapists in order to outline the best practice guidelines for the external-beam radiation therapy technique referred to as stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). The task group report includes a review of the literature to identify reported clinical findings and expected outcomes for this treatment modality. Information is provided for establishing a SBRT program, including protocols, equipment, resources, and QA procedures. Additionally, suggestions for developing consistent documentation for prescribing, reporting, and recording SBRT treatment delivery is provided.

Purpose Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a widely used tool for prospectively evaluating safety and reliability. We report our experiences in applying FMEA in the setting of radiation oncology. Methods and Materials We performed an FMEA analysis for our external beam radiation therapy service, which consisted of the following tasks: (1) create a visual map of the process, (2) identify possible failure modes; assign risk probability numbers (RPN) to each failure mode based on tabulated scores for the severity, frequency of occurrence, and detectability, each on a scale of 1 to 10; and (3) identify improvements that are both feasible and effective. The RPN scores can span a range of 1 to 1000, with higher scores indicating the relative importance of a given failure mode. Results Our process map consisted of 269 different nodes. We identified 127 possible failure modes with RPN scores ranging from 2 to 160. Fifteen of the top-ranked failure modes were considered for process improvements, representing RPN scores of 75 and more. These specific improvement suggestions were incorporated into our practice with a review and implementation by each department team responsible for the process. Conclusions The FMEA technique provides a systematic method for finding vulnerabilities in a process before they result in an error. The FMEA framework can naturally incorporate further quantification and monitoring. A general-use system for incident and near miss reporting would be useful in this regard.

The paper reports an important achievement in MRI instrumentation, a pneumatic, fully actuated robot located within the scanner alongside the patient and operating under remote control based on the images. Previous MRI robots commonly used piezoelectric actuation limiting their compatibility. Pneumatics is an ideal choice for MRI compatibility because it is decoupled from electromagnetism, but pneumatic actuators were hardly controllable. This achievement was possible due to a recent technology breakthrough, the invention of a new type of pneumatic motor, PneuStep (1), designed for the robot reported here with uncompromised MRI compatibility, highprecision, and medical safety. MrBot is one of the "MRI stealth" robots today (the second is described in this issue by Zangos et al.). Both of these systems are also multi-imager compatible, being able to operate with the imager of choice or cross-imaging modalities. For MRI compatibility the robot is exclusively constructed of nonmagnetic and dielectric materials such as plastics, ceramics, crystals, rubbers and is electricity free. Light-based encoding is used for feedback, so that all electric components are distally located outside the imager's room. MRI robots are modern, digital medical instruments in line with advanced imaging equipment and methods. These allow for accessing patients within closed bore scanners and performing interventions under direct (in scanner) imaging feedback. MRI robots could allow e.g. to biopsy small lesions imaged with cutting edge cancer imaging methods, or precisely deploy localized therapy at cancer foci. Our robot is the first to show the feasibility of fully automated in-scanner interventions. It is customized for the prostate and operates transperineally for needle interventions. It can accommodate various needle drivers for different percutaneous procedures such as biopsy, thermal ablations, or brachytherapy. The first needle driver is customized for fully automated low-dose radiation seed brachytherapy. This paper gives an introduction to the challenges of MRI robot compatibility and presents the solutions adopted in making the MrBot. Its multi-imager compatibility and other preclinical tests are included. The robot shows the technical feasibility of MRI-guided prostate interventions, yet its clinical utility is still to be determined.

Purpose To characterize the effect of a prostate-rectum spacer on dose to rectum during external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer, and to assess for factors correlated with rectal dose reduction. Materials and methods Fifty-two patients at 4 institutions were enrolled onto a prospective pilot clinical trial. Patients underwent baseline scans, then were injected with perirectal spacing hydrogel and re-scanned. IMRT plans were created on both scans for comparison. Objectives were to establish rates of creation of ≥7.5mm of prostate-rectal separation, and decrease in rectal V70 of ≥25%. Multiple regression analysis was performed to evaluate associations between pre- vs. post-injection changes in rectal V70 and changes in plan conformity, rectal volume, bladder volume, bladder V70, PTV volume, as well as post-injection mid-gland separation, gel volume, gel thickness, length of PTV/gel contact, or gel left-to-right symmetry. Results Hydrogel resulted in ≥ 7.5mm prostate-rectal separation in 95.8% of patients; 95.7% had decreased rectal V70 of ≥ 25%, with mean reduction of 8.0 Gy. There were no significant differences in pre- and post-injection prostate, PTV, rectal, and bladder volumes. Plan conformities were significantly different pre- vs. post-injection (P = 0.02); plans with worse conformity indexes post-injection compared to pre-injection (n=13) still had improvements in rectal V70. In multiple regression analysis, greater post-injection reduction in V70 was associated with decreased relative post-injection plan conformity (P=0.01). Reductions in V70 did not significantly vary by institution, despite significant inter-institutional variations in plan conformity. There were no significant relationships between reduction in V70 and the other characteristics analyzed. Conclusions Injection of hydrogel into prostate-rectal interface resulted in dose reductions to rectum for > 90% of patients treated. Rectal sparing was statistically significant across a range of 10–75 Gy, and was demonstrated within the presence of significant inter-institutional variability in plan conformity, target definitions, and injection results.

No abstract