The introduction of advanced techniques and technology in radiotherapy has greatly improved our ability to deliver highly conformal tumor doses while minimizing the dose to adjacent organs at risk. Despite these tremendous improvements, there remains a general concern about doses to normal tissues that are not the target of the radiation treatment; any "nontarget" radiation should be minimized as it offers no therapeutic benefit. As patients live longer after treatment, there is increased opportunity for late effects including second cancers and cardiac toxicity to manifest. Complicating the management of these issues, there are unique challenges with measuring, calculating, reducing, and reporting nontarget doses that many medical physicists may have limited experience with. Treatment planning systems become dramatically inaccurate outside the treatment field, necessitating a measurement or some other means of assessing the dose. However, measurements are challenging because outside the treatment field, the radiation energy spectrum, dose rate, and general shape of the dose distribution (particularly the percent depth dose) are very different and often require special consideration. Neutron dosimetry is also particularly challenging, and common errors in methodology can easily manifest as errors of several orders of magnitude. Task Group 158 was, therefore, formed to provide guidance for physicists in terms of assessing and managing nontarget doses. In particular, the report: (a) highlights major concerns with nontarget radiation; (b) provides a rough estimate of doses associated with different treatment approaches in clinical practice; (c) discusses the uses of dosimeters for measuring photon, electron, and neutron doses; (d) discusses the use of calculation techniques for dosimetric evaluations; (e) highlights techniques that may be considered for reducing nontarget doses; (f) discusses dose reporting; and (g) makes recommendations for both clinical and research practice.

IMPORTANCE Cancer treatments are associated with subsequent neoplasms in survivors of childhood cancer. It is unknown whether temporal changes in therapy are associated with changes in subsequent neoplasm risk.OBJECTIVE To quantify the association between temporal changes in treatment dosing and subsequent neoplasm risk.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective, multicenter cohort study of 5-year cancer survivors diagnosed before age 21 years from pediatric tertiary hospitals in the United States and Canada between 1970-1999, with follow-up through December 2015.EXPOSURES Radiation and chemotherapy dose changes over time.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Subsequent neoplasm 15-year cumulative incidence, cumulative burden, and standardized incidence ratios for subsequent malignancies, compared by treatment decade. Multivariable models assessed relative rates (RRs) of subsequent neoplasms by 5-year increments, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. Mediation analyses assessed whether changes in rates of subsequent neoplasms over time were mediated by treatment variable modifications. RESULTS Among 23 603 survivors of childhood cancer (mean age at diagnosis, 7.7 years; 46% female) the most common initial diagnoses were acute lymphoblastic leukemia, Hodgkin lymphoma, and astrocytoma. During a mean follow-up of 20.5 years (374 638 person-years at risk), 1639 survivors experienced 3115 subsequent neoplasms, including 1026 malignancies, 233 benign meningiomas, and 1856 nonmelanoma skin cancers. The most common subsequent malignancies were breast and thyroid cancers. Proportions of individuals receiving radiation decreased (77% for 1970s vs 33% for 1990s), as did median dose (30 Gy [interquartile range, 24-44] for 1970s vs 26 Gy [interquartile range, 18-45] for 1990s). Fifteen-year cumulative incidence of subsequent malignancies decreased by decade of diagnosis (2.1% [95% CI, 1.7%-2.4%] for 1970s, 1.7% [95% CI, 1.5%-2.0%] for 1980s, 1.3% [95% CI, 1.1%-1.5%] for 1990s). Reference absolute rates per 1000 person-years were 1.12 (95% CI, 0.84-1.57) for subsequent malignancies, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.06-0.41) for meningiomas, and 1.71 (95% CI, 0.88-3.33) for nonmelanoma skin cancers for survivors with reference characteristics (no chemotherapy, splenectomy, or radiation therapy; male; attained age 28 years). Standardized incidence ratios declined for subsequent malignancies over treatment decades, with advancing attained age. Relative rates declined with each 5-year increment for subsequent malignancies (RR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.82-0.93]; P < .001), meningiomas (RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.75-0.97]; P = .03), and nonmelanoma skin cancers (RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.67-0.84]; P < .001). Radiation dose changes were associated with reduced risk for subsequent malignancies, meningiomas, and nonmelanoma skin cancers.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among survivors of childhood cancer, the risk of subsequent malignancies at 15 years after initial cancer diagnosis remained increased for those diagnosed in the 1990s, although the risk was lower compar...

