Premium
WE‐DE‐201‐02: A Statistical Analysis Tool for Plan Quality Verification in HDR Brachytherapy Forward Planning for Cervix Cancer
Author(s) -
Ma R,
Zhu X,
Li S,
Zheng D,
Lei Y,
Wang S,
Verma V,
Bennion N,
Wahl A,
Zhou S
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4957807
Subject(s) - brachytherapy , rectum , radiation treatment planning , quality assurance , medicine , medical physics , nuclear medicine , reference dose , computer science , radiation therapy , radiology , surgery , risk assessment , external quality assessment , pathology , computer security
Purpose: High Dose Rate (HDR) brachytherapy forward planning is principally an iterative process; hence, plan quality is affected by planners’ experiences and limited planning time. Thus, this may lead to sporadic errors and inconsistencies in planning. A statistical tool based on previous approved clinical treatment plans would help to maintain the consistency of planning quality and improve the efficiency of second checking. Methods: An independent dose calculation tool was developed from commercial software. Thirty‐three previously approved cervical HDR plans with the same prescription dose (550cGy), applicator type, and treatment protocol were examined, and ICRU defined reference point doses (bladder, vaginal mucosa, rectum, and points A/B) along with dwell times were collected. Dose calculation tool then calculated appropriate range with a 95% confidence interval for each parameter obtained, which would be used as the benchmark for evaluation of those parameters in future HDR treatment plans. Model quality was verified using five randomly selected approved plans from the same dataset. Results: Dose variations appears to be larger at the reference point of bladder and mucosa as compared with rectum. Most reference point doses from verification plans fell between the predicted range, except the doses of two points of rectum and two points of reference position A (owing to rectal anatomical variations & clinical adjustment in prescription points, respectively). Similar results were obtained for tandem and ring dwell times despite relatively larger uncertainties. Conclusion: This statistical tool provides an insight into clinically acceptable range of cervical HDR plans, which could be useful in plan checking and identifying potential planning errors, thus improving the consistency of plan quality.