Citations

Healthcare Systems Science (HSS) is an important part of medical education because it helps physicians understand how healthcare systems work and how to improve them. However, it is not commonly included in graduate medical training. This manuscript describes the creation and use of a radiation oncology (RO) HSS curriculum that was built with medical school faculty and adapted to the needs of residents in our residency program. The curriculum included sixteen sessions over ten months and covered six domains: person centered care, population centered care, team-based care, high value care, leadership, and health policy economics and technology. Each session included a short lecture and a case discussion on topics such as financial toxicity, telemedicine, workflow improvement, burnout, health equity, and billing. The curriculum was used successfully with regular participation from residents and faculty, showing that it can fit into an existing residency schedule. Residents completed pre- and post-intervention surveys assessing understanding, consideration, confidence, and satisfaction related to HSS domains using 5-point Likert-scale items. Among residents with paired survey data, scores for understanding of HSS, incorporation of HSS into care planning, confidence applying HSS principles, and satisfaction with HSS integration all improved following curriculum completion. This experience shows that adding HSS to RO residency training is practical and useful, and it may also be a helpful model for other residency programs.

Purpose To implement and evaluate a faculty mentorship skill development curriculum within a radiation oncology department at a single academic medical center. Methods A three-part faculty development curriculum consisting of three 45-minute facilitated workshops was implemented for physician faculty mentors. The curriculum was designed to support mentors in navigating mentoring relationships, aligning expectations, and fostering mentee independence. Content was informed by evidence-based mentorship frameworks and adult learning principles, including models developed by the Center for the Improvement of Mentored Experiences in Research, social cognitive theory, and principles of psychological safety and self-efficacy. Faculty participants representing a range of academic ranks and mentoring experience levels participated voluntarily. Pre- and post-curriculum self-assessment surveys evaluated participant understanding and implementation of mentorship skills, as well as perceptions of common mentorship challenges, using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze responses. Results Curriculum content progressed from foundational mentorship concepts, including mentor roles, mentoring networks, and stages of mentoring relationships, to communication strategies, expectation alignment, and promotion of mentee independence. Educational methods included brief didactic instruction, case-based discussion, guided reflection, and peer-to-peer learning. Survey data demonstrated improvement in participant self-assessment scores across all evaluated mentorship domains, including mentoring across differences, supporting mentee goal achievement, confidence as a mentor, providing constructive feedback, awareness of mentorship challenges, setting clear expectations, and understanding core mentorship competencies. Participants also reported reduced perceived challenges related to mentorship, with the largest improvements observed in setting boundaries, mentoring across differences, and addressing sensitive topics. Conclusions This faculty mentorship development curriculum was feasible to implement and demonstrated favorable early improvements in self-reported mentorship knowledge, confidence, and perceived ability to navigate common mentorship challenges. Further longitudinal evaluation is needed to assess sustained implementation of mentorship skills and longer-term impact on mentoring relationships.

Abstract Background The radiation oncology clinical practice involves many steps relying on the dynamic interplay of abundant text data. Large language models have displayed remarkable capabilities in processing complex text information. But their direct applications in specific fields like radiation oncology remain underexplored. Purpose This study aims to investigate whether fine‐tuning LLMs with domain knowledge can improve the performance on Task (1) treatment regimen generation, Task (2) treatment modality selection (photon, proton, electron, or brachytherapy), and Task (3) ICD‐10 code prediction in radiation oncology. Methods Data for 15 724 patient cases were extracted. Cases where patients had a single diagnostic record, and a clearly identifiable primary treatment plan were selected for preprocessing and manual annotation to have 7903 cases of the patient diagnosis, treatment plan, treatment modality, and ICD‐10 code. Each case was used to construct a pair consisting of patient diagnostics details and an answer (treatment regimen, treatment modality, or ICD‐10 code, respectively) for the supervised fine‐tuning of these three tasks. Open source LLaMA2‐7B and Mistral‐7B models were utilized for the fine‐tuning with the Low‐Rank Approximations method. Accuracy and ROUGE‐1 score were reported for the fine‐tuned models and original models. Clinical evaluation was performed on Task (1) by radiation oncologists, while precision, recall, and F‐1 score were evaluated for Task (2) and (3). One‐sided Wilcoxon signed‐rank tests were used to statistically analyze the results. Results Fine‐tuned LLMs outperformed original LLMs across all tasks with p value ≤ 0.001. Clinical evaluation demonstrated that over 60% of the fine‐tuned LLMs‐generated treatment regimens were clinically acceptable. Precision, recall, and F1‐score showed improved performance of fine‐tuned LLMs. Conclusion Fine‐tuned LLMs demonstrated statistically significant improvements over original LLMs upon three clinically important tasks in radiation oncology. This study explored the feasibility of applying fine‐tuned LLMs in radiation oncology, inspiring further development of utilizing LLMs to assist with radiation oncology tasks.

