Hobbis, Dean

AbstractBackgroundBolus materials have been used for decades in radiotherapy. Most frequently, these materials are utilized to bring dose closer to the skin surface to cover superficial targets optimally. While cavity filling, such as nasal cavities, is desirable, traditional commercial bolus is lacking, requiring other solutions. Recently, investigators have worked on utilizing 3D printing technology, including commercially available solutions, which can overcome some challenges with traditional bolus.PurposeTo utilize failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) to successfully implement a comprehensive 3D printed bolus solution to replace commercial bolus in our clinic using a series of open‐source (or free) software products.Methods3D printed molds for bespoke bolus were created by exporting the DICOM structures of the bolus designed in the treatment planning system and manipulated to create a multipart mold for 3D printing. A silicone (Ecoflex 00–30) mixture is poured into the mold and cured to form the bolus. Molds for sheet bolus of five thicknesses were also created. A comprehensive FMEA was performed to guide workflow adjustments and QA steps.ResultsThe process map identified 39 and 30 distinct steps for the bespoke and flat sheet bolus workflows, respectively. The corresponding FMEA highlighted 119 and 86 failure modes, with 69 shared between the processes. Misunderstanding of plan intent was a potential cause for most of the highest‐scoring failure modes, indicating that physics and dosimetry involvement early in the process is paramount.ConclusionFMEA informed the design and implementation of QA steps to guarantee a safe and high‐quality comprehensive implementation of silicone bolus from 3D printed molds. This approach allows for greater adaptability not afforded by traditional bolus, as well as potential dissemination to other clinics due to the open‐source nature of the workflow.

AbstractPurposeTo assess the practicality of employing a commercial knowledge‐based planning tool (RapidPlan) to generate adapted intact prostate and prostate bed volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans on iterative cone‐beam computed tomography (iCBCT) datasets.Methods and materialsIntact prostate and prostate bed RapidPlan models were trained utilizing planning data from 50 and 44 clinical cases, respectively. To ensure that refined models were capable of producing adequate clinical plans with a single optimization, models were tested with 50 clinical planning CT datasets by comparing dose‐volume histogram (DVH) and plan quality metric (PQM) values between clinical and RapidPlan‐generated plans. The RapidPlan tool was then used to retrospectively generate adapted VMAT plans on daily iCBCT images for 20 intact prostate and 15 prostate bed cases. As before, DVH and PQM metrics were utilized to dosimetrically compare scheduled (iCBCT Verify) and adapted (iCBCT RapidPlan) plans. Timing data was collected to further evaluate the feasibility of integrating this approach within an online adaptive radiotherapy workflow.ResultsModel testing results confirmed the models were capable of producing VMAT plans within a single optimization that were overall improved upon or dosimetrically comparable to original clinical plans. Direct application of RapidPlan on iCBCT datasets produced satisfactory intact prostate and prostate bed plans with generally improved target volume coverage/conformality and rectal sparing relative to iCBCT Verify plans as indicated by DVH values, though bladder metrics were marginally increased on average. Average PQM values for iCBCT RapidPlans were significantly improved compared to iCBCT Verify plans. The average time required [in mm:ss] to generate adapted plans was 06:09 ± 02:06 (intact) and 07:12 ± 01:04 (bed).ConclusionThis study demonstrated the feasibility of leveraging RapidPlan to expeditiously generate adapted VMAT intact prostate and prostate bed plans on iCBCT datasets. In general, adapted plans were dosimetrically improved relative to scheduled plans, emphasizing the practicality of the proposed approach.

Purpose: Post-operative prostate cancer patients are treated with full bladder instruction and the use of an endorectal balloon (ERB). We reassessed the efficacy of this practice based on daily image guidance and dose delivery using high-quality iterative reconstructed cone-beam CT (iCBCT). Methods: Fractional dose delivery was calculated on daily iCBCT for 314 fractions from 14 post-operative prostate patients (8 with and 6 without ERB) treated with volumetric modulated radiotherapy (VMAT). All patients were positioned using novel iCBCT during image guidance. The bladder, rectal wall, femoral heads, and prostate bed clinical tumor volume (CTV) were contoured and verified on daily iCBCT. The dose-volume parameters of the contoured organs at risk (OAR) and CTV coverage were assessed for the clinical impact of daily bladder volume variations and the use of ERB. Minimum bladder volume was studied, and a straightforward bladder instruction was explored for easy clinical adoption. Results: A “minimum bladder” contour, the overlap between the original bladder contour and a 15 mm anterior and superior expansion from prostate bed PTV, was confirmed to be effective in identifying cases that might fail a bladder constraint of V65% <60%. The average difference between the maximum and minimum bladder volumes for each patient was 277.1 mL. The daily bladder volumes varied from 62.4 to 590.7 mL and ranged from 29 to 286% of the corresponding planning bladder volume. The bladder constraint of V65% <60% was met in almost all fractions (98%). CTVs (D90%, D95%, and D98%) remained well-covered regardless of the absolute bladder volume daily variation or the presence of the endorectal balloon. Patients with an endorectal balloon showed smaller variation but a higher average maximum rectal wall dose (D0.03mL: 104.3% of the prescription) compared to patients without (103.3%). Conclusions: A “minimum bladder” contour was determined that can be easily generated and followed to ensure sufficient bladder sparing. Further analysis and validation are needed to confirm the utility of the minimal bladder contour. Accurate dose delivery can be achieved for prostate bed target coverage and OAR sparing with or without the use of ERB.

AbstractBackgroundCone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) allows for patient setup and positioning, and potentially dose verification or adaptive replanning prior to each treatment delivery. Poor CBCT image quality due to scatter artifacts and patient motion has been a major limiting factor. A new image reconstruction algorithm was recently clinically implemented for improving image quality through iterative reconstruction (iCBCT).PurposeThis study aims to characterize iCBCT image quality, establish image value (HU)‐to‐relative electron density (RED) calibration curves for dose calculation, and assess the dosimetric accuracy for different anatomical sites.Material and methodsBoth conventional CBCT and iCBCT scans were acquired from a Varian TrueBeam On‐Board Imager system. A Catphan 604 phantom was scanned to compare image quality between the traditional Feldkamp–Davis–Kress (FDK) and novel iterative reconstruction techniques. Computerized Imaging Reference Systems (CIRS) electron density phantom was used to construct site‐specific HU‐RED curves corresponding to various scan settings. The CIRS Dynamic Thorax phantom, Rando pelvis phantom, and BrainLab head phantom were used for assessing dosimetric accuracy calculated on iCBCT images, compared to that on traditional FDK‐based CBCT images. All phantoms were scanned on a computed tomography (CT) to obtain baseline HU values for comparison.ResultsTest results obtained from Catphan showed statistically significant improvement with iCBCT, compared to FDK CBCT. Average HU differences from the baseline CT values were improved to within ±30 HU for iCBCT, compared to FDK CBCT for phantom studies. Dose calculated on iCBCT for both phantoms and patient cases directly using baseline HU‐RED calibration from CT showed 0.5%–2.0% accuracy from the baseline dose calculated on CT, which is comparable to doses calculated using site‐specific HU‐RED calibration curves.ConclusioniCBCT provides improved image quality, improved HU accuracy compared to CT baseline, and has potential to provide online dose verification as part of the adaptive radiotherapy workflow directly using the baseline HU‐RED calibration curve from CT.