Total Skin Electron Therapy (TSET) is a specialised radiotherapy technique to treat cutaneous T-cell lymphomas. The purpose of this article is to review different in-vivo dosimetry techniques and to identify further research direction in TSET

Studies focused on in-vivo dosimetry in TSET were included. Studies based on absolute dosimetry in TSET were excluded and no restriction was applied regarding the type of treatment technique and the type of dosimeter.

From the review of articles, we have found that obesity index and patient position during treatment plays a major role in underdose or overdose in TSET. Many studies favour individualised boost dose to patients. The analysis showed that thermoluminescent dosimeters are the most widely used dosimeters in TSET, and time-consuming is the only drawback in the use of dosimetry.

Study showed that the practice of using in-vivo dosimetry would be better way to treat TSET by ensuring accuracy of dose delivery to the patients. Further, only limited studies are available for dosimetry with radiochromic films. With this observation, we have started exploring the use of radiochromic film in our TSET dosimetry, and the results can be analysed to standardise the technique in future.

To modify the final dose delivered to superficial tissues and to modulate dose distribution near irradiated surface, different boluses are used. Air gaps often form under the bolus affecting dose distribution. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an air gap under the bolus radiation on dose delivery.

To evaluate the impact of the air gap, both helical tomotherapy (HT) and direct tomotherapy (DT) were performed in a simulation study.

The maximum dose to bolus in DT plans was bigger than that used in HT plans. The maximum dose delivered to the bolus depended on the air gap size. However, the maximum dose to bolus in all HT plans was within the acceptable value range. Acceptable value was set to up to 107% of the prescription dose. In the simulation performed in this study, the acceptable air gap under bolus was up to 15 mm and below 5 mm in HT and DT plans, respectively.

HT technique is a good choice, but DT technique can be also used if the bolus position can be reproduced accurately. Thus, the reproducibility of the bolus position between planning and treatment is very important.

Studying the use of Aperture Shape Controller (ASC) and Convergence Mode (CM) in Eclipse (Varian Medical System) in terms of plan quality and complexity of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).

Forty VMAT plans were re-optimised for the prostate, prostate + lymph nodes, breast and head & neck patients retrospectively, changing the ASC settings (off, moderate, very high) and CM settings (off, on and extended).

Using ‘on’ or ‘extended’ CM increased plan quality in terms of planning target volume homogeneity and low-dose spread to the organs at risk (OAR). ‘Extended’ CM increased the optimisation time 4·3-fold compared to ‘on’, and deteriorated the plan quality in several simple planning cases. ‘Moderate’ ASC decreased plan complexity with minor effect on plan quality compared to ‘off’, but ‘very high’ ASC had larger adverse dosimetric effects. However, the ASC decreased the plan complexity only if the CM was turned ‘on’.

Using ‘on’ CM increases the plan quality but using ‘extended’ CM is not recommended. The ‘moderate’ ASC decreased complexity without significant adverse effects on plan quality, and even ‘very high’ ASC may be used when plan simplicity is prioritised. However, if CM is not used, the ASC should also be turned off.

Induction chemotherapy (iC) followed by concurrent chemoradiation has been shown to improve overall survival (OS) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). However, the survival benefit of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT) following iC remains unclear.

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for primary stage III, cT4N0-1M0 LAPC (2004–15). Kaplan–Meier analysis, Cox proportional hazards method and propensity score matching were used.

Among 872 patients, 738 patients underwent CFRT and 134 patients received SBRT. Median follow-up was 24·3 and 22·9 months for the CFRT and SBRT cohorts, respectively. The use of SBRT showed improved survival in both the multivariate analysis (hazards ratio 0·78, p = 0·025) and 120 propensity-matched pairs (median OS 18·1 versus 15·9 months, p = 0·004) compared to the CFRT.

This NCDB analysis suggests survival benefit with the use of SBRT versus CFRT following iC for the LAPC.

The aim of this study is to establish clinical evidence regarding the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in target volume definition for radiotherapy treatment planning of brain tumours.

Primary studies were systematically retrieved from six electronic databases and other sources. Studies included were only those that quantitatively compared computed tomography (CT) and MRI in target volume definition for radiotherapy of brain tumours. Study characteristics and quality were assessed and the data were extracted from eligible studies. Effect estimates for each study was computed as mean percentage difference based on individual patient data where available. The included studies were then combined in meta-analysis using Review Manager (RevMan) software version 5.0.

Five studies with a total number of 72 patients were included in this review. The quality of the studies was rated strong. The percentages mean differences of the studies were 7·47, 11·36, 30·70, 41·69 and −24·6% using CT as the baseline. The result of statistical analysis showed small-to-moderate heterogeneity; τ2=36·8; χ2=6·23; df=4 (p=0·18); I2=36%. The overall effect estimate was −1·85 [95% confidence interval (CI); −7·24, 10·94], Z=0·40 (p=0·069>0·5).

Brain tumour volumes measured using MRI-based method for radiotherapy treatment planning were larger compared with CT defined volumes but the difference lacks statistical significance.

