PurposeThe aim of this project was to design and manufacture a cost‐effective end‐to‐end (E2E) phantom for quantifying the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of a linear accelerator based, multi‐target single‐isocenter (MTSI) frameless stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) technique.MethodA perspex Multi‐Plug device from a Sun Nuclear ArcCheck phantom (Sun Nuclear, Melbourne, FL) was enhanced to make it more applicable for MTSI SRS E2E testing. The following steps in the SRS chain were then analysed using the phantom: magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) distortion, planning computed tomography (CT) scan and MRI image registration accuracy, phantom setup accuracy using CBCT, dosimetric accuracy using ion chamber, planar film dose measurements and coincidence of linear accelerator mega‐voltage (MV), and kilo‐voltage (kV) isocenters using Winston‐Lutz testing (WLT).ResultsThe dedicated E2E phantom was able to successfully quantify the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the MTSI SRS technique. MRI distortions were less than 0.5 mm, or half a voxel size. The average MRI‐CT registration accuracy was 0.15 mm (±0.31 mm), 0.20 mm (±0.16 mm), and 0.39 mm (±0.11 mm) in the superior/inferior, left/right and, anterior/posterior directions, respectively. The phantom setup accuracy using CBCT was better than 0.2 mm and 0.1°. Point dose measurements were within 5% of the treatment planning system predicted dose. The comparison of planar film doses to the planning system dose distributions, performed using gamma analysis, resulted in pass rates greater than 97% for 3%/1 mm gamma criteria. Finally, off‐axis WLT showed MV/kV coincidence to be within 1 mm for off‐axis distances up to 60 mm.ConclusionA novel, versatile and cost‐effective phantom for comprehensive E2E testing of MTSI SRS treatments was developed, incorporating multiple detector types and fiducial markers. The phantom is capable of quantifying the accuracy of each step in the MTSI SRS planning and treatment process.

No abstract

Image registration is a process that underlies many new techniques in radiation oncologyfrom multimodal imaging and contour propagation in treatment planning to dose accumulation throughout treatment. Deformable image registration (DIR) is a subset of image registration subject to high levels of complexity in process and validation. A need for local guidance to assist in high-quality utilisation and best practice was identified within the Australian community, leading to collaborative activity and workshops. This report communicates the current limitations and best practice advice from early adopters to help guide those implementing DIR in the clinic at this early stage. They are based on the state of image registration applications in radiotherapy in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ), and consensus discussions made at the 'Deforming to Best Practice' workshops in 2018. The current status of clinical application use cases is presented, including multimodal imaging, automatic segmentation, adaptive radiotherapy, retreatment, dose accumulation and response assessment, along with uptake, accuracy and limitations. Key areas of concern and preliminary suggestions for commissioning, quality assurance, education and training, and the use of automation are also reported. Many questions remain, and the radiotherapy community will benefit from continued research in this area. However, DIR is available to clinics and this report is intended to aid departments using or about to use DIR tools now.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of departmental planning techniques on appropriate in-vivo source tracking error thresholds for high dose rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy (BT) treatments, and to determine if a single in-vivo source tracking error threshold would be appropriate for the same patient anatomy. Methods: The prostate, rectum, and urethra were contoured on a single patient transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) dataset. Anonymized DICOM files were disseminated to 16 departments who created an HDR prostate BT treatment plan on the dataset with a prescription dose of 15 Gy in a single fraction. Departments were asked to follow their own local treatment planning guidelines. Source positioning errors were then simulated in the 16 treatment plans and the effect on dose-volume histogram (DVH) indices calculated. Change in DVH indices were used to determine appropriate in-vivo source tracking error thresholds. Plans were considered to require intervention if the following DVH conditions occurred: prostate V100% < 90%, urethra D0.1cc > 118%, and rectum tt Dmax > 80%. Results: There was wide variation in appropriate in-vivo source tracking error thresholds among the 16 participating departments, ranging from 1 to 6 mm. Appropriate in-vivo source tracking error thresholds were also found to depend on the direction of the source positioning error and the endpoint. A robustness parameter was derived, and found to correlate with the sensitivity of plans to source positioning errors. Conclusions: A single HDR prostate BT in-vivo source tracking error threshold cannot be applied across multiple departments, even for the same patient anatomy. The burden on in-vivo source tracking devices may be eased through improving HDR prostate BT plan robustness during the plan optimisation phase.