The dosimetric accuracy of treatment planning systems (TPSs) decreases for locations outside the treatment field borders. However, the true accuracy of specific TPSs for locations beyond the treatment field borders is not well documented. Our objective was to quantify the accuracy of out-of-field dose predicted by the commercially available Eclipse version 8.6 TPS (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) for a clinical treatment delivered on a Varian Clinac 2100. We calculated (in the TPS) and determined (with thermoluminescent dosimeters) doses at a total of 238 points of measurement (with distance from the field edge ranging from 3.75 to 11.25 cm). Our comparisons determined that the Eclipse TPS underestimated out-of-field doses by an average of 40% over the range of distances examined. As the distance from the treatment field increased, the TPS underestimated the dose with increasing magnitude—up to 55% at 11.25 cm from the treatment field border. These data confirm that accuracy beyond the treatment border is inadequate, and out-of-field data from TPSs should be used only with a clear understanding of this limitation. Studies that require accurate out-of-field dose should use other dose reconstruction methods, such as direct measurements or Monte Carlo calculations.

Three commercial metal artifact reduction methods were evaluated for use in computed tomography (CT) imaging in the presence of clinically realistic metal implants: Philips O-MAR, GE's monochromatic Gemstone Spectral Imaging (GSI) using dual-energy CT, and GSI monochromatic imaging with metal artifact reduction software applied (MARs). Each method was evaluated according to CT number accuracy, metal size accuracy, and streak artifact severity reduction by using several phantoms, including three anthropomorphic phantoms containing metal implants (hip prosthesis, dental fillings, and spinal fixation rods). All three methods showed varying degrees of success for the hip prosthesis and spinal fixation rod cases, while none were particularly beneficial for dental artifacts. Limitations of the methods were also observed. MARs underestimated the size of metal implants and introduced new artifacts in imaging planes beyond the metal implant when applied to dental artifacts, and both the O-MAR and MARs algorithms induced artifacts for spinal fixation rods in a thoracic phantom. Our findings suggest that all three artifact mitigation methods may benefit patients with metal implants, though they should be used with caution in certain scenarios.

