Back to Authors

Lemish, Pamela R.

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic in Arizona

Citations 2

Four‐year experience with an in‐house treatment management platform to streamline departmental operations in radiation oncology
Chang, G., Rong, Yi , Buckey, Courtney, Susen, Matthew, Lara, Pedro R., Lemish, Pamela R., Boutis, Gregory S., Chen, Quan, Chang, Grace N , Susen, Matthew J, Clouser, Edward L, Rong, Yi , Buckey, C, Lara, Pedro, Clouser, Edward

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics | March 9, 2026 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 3 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/acm2.70515 Get It

Abstract Purpose To develop and implement an in‑house treatment‑management platform to improve communication, data accessibility, and task tracking across a radiation oncology department. Methods We developed Capsule, a custom software platform that centralizes patient data from the ARIA oncology information system (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, United States), and integrates it with data from Outlook (Microsoft, Redmond, United States), spreadsheets, and manual inputs. Built using C#, SQL, and the .NET framework, it features a graphical interface in XAML with twelve modular tools to support workflows across a large multi‐modality department. A formal validation, feedback, and maintenance cycle was established. Its impact on workflow efficiency was evaluated using average CarePath task duration before and after implementation, supplemented by user interviews and surveys. Results The Department Schedule, Treatment Planning and On‐Treatment Whiteboard, Spreadsheet, and various workload tracking modules emerged as the most frequently used among dosimetrists surveyed.The Whiteboard module consolidates planning metadata for streamlined workflows. Workload and scheduling modules help distribute tasks fairly. The Department Schedule module centralizes daily role and contact information. The Spreadsheet module allows dosimetrists to identify a reference for unique plans and provides secure access to large exportable tabulated patient data and clinical trends. Other modules support proton down‐time replanning and special procedure physics assignment. One year after Capsule's implementation, most tasks in the external beam radiation therapy workflow experienced a reduction in average duration. Discussion Capsule streamlines workflows by integrating multiple tools into a single platform, supporting urgent scenarios, and improving task hand‐off. Its modular design allows customization to local workflows, but implementation must be guided by institutional oversight and formal quality management to ensure data security and compliance. Conclusion Capsule can provide a solution for improved workflow efficiency, communication, and interdisciplinary coordination. By democratizing access to routine and retrospective data, it supports treatment planning, scheduling, and quality improvement. Ongoing updates are essential as clinical practices evolve.
Dosimetric Advantage of Scanning Beam Proton Therapy in Gynecologic Patients Receiving Adjuvant Radiotherapy
Ger, Rachel , Lentz, Jarrod M. , Vora, Sujay A., Bues, Martin , Morales, Danairis Hernandez, Anderson, Justin D. , Kutyreff, Christopher J. , Schulz, Christie A., Lara, Pedro R., Ridgway, Ana K., Lemish, Pamela R., Gagneur, Justin D., Ger, Rachel B , Bues, Martin , Kutyreff, Christopher J , Anand, Aman, Niedzielski, Joshua S. , Schulz, Christie A., Lara, Pedro R., Anand, Aman Raj

Cancers | June 17, 2025 | Volume: 17 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 2010

10.3390/cancers17122010 Get It

Background/Objectives: Adjuvant radiation for gynecologic malignancies often exposes organs at risk (OARs), such as the bone marrow, bowel, rectum, and bladder, to radiation, leading to toxicities that impact treatment tolerance and patient quality of life. Scanning proton beam therapy, particularly with Individual Field Simultaneous Optimization (IFSO), may offer dosimetric and biological advantages over volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). This study evaluates the clinical impact of IFSO-based proton planning in post-operative gynecologic cancer patients. Materials and Methods: Fourteen patients receiving adjuvant proton therapy to 45 Gy in 25 fractions were retrospectively analyzed. Comparison VMAT plans were generated on the same datasets. Dose–volume metrics for key OARs and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs) were compared using paired statistical tests. Robustness evaluations accounted for setup and range uncertainties. Results: Proton plans significantly reduced dose to bone marrow (V10Gy: 58% vs. 86%, p < 0.00001; V20Gy: 47% vs. 58%, p < 0.00001), small bowel (V20Gy: 21% vs. 56%, p < 0.00001), and femoral heads (left femoral head mean: 11Gy vs. 13Gy, p = 0.032; right femoral head mean: 11Gy vs. 13Gy, p = 0.022). NTCP modeling predicted significantly lower rates of bowel urgency (9.4% vs. 3.3%, p < 0.001) and hematologic toxicity (10.2% vs. 4.9%, p < 0.001) with proton therapy. Plans remained robust across uncertainty scenarios. Conclusions: IFSO-based scanning proton therapy provides clinically meaningful sparing of bone marrow and bowel, with the potential to reduce hematologic and gastrointestinal toxicities. These findings support its use in patients receiving adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy, particularly those undergoing extended field treatment or chemotherapy.