Multicentre knowledge sharing and planning/dose audit on flattening filter free beams for SBRT lung

8th International Conference on 3D Radiation Dosimetry

Hansen, C.R.^1,9 ; Sykes, J.R.^2,3,9 ; Barber, J.^3,9 ; West, K.^3 ; Bromley, R.^4 ; Szymura, K.^4 ; Fisher, S.^5 ; Sim, J.^5 ; Bailey, M.^6 ; Chrystal, D.^6 ; Deshpande, S.^7 ; Franji, I.^7 ; Nielsen, T.B.^1 ; Brink, C.^1,8 ; Thwaites, D.I.^9

Laboratory of Radiation Physics, Odense University Hospital, Denmark^1

St James's Institute of Oncology, Leeds, United Kingdom^2

Department of Radiation Oncology, Nepean Cancer Care Centre, Sydney, Australia^3

Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia^4

Department of Radiation Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia^5

Illawarra Cancer Care Centre, Wollongong, Australia^6

Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres, Sydney, Australia^7

Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark^8

Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia^9

关键词: Clinical practices;    Flattening filter free;    Knowledge-sharing;    Sharing knowledge;    Stereotactic body radiation therapy;    Treatment planning;    Treatment planning systems;    Volumetric modulated arc therapy;   

Others  :  https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/573/1/012018/pdf
DOI  :  10.1088/1742-6596/573/1/012018

来源: IOP

【 摘 要 】

When implementing new technology into clinical practice, there will always be a need for large knowledge gain. The aim of this study was twofold, (I) audit the treatment planning and dose delivery of Flattening Filter Free (FFF) beam technology for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) of lung tumours across a range of treatment planning systems compared to the conventional Flatting Filter (FF) beams, (II) investigate how sharing knowledge between centres of different experience can improve plan quality. All vendor/treatment planning system (TPS) combinations investigated were able to produce acceptable treatment plans and the dose accuracy was clinically acceptable for all plans. By sharing knowledge between the different centres, the minor protocol violations (MPV) could be significantly reduced, from an average of 1.9 MPV per plan to 0.6 after such sharing of treatment planning knowledge. In particular, for the centres with less SBRT and/or volumetric- modulated arc therapy (VMAT) experience the MPV average per plan improved. All vendor/TPS combinations were also able to successfully deliver the FF and FFF SBRT VMAT plans. The plan quality and dose accuracy were found to be clinically acceptable.