Abstract Background Inter‐fractional and intra‐fractional positioning and motion monitoring based on implanted fiducials through kilovoltage (kV) imaging is a cost‐effective approach to enhance intact prostate radiotherapy treatment accuracy. However, comprehensive studies for three‐dimensional (3D) position extraction and the corrective action threshold are lacking. Purpose To develop and verify a fiducial motion monitoring system with 3D position information based on triggered kV images taken during treatment delivery, and to comprehensively evaluate the recommended thresholds for corrective action during treatment. Methods An in‐house fiducial triangulation algorithm was developed to monitor fiducial positions using subsequent kV triggered images. The precision of fiducial triangulation and motion detection was validated on a pelvis phantom with four fiducial inserts. A retrospective study was conducted on prostate cancer patients who received either moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT, n = 16) or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT, n = 12), categorized by endo‐rectal balloon (ERB) use. Intra‐fractional positions relative to isocenter were computed, and these positions were analyzed in comparison to the original marker locations of the patient's treatment plan. A linear regression fit was used per fraction to determine correlation coefficients between motions in the left–right (LR), superior–inferior (SI), and anterior–posterior (AP) directions. Average fraction time (AFT) of treatment was reported based on the observed average time spent on steps in the workflow and the percentage of fiducials caught outside of the current two‐dimensional (2D) tolerance threshold of 5 mm. The observed 3D offsets were used to estimate AFT for various 3D tolerance thresholds. Results Overall, our triangulation method proved to be very precise for static cases, where phantom measurements revealed a fiducial position triangulation precision of mm for stationary targets, but had a spread of mm for targets with 1 mm of motion. Employing triangulation, true motion exceeding 5 mm was detected above 4.0 mm in magnitude 90.9% of the time, a noticeable improvement in comparison to the 28%–65% successful detection rate reported by 2D projection methods. Most detection errors were attributed to depth disparity. Similar to other reports, correlation coefficients for intra‐fractional motion generally indicated no LR/SI, no LR/AP, and weak positive SI/AP correlations for MHRT and SBRT patients. Offsets beyond a 3D tolerance threshold of 5 mm were observed at a rate of 4.25%–5.25%, while the 5 mm 2D out‐of‐tolerance catch‐rate was 1.6%. The AFT was 8.1–8.2 min using the 2D tolerance threshold of 5 mm. In comparison, the estimated AFT for the proposed 3D tolerance monitoring of offsets beyond 2–5 mm was slightly higher at 8.2–10.9 min due to the higher amount of out‐of‐tolerance instances for the higher precision intra‐fractional motion management. Conclusions Our study showcases a promising subsequent kV‐based triangulation method for intra‐fractional prostate motion monitoring. Acquiring 3D motion information results in higher out‐of‐tolerance catch‐rates particularly in the depth dimension of the kV images, which is perpendicular to the treatment beam. Failure to properly observe and catch these offsets would result in sub‐optimal conformality and accuracy of the dose delivery.

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.

Abstract Background Minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) quantify the clinical relevance of quality of life results at the individual patient and group level. The aim of this study was to estimate the MCID for the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) and the Worst and Usual Fatigue items in patients with brain or CNS cancer undergoing curative radiotherapy. Methods Data from a multi-site prospective registry was used. The MCID was calculated using distribution-based and anchor-based approaches. For the anchor-based approach, the fatigue item from the PROMIS-10 served as the anchor to determine if a patient improved, deteriorated, or had no change from baseline to end of treatment (EOT). We compared the unadjusted means on the BFI for the 3 groups to calculate the MCID. For the distribution-based approaches, we calculated the MCID as 0.5 SD of the scores and as 1.96 times the standard error of measurement. Results Three-hundred and fifty nine patients with brain or CNS tumors undergoing curative radiotherapy filled out the 9-item BFI at baseline and EOT. The MCID for the BFI was 1.33 (ranging from 0.99 to 1.70 across the approaches), 1.51 (ranging from 1.16 to 2.02) and 1.76 (ranging from 1.38 to 2.14) for the usual and worst fatigue items, respectively. Conclusions This study provides the MCID ranges for the BFI and Worst and Usual fatigue items, which will allow clinically meaningful conclusions to be drawn from BFI scores. These results can be used to select optimal treatments for patients with brain or CNS cancer or to interpret BFI scores from clinical trials.

Abstract PURPOSE 18F-DOPA is sensitive/specific for identifying areas of biologically aggressive disease for glioblastoma. We report the impact of 18F-DOPA on radiation treatment planning from a phase II study. METHODS Gross target volume (GTV) was defined by the boolean of high-risk PET (tumor/normal brain SUV > 2.0) and MRI T1 contrast enhancement (MRI-CE) including surgical cavity. The clinical target volume (CTV) included the GTV with 1cm margin. Using proton beam therapy, GTV ≤ 65 cc was treated with 25 (CTV), 30 (MRI-CE), and 35 (PET) GyE over 5 fractions with a simultaneous integrated boost. GTV > 65 cc received 30 (CTV), 35 (MRI-CE), and 40 (PET) GyE over 10 fractions. Radiation field design was compared to traditional 1.5cm CTV margin on MRI-CE. RESULTS Between May 2019 and October 2021, 39 patients were treated. The median MRI-CE tumor diameter was 5.2cm. The median PET volume was 7.9cc (range 0–64.9cc). The median MRI-CE volume was 35.1cc (range 8.6–114cc). High-risk PET was contained within: MRI-CE 18/39 (46%), MRI-CE + T2W FLAIR 13/39 (33%), MRI-CE + T2W FLAIR + outside GTV 4/39 (10%), outside GTV 2/39 (5%) and no uptake 2/39 (5%). Utilizing this planning technique, there was a 26% volume reduction in CTV to traditional 1.5 cm margin on MRI-CE. PET imaging in treatment planning allowed inclusion of high-risk disease that would have been excluded on traditional CTV in 23% of cases (range 1.6-33.8cc). PET was more predictive [HR 1.03 (95% CI 1.01, 1.05) p = 0.002] than MRI [HR 1.01 (95% CI 1.00, 1.03) p = 0.02] for death with each cc increasing risk of death by 3.1%. CONCLUSIONS The incorporation of 18F-DOPA in treatment planning yields a more targeted approach with reductions in both normal brain treated and risk of geographic miss compared to traditional CTV margins.