Experienced Radiation Oncologist Research Articles

Hiring of radiation oncologists by physician groups in 1997

Purpose: To determine the hiring activities of physician groups with respect to radiation oncologists.Methods and Materials: A survey was mailed to a stratified, random sample of 589 groups in the fall of 1997. A total of 448 surveys were returned from groups with more than one radiation oncologist or diagnostic radiologist. The response rate was 76%. Responses were weighted to represent the total population of approximately 3286 practices in the United States that have multiple radiation oncologists or diagnostic radiologists. Eighty-seven responding groups had radiation oncologists and are the basis of reported data. Findings were compared to results of similar, previous surveys.Results: In the 12 months prior to the survey, groups sought to hire 289 (SE = 76) radiation oncologists, about the same as in 1996 but well above 1994 and 1995. Almost all the 289 jobs were full-time positions; 70% were to fill expansion positions, 10% were replacements for physicians who had left the profession, and the remaining 20% were replacements for physicians who had moved to other radiation oncology positions. During the year, an additional 83 (SE = 36) positions were vacated that groups did not seek to refill. Private, nonacademic groups offered 26% of their full-time positions on a non-partnership-track basis. Seventy-one percent of available positions were in groups that preferred recently trained radiation oncologists to those with 10–20 years experience. Groups succeeded in hiring 220 (SE = 65) radiation oncologists, 76% of those sought.Conclusions: In 1997, the number of positions available apparently was approximately equal to the number needed, which is the number of graduates plus the number of experienced radiation oncologists moving to new jobs. However, because our sample was small, there might have been a considerable disparity.

Differences in target outline delineation from CT scans of brain tumours using different methods and different observers

Purpose: To assess errors resulting from manual transfer of contour information for three-dimensional (3-D) target reconstruction, and to determine variations in target volume delineation of brain tumours by different radiation oncologists. Materials and methods: Images of 18 patients with intracranial astrocytomas were used for retrospective treatment planning by five radiation oncologists. In this study, the target outline was delineated on sequential CT slices by an experienced radiation oncologist. Thereafter, the target outline was manually reconstructed by five radiation oncologists onto an A-P or lateral scout film. The same target outline was also reconstructed as a projection using the Beam's-eye view capability on a CT simulator unit. The two target outlines were compared by encompassing each shape with the smallest rectangle. The manually-reconstructed radiation field was termed ‘Field manually established on X-ray film (F-X)’, and the automatically-established field was termed ‘Field established by CT simulator (F-CT)’. In a second part of this study, four radiation oncologists defined contours from contrast enhanced CT images of nine patients with intracranial astrocytomas. The CT images of these nine cases included five pre-operative cases and four post-operative cases. Both gross tumour volume (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV) were outlined on sequential CT slices. The target outlines for the four radiation oncologists were compared by identifying the smallest rectangular field surrounding the projection of these contours. The field established by each radiation oncologist was termed ‘Field of target volume (F-TV)’, and the overlapping portion of the four F-TVs for each case was termed ‘Overlapped field of the target volume (Fo-TV)’. Results: The average distance between the isocentres of F-X and F-CT was 0.6±0.4 cm (mean±SD). The average ratio of the area of F-X divided by the area of F-CT was 1.04±0.12. The area of F-X was wider than the area of F-CT for four of the five oncologists. The ratio of the area of F-TV divided by the area of Fo-TV was calculated. The average ratio was relatively greater for CTV (2.07 in pre-operative cases and 2.11 in post-operative cases) than for GTV (1.12 in pre-operative cases and 1.41 in post-operative cases). Among radiation oncologists, variations in the delineation of GTV were smaller than those of CTV. Conclusions: When using an X-ray simulator in treatment planning, errors resulting from the manual transfer of CT contour information to planar radiographs must be considered. When computer techniques are used to project contours onto radiographs errors resulting from individual variations when performing the contouring must be considered.

Optimization of the Dose Level for a Given Treatment Plan to Maximize the Complication-free Tumor Cure

During the past decade, tumor and normal tissue reactions after radiotherapy have been increasingly quantified in radiobiological terms. For this purpose, response models describing the dependence of tumor and normal tissue reactions on the irradiated volume, heterogeneity of the delivered dose distribution and cell sensitivity variations can be taken into account. The probability of achieving a good treatment outcome can be increased by using an objective function such as P+, the probability of complication-free tumor control. A new procedure is presented, which quantifies P+ from the dose delivery on 2D surfaces and 3D volumes and helps the user of any treatment planning system (TPS) to select the best beam orientations, the best beam modalities and the most suitable beam energies. The final step of selecting the prescribed dose level is made by a renormalization of the entire dose plan until the value of P+ is maximized. The index P+ makes use of clinically established dose-response parameters, for tumors and normal tissues of interest, in order to improve its clinical relevance. The results, using P+, are compared against the assessments of experienced medical physicists and radiation oncologists for two clinical cases. It is observed that when the absorbed dose level for a given treatment plan is increased, the treatment outcome first improves rapidly. As the dose approaches the tolerance of normal tissues the complication-free cure begins to drop. The optimal dose level is often just below this point and it depends on the geometry of each patient and target volume. Furthermore, a more conformal dose delivery to the target results in a higher control rate for the same complication level. This effect can be quantified by the increased value of the P+ parameter.

