Advertisement

Retrospective analysis of multi-institutional, patient-specific treatment planning results of high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy for gynecological cancer using V100%

  • Tetsuya WatanabeEmail author
  • Hisayuki Miyashita
  • Ryoichi Notake
  • Keisuke Todoroki
  • Go Nakajima
  • Kana Washizu
  • Nobuko Utsumi
  • Shogo Hatanaka
  • Masatsugu Hariu
  • Takafumi Yamano
  • Keiichiro Nishimura
  • Munefumi Shimbo
  • Takeo Takahashi
Technical Paper
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

The objective of this study was to clarify the usefuleness of the K parameters of the independent verification method using V100% (the volume of water receiving 100% of the prescription dose) for institutions implementing the high-dose-rate (HDR) intracavitary brachytherapy for gynecological cancer. The data of 249 plans of 11 institutions in Japan were used, and the constant K value obtained by a parameter fit for single-192Ir, two-192Ir, and three-192Ir systems was calculated. The predicted total dwell time calculated using the constant K value was defined as Tpr, and the total dwell time calculated using a radiation treatment planning system was defined as TRTP. The ratio of Tpr and TRTP for each plan was calculated. The constant K values (95% CI) obtained for each system outlined above were 1233 (1227–1240), 1205 (1199–1211), and 1171 (1167–1175), respectively. Regarding the Tpr/TRTP, the entire data were within 0.9–1.1. For accurate verification, it was clarified that constant K values should be calculated for each system. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission considers a difference of 20% between the prescribed total dose and the administered total dose as a reportable medical event. There is a need for a quick method to verify the accuracy with a minimum of 10% threshold of a plan. The constant K values in this study were obtained from multiple institutions, and the variation in the values among these institutions was small. The data obtained by this study may be used as a parameter of this verification method employed by numerous institutions, particularly those who have recently initiated HDR brachytherapy. In addition, for institutions already using this method, this data might be useful for the validation of the parameters which were used in such institutions.

Keywords

High-dose-rate brachytherapy Multi-institutional study Gynecological cancer Independent verification method Quality assurance 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors sincerely thank the following institutions for providing sample data: Cancer Institute Hospital, Chiba Cancer Center, Gunma University Hospital, Kyorin University Hospital, Saitama prefectural Cancer Center, Showa University Hospital, Tokyo Medical University Hospital and Yokohama City University Medical Center.

Funding

This study was funded by a Kanto-Branch Research Grant from the Japanese Society of Radiological Technology.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Stitt JA, Fowler JF, Thomadsen BR et al (1992) High dose rate intracavitary brachytherapy for carcinoma of the cervix: the Madison system: I. Clinical and radiobiological considerations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 24:335–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2003) Medical use of by-product material. Title 10, Chap. 1, Code of Federal Regulations d Energy. Part 35. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Takahashi Y, Koizumi M, Sumida I et al (2012) The usefulness of an independent patient-specific treatment planning verification method using a benchmark plan in high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy for carcinoma of the uterine cervix. J Radiat Res 53:936–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Das RK, Bradley KA, Nelson IA et al (2006) Quality assurance of treatment plans for interstitial and intracavitary high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 5:56–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thomadosen BR, Shahabi S, Stitt JA et al (1992) High dose rate intracavitary brachytherapy for carcinoma of the cervix: the Independent patient-specific treatment planning verification method using a benchmark plan 943 Madison system: II. Procedural and physical considerations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 24:349–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Venselaar JLM, Bierhuizen HWJ, Klop R (1996) A method to check treatment time calculations in Ir-192 high dose rate volume implants. Med Phys 22:1499–1500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ezzell GA (1994) Quality assurance of treatment plans for optimized high dose rate brachytherapy planar implants. Med Phys 21:659–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rogus RD, Smith MJ, Kubo HD (1998) An equation to QA check the total treatment time for single-catheter HDR brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 40:245–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kubo HD (1992) Verification of treatment plans by mathematical formulas for single catheter HDR brachytherapy. Med Dosim 17:151–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumar R, Sharma SD, Vijaykumar C et al (2008) A dose verification method for high-dose-rate brachytherapy treatment plans. J Cancer Res Ther 4:173–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lachaine ME, Gorman JC, Palisca MG (2003) A fast independent dose check of HDR plans. J Appl Clin Med Phys 4:149–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cohen GN, Amols HI, Zaider M (2000) An independent dose-to-point calculation program for the verification of high-dose-rate brachytherapy treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 48:1251–1258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bidmead M, Briot E, Burger J et al (2004) Quality assurance of brachytherapy treatment planning system. In: Venselaar J, Calatayud JP (eds) A practical guide to quality control of brachytherapy equipment. ESTRO, Brussels, pp 215–231Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Viswanathan AN, Beriwal S, De Los Santos JF et al (2012) American brachytherapy society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part II: high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 11:47–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thomadsen B, Miller R (2014) Brachytherapy physics. Compr Biomed Phys 9:315–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Das RK, Thomadsen BR (2005) High dose rate sources and delivery system. In: Thomadsen BR et al (eds) Brachytherapy physics. Medical Physics Publishing Co., Madison, pp 59–74Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tetsuya Watanabe
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hisayuki Miyashita
    • 2
  • Ryoichi Notake
    • 3
  • Keisuke Todoroki
    • 1
  • Go Nakajima
    • 1
  • Kana Washizu
    • 1
  • Nobuko Utsumi
    • 1
    • 4
  • Shogo Hatanaka
    • 1
  • Masatsugu Hariu
    • 1
  • Takafumi Yamano
    • 1
  • Keiichiro Nishimura
    • 1
  • Munefumi Shimbo
    • 1
  • Takeo Takahashi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiation Oncology, Saitama Medical CenterSaitama Medical UniversityKawagoeJapan
  2. 2.Department of RadiologySt. Marianna University School of Medicine HospitalKawasakiJapan
  3. 3.Department of Radiation OncologyTokyo Medical and Dental University Hospital of MedicineTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Department of Radiation TherapyJCHO Tokyo Shinjuku Medical CenterTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations