Prisciandaro, Joann I.

AbstractThe American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8,000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States.The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner.Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized.The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: Must and Must Not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. Should and Should Not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances. Approved by AAPM’s Executive Committee May 28, 2019

The term Big Data has come to encompass a number of concepts and uses within medicine. This paper lays out the relevance and application of large collections of data in the radiation oncology community. We describe the potential importance and uses in clinical practice. The important concepts are then described and how they have been or could be implemented are discussed. Impediments to progress in the collection and use of sufficient quantities of data are also described. Finally, recommendations for how the community can move forward to achieve the potential of big data in radiation oncology are provided.

This manuscript presents a case of early stage squamous cell carcinoma of the left buccal mucosa treated with intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) followed by a high‐dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy boost. With limited literature available on HDR mold (stent) radiotherapy for oral cancer, a discussion on the issues encountered during treatment planning and delivery may prove to be insightful for facilities faced with a similar challenge.PACS numbers: 87.53.Jw, 87.53.Tf, 87.59.Ci, 87.59.Fm

A method to investigate light and radiation field congruence utilizing a commercially available amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device (EPID) was developed. This method employed an EPID, the associated EPI software, and a diamond‐shaped template. The template was constructed from a block tray in which Sn/Pb wires, 1 mm in diameter, were embedded into a diamond shaped groove milled into the tray. The collimator jaws of the linac were aligned such that the light field fell directly on the corners of the diamond. A radiation detection algorithm within the EPI software determined the extent of the radiation field. The light and radiation field congruence was evaluated by comparing the vertexes of the diamond reference structure to the detected radiation field. In addition, the digital jaw settings were recorded and later compared to the light field detected on the films and EPIs. Three linear accelerators were tracked for a period ranging from 2–8 months. Light radiation field congruence tests with films and EPIs were comparable, yielding a difference of less than 0.6 mm, well within the allowed 2‐mm tolerance. A disparity was observed in the magnitude of the detected light field. The X and Y dimensions of the light field measured with film differed by less than or equal to 1.4 mm from the digital collimator settings, whereas the values extracted from the EPIs differed by up to 2.5 mm. Based on these findings, EPIs were found to be a quick and reliable alternative to film for qualitative and relative analyses.PACS number(s): 87.53.Xd, 87.56.Fc, 87.53.Oq, 87.52.–g, 87.53.–j