Abstract
In the last decade, there have been many advancements in the treatment and management of patients with radiation therapy. One area where the advances have been the greatest is in the management and treatment of thoracic malignancies. The advances in technology have influenced all aspects of the therapeutic management of patients with some type of thoracic malignancy. These advances have improved the overall care and treatment of all patients with thoracic cancers. They have affected and improved the patient simulation, treatment planning, and treatment delivery processes. The technologic advances, however, don’t come without a cost. The quality assurance of these patients and the manpower needed to perform this increased workload has increased tremendously. This chapter discusses all of the new techniques involved in patient simulation, treatment planning, and treatment delivery. A description of the variety of techniques and vendors who provide the equipment for each is described. The additional quality assurance necessary at each step in the process of the management of these patients is given, and, once again, the vendors who provide the equipment necessary to perform the quality assurance are given. Finally, techniques in how to bring the whole process of patient simulation, treatment planning, and treatment delivery and quality assurance for each step are presented.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Halperin R, et al. Setup reproducibility in radiation therapy for lung cancer: a comparison between T-bar and expanded foam immobilization devices. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43(1):211–6.
Negoro Y, et al. The effectiveness of an immobilization device in conformal radiotherapy for lung tumor: reduction of respiratory tumor movement and evaluation of the daily setup accuracy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;50(4):889–98.
Fuss M, et al. Repositioning accuracy of a commercially available double-vacuum whole body immobilization system for stereotactic body radiation therapy. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2004;3(1):59–67.
Mah D, et al. Technical aspects of the deep inspiration breath-hold technique in the treatment of thoracic cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48(4):1175–85.
Rosenzweig KE, et al. The deep inspiration breath-hold technique in the treatment of inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48(1):81–7.
Keall PJ, et al. Acquiring 4D thoracic CT scans using a multislice helical method. Phys Med Biol. 2004;49(10):2053–67.
Vedam SS, et al. Acquiring a four-dimensional computed tomography dataset using an external respiratory signal. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48(1):45–62.
Giraud P, et al. Reduction of organ motion in lung tumors with respiratory gating. Lung Cancer. 2006;51(1):41–51.
Wagman R, et al. Respiratory gating for liver tumors: use in dose escalation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55(3):659–68.
Mutic S, et al. Quality assurance for computed-tomography simulators and the computed-tomography-simulation process: report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 66. Med Phys. 2003;30(10):2762–92.
Jiang SB, Wolfgang J, Mageras GS. Quality assurance challenges for motion-adaptive radiation therapy: gating, breath holding, and four-dimensional computed tomography. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71(1 Suppl):S103–7.
Klein EE, et al. Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. Med Phys. 2009;36(9):4197–212.
Siochi RA, et al. Information technology resource management in radiation oncology. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009;10(4):3116.
Yu CX. Intensity-modulated arc therapy with dynamic multileaf collimation: an alternative to tomotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 1995;40(9):1435–49.
Cao D, et al. Comparison of plan quality provided by intensity-modulated arc therapy and helical tomotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69(1):240–50.
Fukumoto S, et al. Small-volume image-guided radiotherapy using hypofractionated, coplanar, and noncoplanar multiple fields for patients with inoperable stage I nonsmall cell lung carcinomas. Cancer. 2002;95(7):1546–53.
ICRU, ICRU Report 62, prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy (Supplement to ICRU Report 50), in International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements 1999, ICRU: Bethesda.
Oh YK, et al. Assessment of setup uncertainties for various tumor sites when using daily CBCT for more than 2200 VMAT treatments. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15(2):4418.
Schmidhalter D, et al. Assessment of patient setup errors in IGRT in combination with a six degrees of freedom couch. Z Med Phys. 2014;24(2):112–22.
Huang CY, et al. Six degrees-of-freedom prostate and lung tumor motion measurements using kilovoltage intrafraction monitoring. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015;91(2):368–75.
Fraass B, et al. American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 53: quality assurance for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning. Med Phys. 1998;25(10):1773–829.
Lee TF, Fang FM. Quantitative analysis of normal tissue effects in the clinic (QUANTEC) guideline validation using quality of life questionnaire datasets for parotid gland constraints to avoid causing xerostomia during head-and-neck radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2013;106(3):352–8.
Van Dyk J, et al. Commissioning and quality assurance of treatment planning computers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993;26(2):261–73.
Ten Haken RK, Fraass BA. Quality assurance in 3-D treatment planning. Front Radiat Ther Oncol. 1996;29:104–14.
Stern RL, et al. Verification of monitor unit calculations for non-IMRT clinical radiotherapy: report of AAPM Task Group 114. Med Phys. 2011;38(1):504–30.
Gibbons JP, et al. Monitor unit calculations for external photon and electron beams: report of the AAPM Therapy Physics Committee Task Group No. 71. Med Phys. 2014;41(3):031501.
Butts JR, Foster AE. Comparison of commercially available three-dimensional treatment planning algorithms for monitor unit calculations in the presence of heterogeneities. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2001;2(1):32–41.
Chan J, et al. Comparison of monitor unit calculations performed with a 3D computerized planning system and independent “hand” calculations: results of three years clinical experience. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2002;3(4):293–301.
Low DA, et al. Dosimetry tools and techniques for IMRT. Med Phys. 2011;38(3):1313–38.
Ravichandran R, et al. Need of patient-specific quality assurance and pretreatment verification program for special plans in radiotherapy. J Med Phys. 2011;36(3):181–3.
O’Daniel J, et al. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy: effective and efficient end-to-end patient-specific quality assurance. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82(5):1567–74.
Krishnamurthy K, et al. Formulation and initial experience on patient specific quality assurance for clinical implementation of dynamic IMRT. Gulf J Oncolog. 2009;5:44–8.
Schreibmann E, et al. Patient-specific quality assurance method for VMAT treatment delivery. Med Phys. 2009;36(10):4530–5.
Anjum MN, et al. IMRT quality assurance using a second treatment planning system. Med Dosim. 2010;35(4):274–9.
Calvo-Ortega JF, et al. A varian DynaLog file-based procedure for patient dose-volume histogram-based IMRT QA. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15(2):4665.
Rangaraj D, et al. Catching errors with patient-specific pretreatment machine log file analysis. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2013;3(2):80–90.
Litzenberg DW, Moran JM, Fraass BA. Verification of dynamic and segmental IMRT delivery by dynamic log file analysis. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2002;3(2):63–72.
Chui CS, Spirou S, LoSasso T. Testing of dynamic multileaf collimation. Med Phys. 1996;23(5):635–41.
Mamalui-Hunter M, Li H, Low DA. MLC quality assurance using EPID: a fitting technique with subpixel precision. Med Phys. 2008;35(6):2347–55.
Bayouth JE, Wendt D, Morrill SM. MLC quality assurance techniques for IMRT applications. Med Phys. 2003;30(5):743–50.
Molineu A, et al. Design and implementation of an anthropomorphic quality assurance phantom for intensity-modulated radiation therapy for the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;63(2):577–83.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nelson, C., Kirsner, S., Saglam, Y., Alpan, V. (2016). Quality Assurance of Modern Radiotherapy Techniques in Thoracic Malignancies. In: Ozyigit, G., Selek, U., Topkan, E. (eds) Principles and Practice of Radiotherapy Techniques in Thoracic Malignancies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28761-4_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28761-4_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28759-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28761-4
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)