Background: Treatments for childhood cancer have evolved in recent decades, with the goal of maximizing cure rates while minimizing the adverse effects of therapy. We aimed to evaluate incidence patterns of serious chronic health conditions in long-term survivors of childhood cancer across three decades of diagnosis and treatment. Methods: We used data from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, a retrospective cohort with prospective follow-up of 5-year survivors of childhood cancer diagnosed from 1970-1999 in North America. We examined the cumulative incidence of severe to fatal chronic health conditions occurring up to 20 years post-diagnosis among survivors, compared by diagnosis decade. Multivariable regression models estimated hazard ratios per diagnosis decade, and addition of treatment variables assessed whether treatment changes attenuated associations between diagnosis decade and chronic disease risk. Findings: Among 23,601 survivors (median age 28, range 5-63 years; 46% female), the 20-year cumulative incidence of at least one grade 3-5 chronic condition decreased significantly from 33·2% (95% CI, 32·0%-34·3%) in those diagnosed 1970-1979 to 29·3% (95% CI, 28·4%-30·2%, p<0·0001) in 1980-1989, and 27·5% (95% CI, 26·4%-28·6%, p=0·012 vs. 1980-1989) in 1990-1999. By comparison, the 20-year cumulative incidence of at least one grade 3-5 condition among 5,051 siblings was 4·6% (95% CI,3·9%-5·2%). The 15-year cumulative incidence of at least one grade 3-5 condition was lower for survivors diagnosed 1990-1999 compared to 1970-1979 for Hodgkin lymphoma (17·7% vs. 26·4%, p<0·0001), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (16·9% vs. 23·8%, p=0.0053), astrocytoma (30·5% vs. 47·3%, p<0·0001), Wilms tumor (11·9% vs. 17·6%, p=0·034), soft tissue sarcoma (28·3% vs. 36·5%, p=0·021), and osteosarcoma (65·6% vs. 87·5%, p<0·0001). In contrast, the 15-year cumulative incidence of at least one grade 3-5 condition was higher (1990-1999 vs. 1970-1979) for medulloblastoma/PNET (58·9% vs. 42·9%, p=0·00060) and neuroblastoma (25·0% vs. 18·0%, p=0·0045). Results were consistent with changes in treatment as a mediator of the association between diagnosis decade and risk of grade 3-5 chronic conditions for astrocytoma, Hodgkin lymphoma, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Temporal decreases were observed for endocrinopathies, subsequent malignant neoplasms, musculoskeletal conditions, and gastrointestinal conditions, while hearing loss increased. Interpretation: Our results provide novel evidence that more recently treated survivors of childhood cancer have experienced improvements in health outcomes, consistent with efforts over the same time period to modify childhood cancer treatment regimens to maximize cure while reducing risk of late effects. Continuing advances in cancer therapy offer promise of further reducing the risk of late effects. However, achieving a cure for childhood cancer continues to come at a cost for many survivors, emphasizing the importance of long-term follow-up care for this population. Funding: National Cancer Institute and t...

No abstract

Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) and optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLD) are practical, accurate, and precise tools for point dosimetry in medical physics applications. The charges of Task Group 191 were to detail the methodologies for practical and optimal luminescence dosimetry in a clinical setting. This includes: (a) to review the variety of TLD/OSLD materials available, including features and limitations of each; (b) to outline the optimal steps to achieve accurate and precise dosimetry with luminescent detectors and to evaluate the uncertainty induced when less rigorous procedures are used; (c) to develop consensus guidelines on the optimal use of luminescent dosimeters for clinical practice; and (d) to develop guidelines for special medically relevant uses of TLDs/OSLDs such as mixed photon/neutron field dosimetry, particle beam dosimetry, and skin dosimetry. While this report provides general guidelines for TLD and OSLD processes, the report provides specific details for TLD‐100 and nanoDotTM dosimeters because of their prevalence in clinical practice.

Purpose: Measurement of the absorbed dose from radiotherapy beams is an essential component of providing safe and reproducible treatment. For an energy-dependent dosimeter such as thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs), it is generally assumed that the energy spectrum is constant throughout the treatment field and is unperturbed by field size, depth, field modulation, or heterogeneities. However, this does not reflect reality and introduces error into clinical dose measurements. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the variability in the energy spectrum of a Varian 6 MV beam and to evaluate the impact of these variations in photon energy spectra on the response of a common energy-dependent dosimeter, TLD. Methods: Using Monte Carlo methods, we calculated variations in the photon energy spectra of a 6 MV beam as a result of variations of treatment parameters, including field size, measurement location, the presence of heterogeneities, and field modulation. The impact of these spectral variations on the response of the TLD is largely based on increased photoelectric effect in the dosimeter, and this impact was calculated using Burlin cavity theory. Measurements of the energy response were also made to determine the additional energy response due to all intrinsic and secondary effects. Results: For most in-field measurements, regardless of treatment parameter, the dosimeter response was not significantly affected by the spectral variations (<1% effect). For measurement points outside of the treatment field, where the spectrum is softer, the TLD over-responded by up to 12% due to an increased probability of photoelectric effect in the TLD material as well as inherent ionization density effects that play a role at low photon energies. Conclusions: It is generally acceptable to ignore the impact of variations in the photon spectrum on the measured dose for locations within the treatment field. However, outside the treatment field, the spectra are much softer, and a correction factor is generally appropriate. The results of this work have determined values for this factor, which range from 0.88 to 0.99 depending on the specific irradiation conditions.