The doses calculated by PS and RADCALC(®) for uniformly loaded ROPES plaques in full and uniform scattering conditions were validated by the EBT3 film measurements. The stainless steel plaque backing was observed to decrease the measured dose by 4%. Through the introduction of a scalar correction factor (0.96) in PS, the dose homogeneity effect of the stainless steel plaque backing was found to agree with the measured EBT3 film measurements.

Objectives: Rigid image registration (RIR) and deformable image registration (DIR) are widely used in radiotherapy. This project aims to capture current international approaches to image registration. Methods: A survey was designed to identify variations in use, resources, implementation, and decision-making criteria for clinical image registration. This was distributed to radiotherapy centers internationally in 2018. Results: There were 57 responses internationally, from the Americas (46%), Australia/New Zealand (32%), Europe (12%), and Asia (10%). Rigid image registration and DIR were used clinically for computed tomography (CT)-CT registration (96% and 51%, respectively), followed by CT-PET (81% and 47%), CT-CBCT (84% and 19%), CT-MR (93% and 19%), MR-MR (49% and 5%), and CT-US (9% and 0%). Respondent centers performed DIR using dedicated software (75%) and treatment planning systems (29%), with 84% having some form of DIR software. Centers have clinically implemented DIR for atlas-based segmentation (47%), multi-modality treatment planning (65%), and dose deformation (63%). The clinical use of DIR for multimodality treatment planning and accounting for retreatments was considered to have the highest benefit-to-risk ratio (69% and 67%, respectively). Conclusions: This survey data provides useful insights on where, when, and how image registration has been implemented in radiotherapy centers around the world. DIR is mainly in clinical use for CT-CT (51%) and CT-PET (47%) for the head and neck (43-57% over all use cases) region. The highest benefit-risk ratio for clinical use of DIR was for multi-modality treatment planning and accounting for retreatments, which also had higher clinical use than for adaptive radiotherapy and atlasbased segmentation.

PurposeThis study aims to assess the accuracy of source position verification during high‐dose rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy using a novel, in‐house developed two‐dimensional (2D) diode array (the Magic Plate), embedded exactly below the patient within a carbon fiber couch. The effect of tissue inhomogeneities on source localization accuracy is examined.MethodMonte Carlo (MC) simulations of 12 source positions from a HDR prostate brachytherapy treatment were performed using the Geant4 toolkit. An Ir‐192 Flexisource (Isodose Control, Veenendaal, the Netherlands) was simulated inside a voxelized patient geometry, and the dose deposited in each detector of the Magic Plate evaluated. The dose deposited in each detector was then used to localize the source position using a proprietary reconstruction algorithm.ResultsThe accuracy of source position verification using the Magic Plate embedded in the patient couch was found to be affected by the tissue inhomogeneities within the patient, with an average difference of 2.1 ± 0.8 mm (k = 1) between the Magic Plate predicted and known source positions. Recalculation of the simulations with all voxels assigned a density of water improved this verification accuracy to within 1 mm.ConclusionSource position verification using the Magic Plate during a HDR prostate brachytherapy treatment was examined using MC simulations. In a homogenous geometry (water), the Magic Plate was able to localize the source to within 1 mm, however, the verification accuracy was negatively affected by inhomogeneities; this can be corrected for by using density information obtained from CT, making the proposed tool attractive for use as a real‐time in vivo quality assurance (QA) device in HDR brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

PurposeInverse planning simulated annealing (IPSA) optimized brachytherapy treatment plans are characterized with large isolated dwell times at the first or last dwell position of each catheter. The potential of catheter shifts relative to the target and organs at risk in these plans may lead to a more significant change in delivered dose to the volumes of interest relative to plans with more uniform dwell times.Material and methodsThis study aims to determine if the Nucletron Oncentra dwell time deviation constraint (DTDC) parameter can be optimized to improve the robustness of high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy plans to catheter displacements. A set of 10 clinically acceptable prostate plans were re-optimized with a DTDC parameter of 0 and 0.4. For each plan, catheter displacements of 3, 7, and 14 mm were retrospectively applied and the change in dose volume histogram (DVH) indices and conformity indices analyzed.ResultsThe robustness of clinically acceptable prostate plans to catheter displacements in the caudal direction was found to be dependent on the DTDC parameter. A DTDC value of 0 improves the robustness of planning target volume (PTV) coverage to catheter displacements, whereas a DTDC value of 0.4 improves the robustness of the plans to changes in hotspots.ConclusionsThe results indicate that if used in conjunction with a pre-treatment catheter displacement correction protocol and a tolerance of 3 mm, a DTDC value of 0.4 may produce clinically superior plans. However, the effect of the DTDC parameter in plan robustness was not observed to be as strong as initially suspected.