Analysis of localization errors in the definition of the mantle field using a beam's eye view treatment-planning system

Purpose : Reports of the treatment of Hodgkins' disease (HD) with radiotherapy using the mantle field technique hypothesis that the availability of computerized tomography images reduces the incidence of location error, and that the use of beam's eye view treatment planning techniques may further improve localization. The purpose of this report is to asses the possible contribution of a three-dimensional treatment-planning system to tumor localization and mantle block drawing in patients with HD. Materials and Methods : We evaluated the localization error rate of four experienced radiation oncologists as they drew the lung blocks for the mantle field. The analysis included 16 patients treated with mantle fields in our department between 1989 and 1991. In each case our computerized three-dimensional treatment planning system was used to generate a beam's eye view display of tumor volumes. Simulation radiographs for all 16 patients were overlaid with acetate film, and lung blocks were drawn by clinicians using only the simulation radiographs for reference. The process was repeated with the thoracic CT scans available for reference. The mantle block eye view plot was our benchmark for the evaluation of errors of tumor localization. Localization errors were defined as touching or overlap of the shielding blocks onto tumors. Results : There was a high degree ( p < 0.0003) of consistenly in scoring across all pairing of clinicians and the results from all four were pooled for the analysis. The overall error rate using the simulation radiographs alone was 18%. The rate was significantly lower (13%) when the CT images were available ( p = 0.038). The axillary region had the highest localization error rate (41.7% without CT available and 27.1% with CT available) and the superior mediastinum had the lowest error rate (10.7% without CT, 8.5% with CT). Compared with a system such as beam's eye view, which could reduce the localization error rate to zero, the error rate with CT scans available is still significant [95% confidence interval (CI = 10–17%]. Localization errors were more likely with increasing tumor size when CT scans were not available ( p = 0.029). A similar trend was not seen when CT error rate ( p = 0.03). Tumors in the axilla and inferior mediastinum had a greater relative risk than those in the superior mediastinum ( p = 0.0001). Conclusion : The availability of CT imaging offers an advantage in the outlining of the mantle field in the treatment of Hodgkin's disease. When the error rate is evaluated usng a beam's eye view treatment planning system, a significant proportion of tumors may be overlapped by the outlined mantle blocks even when CT images are available for reference. The use of beam's eye view treatment planning in mantle field definition, especially for tumors in the axillary region, may reduce the incidence of geographic misses.

Current radiosurgery practice: results of an astro survey

Purpose :Although there is increasing interest in radiosurgery, little quantitative data regarding current patterns of radiosurgery practice are available. We developed a radiosurgery questionnaire to obtain information on radiosurgery practice. Methods and Materials : We distributed the questionnaire to the entire membership of the American Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology in early 1993. Responses were obtained from 74 facilities that practice radiosurgery, corresponding to over 6000 treatments carried out since 1983 by 135 radiation oncologists and 130 physicists. Results : Most respondents were found to work within a multidisciplinary team, consisting of the following specialists (Average hours devoted per patient on day of treatment in parentheses): radiation oncologist (3.8), neurosurgeon (3.2), physicist (6.1), radiologist (0.7), nurse (2.7), other (3.0). On average, neurosurgeons and nurses who perform Gamma Knife radiosurgery devote significantly more time-per-patient on the day of treatment than their peers who perform linac radiosurgery. On average, less experienced radiation oncologists and physicists (≤ 24 months experience, or ≤ 50 patients treated) devote significantly more time-per-patient on the day of treatment than their more experienced peers. Although there are many more linac radiosurgery facilities than Gamma Knife facilities, on average the number of patients treated per month per facility is significantly larger at the latter. On average, follow-up responsibilities are nearly equally shared by radiation oncologists and neurosurgeons, except at Gamma Knife facilities, where neurosurgeons assume a larger percentage of follow-up responsibility. The percentages of patients treated at linac facilities for metastases or primary CNS malignancy are larger than the corresponding percentages at Gamma Knife facilities; the opposite is true for arteriovenous malformation, acoustic neuroma, and meningioma. Conclusion : Current radiosurgery practice usually involves a team approach, with participation of specialists from radiation oncology, neurosurgery, physics, radiology, and nursing. The average number of M.D. and Ph.D. hours required per treatment on the day of radiosurgery is high.

