Advertisement

Development of a dosimetry inter-comparison for IMRT as part of site credentialing for a TROG multi-centre clinical trial for prostate cancer

  • B. HealyEmail author
  • J. Frantzis
  • R. Murry
  • J. Martin
  • M. Middleton
  • C. Catton
  • T. Kron
Scientific Paper

Abstract

A methodology has been developed for a dosimetry inter-comparison of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) delivery in Australasia. The inter-comparison is part of site credentialing for those sites participating in the prostate fractionated irradiation trial (PROFIT) for intermediate-risk prostate patients developed by the Ontario Clinical Oncology Group and coordinated in Australasia by the Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group. Features of the dosimetry inter-comparison design included the use of a dedicated pelvic anthropomorphic phantom, the use of a single CT data set of the phantom including contours and the use of radiochromic film as a dosimeter. Action levels for agreement between measured dose and treatment planning system dose have been proposed based on measurement uncertainty and international experience. A trial run of the dosimetry procedure at the reference centre gave results within the predefined action levels.

Keywords

Multi-centre clinical trials Quality assurance IMRT Radiochromic film dosimetry Prostate cancer 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by research grants from Cancer Australia and the Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia. The authors thank the Physics Department of the Calvary Mater Newcastle Hospital for the loan of the Elvis pelvic anthropomorphic phantom and for the photograph of the phantom.

References

  1. 1.
    Peters LJ, O’Sullivan B, Giralt J, Fitzgerald TJ, Trotti A, Bernier J et al (2010) Critical impact of radiotherapy protocol compliance and quality in the treatment of advanced head and neck cancer: results from TROG 02.02. J Clin Oncol 28:2996–3001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ibbott GS, Followill DS, Molineu HA, Lowenstein JR, Alvarez PE, Roll JE (2008) Challenges in credentialing institutions and participants in advanced technology multi-institutional clinical trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 71:S71–S75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Das IJ, Cheng C-W, Chopra KL, Mitra RK, Srivastava SP, Glatstein E (2008) Intensity-modulated radiation therapy dose prescription, recording and delivery: patterns of variability amongst institutions and treatment planning systems. J Nat Cancer Inst 100:300–307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    ICRU (2010) Report 83: prescribing, recording, and reporting photon-beam intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), Journal of the ICRU 10Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Galvin JM, Ezzell G, Eisbrauch A et al (2004) Implementing IMRT in clinical practice: a joint document of the American society for therapeutic radiology and oncology and the American association of physicists in medicine. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 58:1616–1634PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Purdy JA (2008) Quality assurance issues in conducting multi-institutional advanced technology clinical trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 71:S66–S70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ebert MA, Harrison KM, Cornes D, Howlett SJ, Joseph DJ, Kron T, Hamilton CS, Denham JW (2009) Comprehensive Australasian multicentre dosimetric intercomparison: issues, logistics and recommendations. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 53:119–131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kron T, Hamilton C, Roff M, Denham J (2002) Dosimetric intercomparison for two Australasian clinical trials using an anthropomorphic phantom. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 52:566–579PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ebert MA, Harrison KM, Howlett SJ, Cornes D, Kron T, Joseph DJ, Hamilton CS, Denham JD (2009) Outcomes of the Australasian level III dosimetry intercomparison. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 53(Supplement 1):A62Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ebert MA, Haworth A, Kearvell R, Hooton B, Coleman R, Spry N, Bydder S, Joseph D (2008) Detailed review and analysis of complex radiotherapy clinical trial planning data: evaluation and initial experience with the SWAN software system. Radiother Oncol 86:200–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harrison K (2009) A novel anthropomorphic pelvic phantom designed for multicentre level III dosimetry intercomparison. Masters thesis, University of NewcastleGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    IAEA (2006) Absorbed dose determination in external beam radiotherapy: an international code of practice for dosimetry based on standards of absorbed dose to water, Technical Report Series No 398. International Atomic Energy Agency, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Christ G (1995) White polystyrene as a substitute for water in high energy photon dosimetry. Med Phys 22:2097–2100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    van Battum LJ, Hoffmans D, Piersma H, Heukelom S (2008) Accurate dosimetry with GafChromic EBT film of a 6 MV photon beam in water: what level is achievable? Med Phys 35:704–716PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Low DA, Harms WB, Mutic S, Purdy JA (1998) A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. Med Phys 25:656–661PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mijnheer B, Georg D (eds) (2008) Guidelines for the verification of IMRT, ESTRO Booklet 9. ESTRO, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ezzell GA, Burmeister JW, Dogan N, LoSasso TJ, Mechalakos JG, Mihailidis D et al (2009) IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM task group 119. Med Phys 36:5359–5373PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ibbott GS, Molineau A, Followill DS (2006) Independent evaluations of IMRT through the use of an anthropomorphic phantom. Technol Cancer Res Treat 5:481–487PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rogers DWO, Feddegon BA, Ding GX, We J (1995) BEAM: a Monte Carlo code to simulate radiotherapy treatment units. Med Phys 22:503–524PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rink A, Vitkin IA, Jaffray DA (2007) Energy dependence (75 kVp to 18 MV) of radiochromic films assessed using a real-time optical dosimeter. Med Phys 34:458–463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Healy
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. Frantzis
    • 1
  • R. Murry
    • 1
  • J. Martin
    • 1
  • M. Middleton
    • 1
  • C. Catton
    • 2
  • T. Kron
    • 3
  1. 1.Radiation Oncology QueenslandToowoombaAustralia
  2. 2.Princess Margaret HospitalTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Peter MacCallum Cancer CentreMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations