Radiobiological Considerations Research Articles

Re-irradiation practice and ESTRO/EORTC consensus recommendations: 2023 ASTRO education panel.

Indications for re-irradiation are increasing both for palliation and potentially curative attempts to achieve durable local control. This has been in part driven by the technological advances in the last decade including image-guided brachytherapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy. These enable high dose focal irradiation to be delivered to a limited target volume with minimal normal tissue re-irradiation. The European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) have collaboratively developed a comprehensive consensus on re-irradiation practices, aiming to standardise definitions, reporting, and clinical decision-making processes. The document introduces a universally applicable definition for re-irradiation, categorised into two primary types based on the presence of geometric overlap of irradiated volumes and concerns for cumulative dose toxicity. It also identifies "repeat organ irradiation" and "repeat irradiation" for cases without such overlap, emphasising the need to consider toxicity risks associated with cumulative doses. Additionally, the document presents detailed reporting guidelines for re-irradiation studies, specifying essential patient and tumour characteristics, treatment planning and delivery details, and follow-up protocols. These guidelines are designed to improve the quality and reproducibility of clinical research, thus fostering a more robust evidence base for future re-irradiation practices. The consensus underscores the necessity of interdisciplinary collaboration and shared decision-making, highlighting performance status, patient survival estimates, and response to initial radiotherapy as critical factors in determining eligibility for re-irradiation. It advocates for a patient-centric approach, with transparent communication about treatment intent and potential risks. Radiobiological considerations, including the application of the linear-quadratic model, are recommended for assessing cumulative doses and guiding re-irradiation strategies. By providing these comprehensive recommendations, the ESTRO-EORTC consensus aims to enhance the safety, efficacy, and quality of life for patients undergoing re-irradiation, while paving the way for future research and refinement of treatment protocols in the field of oncology.

Comparative analysis of simultaneous integrated boost and sequential boost radiotherapy in node-positive cervical cancer: dosimetric and radiobiological considerations.

For locally advanced cervical cancer, the standard therapeutic approach involves concomitant chemoradiation therapy, supplemented by a brachytherapy boost. Moreover, an external beam radiotherapy (RT) boost should be considered for treating gross lymph node (LN) volumes. Two boost approaches exist with Volumetric Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT): Sequential (SEQ) and Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB). This study undertakes a comprehensive dosimetric and radiobiological comparison between these two boost strategies. The study encompassed ten patients who underwent RT for cervical cancer with node-positive disease. Two sets of treatment plans were generated for each patient: SIB-VMAT and SEQ-VMAT. Dosimetric as well as radiobiological parameters including tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were compared. Both techniques were analyzed for two different levels of LN involvement - only pelvic LNs and pelvic with para-aortic LNs. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software version 25.0. SIB-VMAT exhibited superior target coverage, yielding improved doses to the planning target volume (PTV) and gross tumour volume (GTV). Notably, SIB-VMAT plans displayed markedly superior dose conformity. While SEQ-VMAT displayed favorable organ sparing for femoral heads, SIB-VMAT appeared as the more efficient approach for mitigating bladder and bowel doses. TCP was significantly higher with SIB-VMAT, suggesting a higher likelihood of successful tumour control. Conversely, no statistically significant difference in NTCP was observed between the two techniques. This study's findings underscore the advantages of SIB-VMAT over SEQ-VMAT in terms of improved target coverage, dose conformity, and tumour control probability. In particular, SIB-VMAT demonstrated potential benefits for cases involving para-aortic nodes. It is concluded that SIB-VMAT should be the preferred approach in all cases of locally advanced cervical cancer.

Improving Dose Volume Histogram (DVH) Based Analysis of Clinical Outcomes Using Modern Statistical Techniques: A Systematic Answer to Multiple Comparisons Concerns

DVH constraints are essential in the clinical practice of radiation therapy. Historically, DVH constraints were found through sparse sampling of all possible DVH indices to find one that appeared to be most predictive for clinical toxicity. This approach can lead to inconsistent results among studies and to multiple comparison concerns. We aim to solve both problems by examining a full array of DVH indices using statistical methods that account for strong correlations among DVH indices and incorporate radiobiological knowledge constraints. We extracted a dense array of V%_D indices from a treatment planning system using ESAPI interface, with V%_D corresponding to the volume fraction irradiated to dose D, or higher. We used Fused Lasso as the base model to compensate for correlations among DVH indices because it applies a penalty on the difference between DVH variables with adjacent dose. The base model was augmented with additional constraints based on radiobiological considerations: the positivity constraint (beta_i > 0) which assumes that any tissue irradiation cannot reduce the risk of toxicity, and monotonicity constraint (beta_i+1 > = beta_i) which assumes that higher dose to a fixed volume fraction cannot be associated with a lower risk of toxicity. We called the hybrid model KC-Lasso (Knowledge Constrained Lasso) and applied it to two clinical examples: grade 2 acute rectal toxicity in conventionally fractionated RT for 79 prostate cancer patients (77.4 Gy + MR based boost to 81-83 Gy) and cardiac toxicity in conventionally fractionated RT for 119 locally advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) patients (Median prescribed dose 62 Gy). We further examined alternative data driven models to determine the importance of knowledge constraints. KC-Lasso detected two distinct dose thresholds for grade 2 rectal toxicity, at 35 Gy and 78 Gy. A threshold of 51 Gy was detected for reduced overall survival due to cardiac irradiation in NSCLC patients. An examination of KC-Lasso models at varying step size suggested that a single mid-range index can be used as a treatment planning constraint while full model can be used for confirmatory, final plan evaluation. Alternative models which lack knowledge constraints show patterns of negative and isolated coefficients which are difficult to interpret and are not likely to be generalizable. A more systematic approach to the analysis of correlations between DVH constraints and clinical toxicity can lead to greater consistency of results among different studies, better understanding of true dose thresholds and results which are more generalizable.

Reirradiation of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: a pragmatic approach, part II: radiation technique and fractionations.

Reirradiation (reRT) of local recurrent/second primary tumors of the head and neck represents a potential curative treatment for patients not candidate to a salvage surgery. Aim of the present study is to summarize literature data on modern radiation techniques and fractionations used in this setting of patients. A narrative review of the literature was conducted on three topics: (1) target volume delineation (2) reRT dose and techniques and (3) ongoing studies. Patients treated with postoperative reRT and palliative intent were not considered for the current analysis. Recommendations on the target volume contouring have been reported. 3D-Conformal Radiotherapy, Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy, Stereotactic body Radiotherapy Intraoperative Radiotherapy, Brachytherapy and Charged Particles have been analyzed in terms of indication and fractionation in the field of reRT. Ongoing studies on the topic have been reported for IMRT and Charged Particles. Moreover, according to literature data a stepwise approach has been proposed aiming to provide a useful tool to select patients candidate to a curative reRT in daily clinical practice. Two clinical cases were also provided for its application. Different radiation techniques and fractionations can be used for a second course of radiotherapy in patients with recurrent/second primary tumor of head and neck region. Tumor characteristics as well as radiobiological considerations should be take into account to define the best reRT approach.

Historical Progress of Stereotactic Radiation Surgery.

Radiosurgery and stereotactic radiotherapy have established themselves as precise and accurate areas of radiation oncology for the treatment of brain and extracranial lesions. Along with the evolution of other methods of radiotherapy, this type of treatment has been associated with significant advances in terms of a variety of modalities and techniques to improve the accuracy and efficacy of treatment. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the progress in stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) over several decades, and includes a review of various articles and research papers, commencing with the emergence of stereotactic techniques in radiotherapy. Key clinical aspects of SRS, such as fixation methods, radiobiology considerations, quality assurance practices, and treatment planning strategies, are presented. In addition, the review highlights the technological advancements in treatment modalities, encompassing the transition from cobalt-based systems to linear accelerator-based modalities. By addressing these topics, this study aims to offer insights into the advancements that have shaped the field of SRS, that have ultimately enhanced the accuracy and effectiveness of treatment.

Radiotherapy treatment interruptions during the Covid-19 pandemic: The UK experience and implications for radiobiology training

Unintended treatment interruptions during a course of radiotherapy can lead to extended overall treatment times which allow increased tumour cell repopulation to occur. Extra dose may therefore be required to offset any loss of tumour control. However, the manner in which the extra dose is delivered requires careful consideration in order to avoid the risk of increased normal tissue toxicity. Radiobiological modelling techniques can allow quantitative examination of such problems and may be used to derive revised pattens of radiation delivery which can help restore a degree of tumour control whilst limiting the likelihood of excess normal tissue morbidity. Unintended treatment interruptions can occur in any radiotherapy department but the rapid spread of the Covid-19 pandemic caused a major increase in the frequency of such interruptions due to staff and patient illness and the consequent self-isolation requirements. This article summarises the radiobiological considerations and caveats involved in assessing treatment interruptions and outlines the UK experience of dealing with the new challenges posed by Covid-19. The world-wide need for more education programmes in cancer radiobiology is highlighted.

Stereotactic MRI-guided radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer (SMILE): a prospective, multicentric phase-II-trial

BackgroundNormofractionated radiation regimes for definitive prostate cancer treatment usually extend over 7–8 weeks. Recently, moderate hypofractionation with doses per fraction between 2.2 and 4 Gy has been shown to be safe and feasible with oncologic non-inferiority compared to normofractionation. Radiobiologic considerations lead to the assumption that prostate cancer might benefit in particular from hypofractionation in terms of tumor control and toxicity. First data related to ultrahypofractionation demonstrate that the overall treatment time can be reduced to 5–7 fractions with single doses > 6 Gy safely, even with simultaneous focal boosting of macroscopic tumor(s). With MR-guided linear accelerators (MR-linacs) entering clinical routine, invasive fiducial implantations become unnecessary. The aim of the multicentric SMILE study is to evaluate the use of MRI-guided stereotactic radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer in 5 fractions regarding safety and feasibility.MethodsThe study is designed as a prospective, one-armed, two-stage, multi-center phase-II-trial with 68 patients planned. Low- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer patients will be eligible for the study as well as early high-risk patients (cT3a and/or Gleason Score ≤ 8 and/or PSA ≤ 20 ng/ml) according to d’Amico. All patients will receive definitive MRI-guided stereotactic radiation therapy with a total dose of 37.5 Gy in 5 fractions (single dose 7.5 Gy) on alternating days. A focal simultaneous integrated boost to MRI-defined tumor(s) up to 40 Gy can optionally be applied. The primary composite endpoint includes the assessment of urogenital or gastrointestinal toxicity ≥ grade 2 or treatment-related discontinuation of therapy. The use of MRI-guided radiotherapy enables online plan adaptation and intrafractional gating to ensure optimal target volume coverage and protection of organs at risk.DiscussionWith moderate hypofractionation being the standard in definitive radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer at many institutions, ultrahypofractionation could be the next step towards reducing treatment time without compromising oncologic outcomes and toxicities. MRI-guided radiotherapy could qualify as an advantageous tool as no invasive procedures have to precede in therapeutic workflows. Furthermore, MRI guidance combined with gating and plan adaptation might be essential in order to increase treatment effectivity and reduce toxicity at the same time.

Imaging DNA Damage Repair In Vivo After 177Lu-DOTATATE Therapy.

Molecular radiotherapy using 177Lu-DOTATATE is a most effective treatment for somatostatin receptor–expressing neuroendocrine tumors. Despite its frequent and successful use in the clinic, little or no radiobiologic considerations are made at the time of treatment planning or delivery. On positive uptake on octreotide-based PET/SPECT imaging, treatment is usually administered as a standard dose and number of cycles without adjustment for peptide uptake, dosimetry, or radiobiologic and DNA damage effects in the tumor. Here, we visualized and quantified the extent of DNA damage response after 177Lu-DOTATATE therapy using SPECT imaging with 111In-anti-γH2AX-TAT. This work was a proof-of-principle study of this in vivo noninvasive biodosimeter with β-emitting therapeutic radiopharmaceuticals. Methods: Six cell lines were exposed to external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or 177Lu-DOTATATE, after which the number of γH2AX foci and the clonogenic survival were measured. Mice bearing CA20948 somatostatin receptor–positive tumor xenografts were treated with 177Lu-DOTATATE or sham-treated and coinjected with 111In-anti-γH2AX-TAT, 111In-IgG-TAT control, or vehicle. Results: Clonogenic survival after external-beam radiotherapy was cell-line–specific, indicating varying levels of intrinsic radiosensitivity. Regarding in vitro cell lines treated with 177Lu-DOTATATE, clonogenic survival decreased and γH2AX foci increased for cells expressing high levels of somatostatin receptor subtype 2. Ex vivo measurements revealed a partial correlation between 177Lu-DOTATATE uptake and γH2AX focus induction between different regions of CA20948 xenograft tumors, suggesting that different parts of the tumor may react differentially to 177Lu-DOTATATE irradiation. Conclusion: 111In-anti-γH2AX-TAT allows monitoring of DNA damage after 177Lu-DOTATATE therapy and reveals heterogeneous damage responses.

Pathologic response after modern radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer.

In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), pathologic complete response (pCR) following radiotherapy treatment has been shown to be an independent prognostic factor for long-term survival, progression-free survival and locoregional control. PCR is considered a surrogate to therapeutic efficacy, years before survival data are available, and therefore can be used to guide treatment plans and additional therapeutic interventions post-surgical resection. Given the extensive fibrotic changes induced by radiotherapy in the lung, radiological assessment of response can potentially misrepresent pathologic response. The optimal timing for assessment of pathologic response after conventionally fractionated radiotherapy and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) remains poorly understood. In this review, we summarize recent literature on pathologic response after radiotherapy for early stage and locally advanced NSCLC, we discuss current controversies around radiobiological considerations, and we present upcoming trials that will provide insight into current knowledge gaps.

Rationale for hypofractionation

Fractionation was established more than fifty years ago as the best way to obtain a differential effect between tumors and normal tissues. However, new technologies allowed today to spare critical organs from the radiation fields. And so protracted courses of irradiation are no longer required. Hypofractionation have clear practical advantages over classical fractionation: it saves the patient time; it saves money for public health system; it reduces pressure on radiotherapy units. In several localization, it has proved to be as efficient as classical fractionation without increasing late effects. In prostate cancer, some radiobiological considerations argue in favor of a better efficiency, but clinical trials did not demonstrated differences in biological control. In conclusion, for all diseases where hypofractionation was demonstrated efficient, it must be fully implemented. Invoice procedures must be adapted to maintain a sufficient level of reimbursement of radiotherapy centers.

Radiobiological considerations in combining doses from external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for cervical cancer.

The recommended radio-therapeutic treatment for cervix cancer consists of a first phase of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) plus a second phase of brachytherapy (BT), the combined treatment being delivered within 8 weeks. In order to assess a comprehensive dosimetry of the whole treatment, it is necessary to take into account that these two phases are characterized by different spatial and temporal dosimetric distributions, which complicates the task of the summation of the two contributions, EBRT and BT. Radiobiology allows to tackle this issue pragmatically by means of the LQ model and, in fact, this is the usual tool currently in use for this matter. In this work, we describe the rationale behind the summation of the dosimetric contributions of the two phases of the treatment, EBRT and BT, for cervix cancer, as carried out with the LQ model. Besides, we address, from a radiobiological point of view, several important considerations regarding the use of the LQ model for this task. One of them is the analysis of the effect of the overall treatment time in the result of the global treatment. Another important question considered is related to the fact that the capacity of LQ to predict the treatment outcomes is deteriorated when the dose per fraction of the radiotherapic scheme exceeds 6-10Gy, which is a typical brachytherapy fractionation. Finally, we analyze the influence of the uncertainty and the variability of the main parameters utilized in the LQ model formulation in the assessment of the global dosimetry.

Khan's Treatment Planning in Radiation Oncology, 4th Edition. Editor: Faiz M.Khan, John P.Gibbons, Paul W.Sperduto. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Wolters Kluwer), Philadelphia, PA, 2016. 648 pp. Price: $215.99. ISBN: 9781469889979. (Hardcover) (*)

The classic with a modern touch! Since the publication of the first edition of this clinical treatise in 1998, the field of radiation oncology has seen changes in all modalities, most notably, in the treatment planning and delivery subprocesses. Beginning with the advent of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) which revolutionized the field, there have been important developments in image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and proton therapy. The book captures the essence of these technologies from a practitioner's viewpoint. The latest edition comes only five short years after the last one, but is timely, considering the rapid advances in radiation oncology. The book's main focus is treatment planning and it presents this area brilliantly from perspectives of physics, biology, and clinical practice. Important treatment planning-related topics in these areas have been highlighted for the reader. However, like the previous editions, the book's main focus remains unchanged: improved patient care through effective and efficient use of new technologies. The book's intended audience is the radiation oncology team: radiation oncologists, medical physicists, and dosimetrists. The inclusion of Key Points (chapter summary) and Study Questions at the end of each chapter should appeal to residents preparing for their board examination. The fourth edition of the book has been completely updated and is accompanied by an e-book with enhanced navigation tools including fully searchable text. All chapters have been revised and most re-written by new authors chosen for their expertise in the field. The new edition also includes an expanded coverage of proton therapy and SBRT. Owing to its increasing and somewhat controversial use, there is also a chapter devoted to comparing the role of protons versus photons in radiation oncology. The book is divided into two sections. Section 1 consists of 23 chapters addressing the physics and biology of treatment planning. This section provides a systematic and logical refresher on pertinent topics, starting with patient imaging, treatment simulation, and a discussion of treatment planning algorithms used for photons, protons, electrons, and brachytherapy. This is followed by a chapter on quality assurance and commissioning of treatment planning systems. The second half of this section is devoted to technical and radiobiological considerations related to various treatment modalities. Section 1 concludes with an important chapter on treatment plan evaluation. Section 2 has 11 chapters devoted to treatment planning for site specific cancers presented from a clinical perspective. The book is clearly written and easy to read—a hallmark of all books penned by Dr. Khan. It provides a ready resource for finding answers to treatment planning related questions in radiation oncology. Perhaps, owing to size limitations, some topics are not covered in detail; however, ample references are provided for the interested reader. It is my hope that the book's future edition will include an expanded list of Study Questions. It is also hoped that the next edition will cover topics related to the evolving, yet important, field of MR-based treatment planning and delivery. In summary, the book is a joy to read and should appeal to all readers interested in radiation oncology. Anil Sethi is an Associate Professor in Radiation Oncology at Loyola University Health System, Chicago, IL. He is board certified by the American Board of Medical Physics (ABMP) and the American Board of Radiology (ABR). He is teaching medical physics to residents and clinical physicists and his research interests are in IMRT, IGRT, and all special procedures in RT especially SRS and SBRT.

Total body irradiation in allogeneic bone marrow transplantation conditioning regimens: A review.

Hematologic malignancies may require, at one point during their treatment, allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Total body irradiation combined with chemotherapy or radiomimetic used in allogeneic bone marrow transplantation is known to be very toxic. Total body irradiation (TBI) induces immunosuppression to prevent the rejection of donor marrow. TBI is also used to eradicate malignant cells and is in sanctuary organs that are not reached by chemotherapy drugs. TBI has evolved since its introduction in the late fifties, but acute and late toxicities remain. Helical tomotherapy, which is widely used for some solid tumors, is a path for the improvement of outcomes and toxicities in TBI because of its sparing capacities. In this article, we first review the practical aspects of TBI with patient positioning, radiobiological considerations and total dose and fractionation prescriptions. Second, we review the use of intensity modulated radiation therapy in bone marrow transplantation with a focus on helical tomotherapy TBI, helical tomotherapy total marrow irradiation (TMI) and total marrow and lymphoid irradiation (TMLI) and their dosimetric and clinical outcomes. Finally, we review the perspective of dose escalation and the extension to older patients and patients with comorbidity who do not benefit from a standard bone marrow transplantation conditioning regimen.

Dosimetric and radiobiological comparison of Cyberknife and Tomotherapy in stereotactic body radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

As recent studies have suggested relatively low α/β for prostate cancer, the interest in hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer is rising. The aim of this study is to compare dosimetric results of Cyberknife (CK) with Tomotherapy (HT) in SBRT for localized prostate cancer. Furthermore, the radiobiologic consequences of heterogeneous dose distribution are also analyzed. A total of 12 cases of localized prostate cancer previously treated with SBRT were collected. Treatments had been planned and delivered using CK. Then HT plans were generated for comparison afterwards. The prescribed dose was 37.5Gy in 5 fractions. Dosimetric indices for target volumes and organs at risk (OAR) were compared. For radiobiological evaluation, generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were calculated and compared. Both CK and HT achieved target coverage while meeting OAR constraints adequately. HT plans resulted in better dose homogeneity (Homogeneity index: 1.04±0.01 vs. 1.21±0.01; p = 0.0022), target coverage (97.74±0.86% vs. 96.56±1.17%; p = 0.0076) and conformity (new vonformity index: 1.16±0.05 vs. 1.21±0.04; p = 0.0096). HT was shown to predict lower late rectal toxicity as compared to CK. Integral dose to body was also significantly lower in HT plans (46.59±6.44 Gy'L vs 57.05±11.68 Gy'L; p = 0.0029). Based on physical dosimetry and radiobiologic considerations, HT may have advantages over CK, specifically in rectal sparing which could translate into clinical benefit of decreased late toxicities.

HDR Monotherapy in Prostate Cancer: Radiobiological Considerations When Determining Biologically Effective Dose in Clinical Trials

HDR Monotherapy in Prostate Cancer: Radiobiological Considerations When Determining Biologically Effective Dose in Clinical Trials

Breast Molecular Profiling and Radiotherapy Considerations.

The last decade has seen major changes in the management of breast cancer. Heterogeneity regarding histology, therapeutic response, dissemination patterns, and patient outcome is evident. Molecular profiling provides an accurate tool to predict treatment outcome compared with classical clinicopathologic features. The genomic profiling unveiled the heterogeneity of breast cancer and identified distinct biologic subtypes. These advanced techniques were integrated into the clinical management; predicting systemic therapy benefit and overall survival. Utilizing genotyping to guide locoregional management decisions needs further characterization. In this chapter we will review available data on molecular classification of breast cancer, their association with locoregional outcome, their radiobiological properties and radiotherapy considerations.

Therapeutic schemes in 177Lu and 90Y-PRRT: radiobiological considerations.

The purpose of this work is to implement a radiobiological model to compare different treatment schedules for Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT) with 177Lu and 90Y. The principal radiobiological quantities were studied as a function of radionuclides, fractionation schemes, activity distribution in kidneys and tumor radiosensitivity. Clinical data were used to derive representative absorbed doses for several treatment schemes for 177Lu-PRRT and for 90Y-PRRT and considered as input data for the radiobiological model. Both uniform and non-uniform activity distributions were considered for kidneys and cortex; for tumors a possible uptake reduction after each cycle and inter-patient radiosensitivity variability were investigated. Normal-Tissue-Complication-Probability (NTCP) and Tumor-Control-Probability (TCP) were evaluated. Hyper-cycling has a limited advantage in terms of BED reduction on kidneys for 177Lu, while for 90Y the effect is sizable and helps in reducing the NTCP. For all 177Lu-schemes the renal toxicity risk is negligible while for some 90Y-schemes the NTCP is not null. In case of tumor uptake reduction with cycles the treatment efficacy is reduced with a BED loss up to 46%. The TCP decreases when assuming normally-distributed tumor radiosensitivity values. This paper discusses how the combination of dosimetry and radiobiological modeling may help in exploring the link between the treatment schedule and the potential clinical outcome. The results highlight the capability of model to reproduce the available clinical data and provide useful qualitative information. Further investigation on dose distribution and dose uptake reduction with accurate clinical data is needed to progress in this field.

MO‐D‐BRD‐04: NIST Air‐Kerma Standard for Electronic Brachytherapy Calibrations

Electronic brachytherapy (eBT) has seen an insurgence of manufacturers entering the US market for use in radiation therapy. In addition to the established interstitial, intraluminary, and intracavitary applications of eBT, many centers are now using eBT to treat skin lesions. It is important for medical physicists working with electronic brachytherapy sources to understand the basic physics principles of the sources themselves as well as the variety of applications for which they are being used. The calibration of the sources is different from vendor to vendor and the traceability of calibrations has evolved as new sources came to market. In 2014, a new air‐kerma based standard was introduced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to measure the output of an eBT source. Eventually commercial treatment planning systems should accommodate this new standard and provide NIST traceability to the end user. The calibration and commissioning of an eBT system is unique to its application and typically entails a list of procedural recommendations by the manufacturer. Commissioning measurements are performed using a variety of methods, some of which are modifications of existing AAPM Task Group protocols. A medical physicist should be familiar with the different AAPM Task Group recommendations for applicability to eBT and how to properly adapt them to their needs. In addition to the physical characteristics of an eBT source, the photon energy is substantially lower than from HDR Ir‐192 sources. Consequently, tissue‐specific dosimetry and radiobiological considerations are necessary when comparing these brachytherapy modalities and when making clinical decisions as a radiation therapy team. In this session, the physical characteristics and calibration methodologies of eBt sources will be presented as well as radiobiology considerations and other important clinical considerations.Learning Objectives: To understand the basic principles of electronic brachytherapy and the various applications for which it is being used. To understand the physics of the calibration and commissioning for electronic brachytherapy sources To understand the unique radiobiology and clinical implementation of electronic brachytherapy systems for skin and IORT techniques Xoft, Inc. contributed funding toward development of the NIST electronic brachytherapy facility (Michael Mitch).The University of Wisconsin (Wesley Culberson) has received research support funding from Xoft, Inc. Zoubir Ouhib has received partial funding from Elekta Esteya.

MO‐D‐BRD‐00: Electronic Brachytherapy

Electronic brachytherapy (eBT) has seen an insurgence of manufacturers entering the US market for use in radiation therapy. In addition to the established interstitial, intraluminary, and intracavitary applications of eBT, many centers are now using eBT to treat skin lesions. It is important for medical physicists working with electronic brachytherapy sources to understand the basic physics principles of the sources themselves as well as the variety of applications for which they are being used. The calibration of the sources is different from vendor to vendor and the traceability of calibrations has evolved as new sources came to market. In 2014, a new air‐kerma based standard was introduced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to measure the output of an eBT source. Eventually commercial treatment planning systems should accommodate this new standard and provide NIST traceability to the end user. The calibration and commissioning of an eBT system is unique to its application and typically entails a list of procedural recommendations by the manufacturer. Commissioning measurements are performed using a variety of methods, some of which are modifications of existing AAPM Task Group protocols. A medical physicist should be familiar with the different AAPM Task Group recommendations for applicability to eBT and how to properly adapt them to their needs. In addition to the physical characteristics of an eBT source, the photon energy is substantially lower than from HDR Ir‐192 sources. Consequently, tissue‐specific dosimetry and radiobiological considerations are necessary when comparing these brachytherapy modalities and when making clinical decisions as a radiation therapy team. In this session, the physical characteristics and calibration methodologies of eBt sources will be presented as well as radiobiology considerations and other important clinical considerations.Learning Objectives: To understand the basic principles of electronic brachytherapy and the various applications for which it is being used. To understand the physics of the calibration and commissioning for electronic brachytherapy sources To understand the unique radiobiology and clinical implementation of electronic brachytherapy systems for skin and IORT techniques Xoft, Inc. contributed funding toward development of the NIST electronic brachytherapy facility (Michael Mitch).The University of Wisconsin (Wesley Culberson) has received research support funding from Xoft, Inc. Zoubir Ouhib has received partial funding from Elekta Esteya.

MO‐D‐BRD‐02: Radiological Physics and Surface Lesion Treatments with Electronic Brachytherapy

Electronic brachytherapy (eBT) has seen an insurgence of manufacturers entering the US market for use in radiation therapy. In addition to the established interstitial, intraluminary, and intracavitary applications of eBT, many centers are now using eBT to treat skin lesions. It is important for medical physicists working with electronic brachytherapy sources to understand the basic physics principles of the sources themselves as well as the variety of applications for which they are being used. The calibration of the sources is different from vendor to vendor and the traceability of calibrations has evolved as new sources came to market. In 2014, a new air‐kerma based standard was introduced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to measure the output of an eBT source. Eventually commercial treatment planning systems should accommodate this new standard and provide NIST traceability to the end user. The calibration and commissioning of an eBT system is unique to its application and typically entails a list of procedural recommendations by the manufacturer. Commissioning measurements are performed using a variety of methods, some of which are modifications of existing AAPM Task Group protocols. A medical physicist should be familiar with the different AAPM Task Group recommendations for applicability to eBT and how to properly adapt them to their needs. In addition to the physical characteristics of an eBT source, the photon energy is substantially lower than from HDR Ir‐192 sources. Consequently, tissue‐specific dosimetry and radiobiological considerations are necessary when comparing these brachytherapy modalities and when making clinical decisions as a radiation therapy team. In this session, the physical characteristics and calibration methodologies of eBt sources will be presented as well as radiobiology considerations and other important clinical considerations.Learning Objectives: To understand the basic principles of electronic brachytherapy and the various applications for which it is being used. To understand the physics of the calibration and commissioning for electronic brachytherapy sources To understand the unique radiobiology and clinical implementation of electronic brachytherapy systems for skin and IORT techniques Xoft, Inc. contributed funding toward development of the NIST electronic brachytherapy facility (Michael Mitch).The University of Wisconsin (Wesley Culberson) has received research support funding from Xoft, Inc. Zoubir Ouhib has received partial funding from Elekta Esteya.