Optimization of hyperthermia with CT scanning.

In a prospective study CT scanning was used to evaluate the precision of thermometry catheter placement in tumours in the head and neck or on the chest wall in 30 consecutive patients prior to hyperthermia treatment. Patients had variable-sized tumours from several primary sites. Thermometry catheter placement was guided by palpation with or without a prior CT scan. Catheter placement was confirmed by CT. All lesions were less than 8 x 8 x 6 cm (L x W x D) in size. A mean of 4.2 +/- 0.2 (+/- 1 SEM, range 2-7) closed-end polyurethane catheters were inserted orthogonally by the same experienced radiation oncologist. Horizontal thermometry catheters were intended to traverse the centre and base of the tumour mass, and a vertical catheter was often inserted to intersect a horizontal catheter. After catheter placement, wire cables with 1 cm spacings were inserted into the catheters and positions determined using orthogonal films and CT scans. The success of catheter placement was judged on the following criteria: (1) catheter distribution factor (CDF = proportion of tumour CT slices transected by at least one catheter); (2) catheter hit ratio (CHR = average number of catheters in tumour per CT slice); (3) catheter miss factor (CMF = average number of catheters out of tumour per CT slice); (4) catheter placement index, CPI = [(CHR)(CDF)]-CMF; and (5) distance of nearest catheter from the visually estimated centre of tumour in the most central tumour CT scan. In the first seven lesions with 3-6 cm depth catheter insertion was guided by palpation only. In the next 23 lesions catheter insertion was guided by a prior CT scan. In the latter group, 15 lesions had depth 3-6 cm while eight lesions had depth < or = 3 cm. Catheter placement by palpation only, without the benefit of CT scan, was much less accurate in terms of the nearest catheter to the centre of the tumour (p = .001), the proportion of CT slices with catheter in tumour (CDF, p = 0.04) and the probability of a catheter being outside the tumour (CMF, p = 0.01). The catheter placement index (CPI) was a good measure of the accuracy and adequacy of catheter placement in large tumours (p = 0.04). Displacement of normal tissue structures by tumour precluded accurate catheter placement and led to a low CPI. It was difficult to accurately instrument lesions < or = 3 cm depth even with the benefit of a prior CT scan.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Treatment and planning decisions in non-small cell carcinoma of the lung: An Australasian patterns of practice study

Fourteen practising radiation oncologists were surveyed to assess their treatment and planning habits utilizing six sample cases of non-small cell carcinoma of the lung. Respondents were first given a general questionnaire, designed to evaluate their theoretical treatment and planning recommendations based on various tumour and patient related variables. Respondents then undertook a practical planning exercise utilizing planning CT and simulator radiographs for each of the six sample cases. Each case was accompanied by a brief history and report outlining specific tumour stage and non-stage related variables. The practical planning exercise was repeated on the second day of the survey utilizing different non-stage related variables but identical radiology and stage-related information. This design enabled firstly, a comparison of clinicians' intended policy and planning methods with actual policy and planning decisions, and secondly, an assessment of intra-clinician variability in decision making and planning practice. Good agreement was evident among clinicians with respect to general, non-case specific treatment policies; however, very significant variation occurred at an inter- and intra-clinician level and involved the entire treatment and planning process for individual cases. Despite identical treatment intent across identical radiological case pairings, clinicians chose widely differing margins and target volumnes in their planning exercise. Treatment intent appeared to be influenced more by non-stage related variables rather than stage related information and radiological appearances per se. We have shown that experienced radiation oncologists do not adhere to stated case selection criteria and show inconsistencies in their treatment planning for non-small cell carcinoma of the lung.

Three-dimensional display techniques in radiation therapy treatment planning

Good radiation treatment planning requires that the target volume be treated with a high and uniform dose of radiation while irradiating normal tissue as little as possible. Even if the merits of a given treatment plan are judged only on the appearance of isodose lines in one or a few planes it can sometimes be difficult for the experienced radiation oncologist to select the best of several alternative plans. If consideration is given to the entire spatial distribution of dose, however, the problem becomes far more difficult because of the enormous amount of data that must be evaluated. We believe that the lack of suitable methods to display these data has greatly contributed to the slow incorporation of 3D considerations into routine radiation treatment planning. In the past few years there have been great advances in both the theory of how to produce effective 3D displays and in the display hardware itself. In this paper we survey some of the methods used at the University of North Carolina, and show specific examples of how these displays can be used in radiation therapy treatment planning.