76
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      IMRT credentialing for prospective trials using institutional virtual phantoms: results of a joint European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer and Radiological Physics Center project

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background and purpose

          Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) credentialing for a EORTC study was performed using an anthropomorphic head phantom from the Radiological Physics Center (RPC; RPC PH). Institutions were retrospectively requested to irradiate their institutional phantom (INST PH) using the same treatment plan in the framework of a Virtual Phantom Project (VPP) for IMRT credentialing.

          Materials and methods

          CT data set of the institutional phantom and measured 2D dose matrices were requested from centers and sent to a dedicated secure EORTC uploader. Data from the RPC PH and INST PH were thereafter centrally analyzed and inter-compared by the QA team using commercially available software (RIT; ver.5.2; Colorado Springs, USA).

          Results

          Eighteen institutions participated to the VPP. The measurements of 6 (33%) institutions could not be analyzed centrally. All other centers passed both the VPP and the RPC ±7%/4 mm credentialing criteria. At the 5%/5 mm gamma criteria (90% of pixels passing), 11(92%) as compared to 12 (100%) centers pass the credentialing process with RPC PH and INST PH (p = 0.29), respectively. The corresponding pass rate for the 3%/3 mm gamma criteria (90% of pixels passing) was 2 (17%) and 9 (75%; p = 0.01), respectively.

          Conclusions

          IMRT dosimetry gamma evaluations in a single plane for a H&N prospective trial using the INST PH measurements showed agreement at the gamma index criteria of ±5%/5 mm (90% of pixels passing) for a small number of VPP measurements. Using more stringent, criteria, the RPC PH and INST PH comparison showed disagreement. More data is warranted and urgently required within the framework of prospective studies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Radiotherapy protocol deviations and clinical outcomes: a meta-analysis of cooperative group clinical trials.

          Noncompliance with radiotherapy (RT) protocol guidelines has been linked to inferior clinical outcomes. We performed a meta-analysis of cooperative group trials to examine the association between RT quality assurance (QA) deviations and disease control and overall survival (OS). We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for multi-institutional trials that reported clinical outcomes in relation to RT QA results. Hazard ratios (HRs) describing the association between RT protocol noncompliance and patient outcomes were extracted directly from the original studies or calculated from survival curves. Inverse variance meta-analyses were performed to assess the association between RT QA deviations and OS. A second meta-analysis tested the association between RT QA deviations and secondary outcomes, including local or locoregional control, event-free survival, and relapse. Random-effects models were used in cases of statistically significant (P < .10) effect heterogeneity. The Egger test was used to detect publication bias. All statistical tests were two-sided. Eight studies (four pediatric, four adult) met all inclusion criteria and were incorporated into this analysis. The frequency of RT QA deviations ranged from 8% to 71% (median = 32%). In a random-effects model, RT deviations were associated with a statistically significant decrease in OS (HR of death = 1.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.28 to 2.35; P < .001). A similar effect was seen for secondary outcomes (HR of treatment failure = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.15 to 2.78; P = .009). No evidence of publication bias was detected. In clinical trials, RT protocol deviations are associated with increased risks of treatment failure and overall mortality.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A quantitative evaluation of IMRT dose distributions: refinement and clinical assessment of the gamma evaluation.

            Although intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is a step forward in comparison to conventional, static beam delivery, quality assurance is more complex and labour intensive, demanding detailed two-dimensional dosimetric verification. Regardless of the technique used for measuring the dose distribution, what is essential to the implementation of routine verification of IMRT fields is the efficient and accurate comparison of the measured versus desired dose distribution. In order to achieve a fast, yet accurate quantitative measure of the correspondence between measured and calculated dose, the theoretical concept of the gamma evaluation method presented by Low et al. (Med. Phys., 25 (1998) 656) was converted into a calculation algorithm, taking into account practical considerations related to the discrete nature of the data. A filter cascade of multiple levels was designed to obtain fast and accurate comparison of the two dose distributions under evaluation. The actual comparison consists of classification into accepted or rejected datapoints with respect to user-defined acceptance criteria (dose difference and distance to agreement). The presented algorithm was tested on dosimetric images calculated and/or acquired by means of a liquid filled portal imaging device during the course of intensity modulated treatments of prostate cancer, including pre-treatment verification as well as verification during treatment. To assess its ability to intercept possible errors in dose delivery, clinically relevant errors were deliberately introduced into the dose distributions. The developed gamma filter method proves successful in the efficient comparison of calculated versus measured IMRT dose distribution. Secondly, intercomparison of dosimetric images acquired during different treatment sessions illustrate its potential to highlight variations in the dosimetric images. The simulated errors were unmistakably intercepted. The readily obtained gamma evaluation images are an easy tool for quality control of IMRT fields. To reduce the artefacts related to the discrete nature and limited resolution of the data, a fast and accurate filter cascade was developed, offering the possibility to use the gamma method for day to day evaluation of patient dosimetric portal images with or without comparison to a predicted portal dose distribution.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              QA makes a clinical trial stronger: evidence-based medicine in radiation therapy.

              Quality assurance (QA) for radiation therapy (RT) in clinical trials is necessary to ensure treatment is safely and effectively administered. QA assurance requires however substantial human and financial resources, as it has become more comprehensive and labor intensive in recent RT trials. It is presumed that RT deviations decrease therapeutic effectiveness of the studied regimen. This study assesses the impact of RT protocol-deviations on patient's outcome in prospective phase II-III RT trials. PubMed, Medline and Embase identified nine prospective RT trials detailing QA RT violation and patient's outcome. Planned QA analysis was preformed retrospectively and prospectively in eight and one studies, respectively. Non-adherence to protocol-specified RT requirements in prospective trials is frequent: the observed major deviation rates range from 11.8% to 48.0% (mean, 28.1 ± 17.9%). QA RT deviations had a significant impact on the primary study end-point in a majority (62.5%) of studies. The number of patients accrued per center was a significant predictive factor for RT deviations in the largest series. These QA data stemming from prospective clinical trials show undisputedly that non adherence to protocol-specified RT requirements is associated with reduced survival, local control and potentially increased toxicity. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Radiat Oncol
                Radiat Oncol
                Radiation Oncology (London, England)
                BioMed Central
                1748-717X
                2014
                29 May 2014
                : 9
                : 123
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen CH-5232, Switzerland
                [2 ]University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
                [3 ]EORTC QA Strategic Committee-ROG, Brussels, Belgium
                [4 ]Institute of Radiation Physics, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
                [5 ]Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
                [6 ]EORTC Headquarter QA team, Brussels, Belgium
                [7 ]Centre Georges-François-Leclerc, Dijon, France
                [8 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
                Article
                1748-717X-9-123
                10.1186/1748-717X-9-123
                4046849
                24885438
                25fb0d00-c9b8-48a4-9546-799a048944a3
                Copyright © 2014 Weber et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 29 November 2013
                : 2 May 2014
                Categories
                Research

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                imrt credentialing,prospective clinical trial,virtual phantom,anthropomorphic phantom,quality assurance

                Comments

                Comment on this article