Information is key to patient informed choice and the internet is currently a major source of health information for adults in the UK. In order for the users to make use of the information it must be presented in a way that the user can understand. This depends on a number of factors one being that the document is written at the right level to be understood by the reader, readability.

The aim of this study was to assess the readability of radiotherapy-related documents on the internet and compare their levels to published norms.

An internet search was undertaken using Google, to identify UK-based literature. Once identified documents were downloaded into Word and cleaned of punctuation other than that at the end of the sentence, documents were then analysed by the software package Readability Studio.

Documents tended to be written at too high a reading level, but the reading level had improved from a similar study conducted in 2006. The level of readability appears to show a relationship to the use of passive voice, which was very variable in the sample collected and reduction in the use of passive voice could help with the readability of the information.

Peer-review programmes in radiation oncology are used to facilitate the process and evaluation of clinical decision-making. However, web-based peer-review methods are still uncommon. This study analysed an inter-centre, web-based peer-review case conference as a method of facilitating the decision-making process in radiation oncology.

A benchmark form was designed based on the American Society for Radiation Oncology targets for radiation oncology peer review. This was used for evaluating the contents of the peer-review case presentations on 40 cases, selected from three participating radiation oncology centres. A scoring system was used for comparison of data, and a survey was conducted to analyse the experiences of radiation oncology professionals who attended the web-based peer-review meetings in order to identify priorities for improvement.

The mean scores for the evaluations were 82·7, 84·5, 86·3 and 87·3% for cervical, prostate, breast and head and neck presentations, respectively. The survey showed that radiation oncology professionals were confident about the role of web-based peer-reviews in facilitating sharing of good practice, stimulating professionalism and promoting professional growth. The participants were satisfied with the quality of the audio and visual aspects of the web-based meeting.

The results of this study suggest that simple inter-centre web-based peer-review case conferences are a feasible technique for peer review in radiation oncology. Limitations such as data security and confidentiality can be overcome by the use of appropriate structure and technology. To drive the issues of quality and safety a step further, small radiotherapy departments may need to consider web-based peer-review case conference as part of their routine quality assurance practices.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) [i.e., Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)] has been considered a relative contraindication for radiation therapy (RT) to the abdomen or pelvis, potentially preventing patients with a diagnosis of IBD from receiving definitive therapy for their malignancy.

Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) conventions, a PubMed/MEDLINE literature search was conducted using the keywords RT, brachytherapy, inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis and toxicity.

A total of 1,206 publications were screened with an addition of 8 studies identified through hand searching. Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis. The total population across all studies was 497 patients, 50·5% having UC, 37% having CD and an additional 12·5% having unspecified IBD. Primary gastrointestinal malignancy (55%) followed by prostate cancer (40%) composed the bulk of the population. Acute and late grade 3 or greater gastrointestinal specific toxicity ranged from 0–23% to 0–13% respectively for those patients with IBD treated with RT to the abdomen or pelvis. In the literature reviewed, RT does not appear to increase fistula or stricture formation or IBD flares; however, one study did note RT to be a statistically significant risk factor for subsequent IBD flare on multivariate analysis.

A review of reported acute and late toxicities suggests that patients with IBD should still be considered for definitive radiotherapy. Patient characteristics including IBD distribution relative to the irradiated field, inflammatory activity at the time of radiation, overall disease severity and disease phenotype in the case of CD (fistulising versus stricturing versus inflammatory only) should be considered on an individual basis when evaluating potential patients. When possible, advanced techniques with strict organ at risk dose constraints should be employed to limit toxicity in this patient population.

To investigate the doses given to the kidneys and the small intestines for three radiation therapy techniques [anterior–posterior (APPA) fields, three fields and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT)] for spinal cord compression (SCC) patients with metastatic disease in the lower thoracic or lumbar spine and to monitor the time spent by clinicians and dose planners.

Radiation therapy is one of the main treatment modalities for SCC. Typical palliative radiation therapy techniques have used APPA fields or a three-field technique.

However, as delivery techniques have evolved dramatically over the past decades, VMAT has gained wide acceptance. VMAT allows for a dose reduction in the organs at risk. Such a dose reduction may result in less toxicity.

The use of the VMAT technique may require more time for contouring and planning compared with the APPA and three-field techniques. Any potential dosimetric benefit of VMAT must not be outweighed by large amounts of extra time spent by clinicians and dose planners.

For 20 patients treated with radiation therapy for SCC at our hospital, we created a VMAT plan, and the more traditionally used APPA and three-field plans. The mean kidney doses and the volume of bowel, which received 20 Gy, were extracted for each plan. The correlations between parameters for three techniques were determined.

Furthermore, the time required for contouring targets for five patients; and the time required to plan five patients, was recorded.

VMAT lead to the most conformal distributions: the high-dose areas were restricted to the target volume, whereas the healthy tissue, especially the bowel, received a lower dose. In contrast, the APPA plan lead to a larger volume of bowel being irradiated, whereas the three-field technique spared the bowel at the expense of a higher dose to the kidneys.

The average contouring time was 16 minutes, the average planning time was 38 minutes.

Patients treated for SCC in the lower thoracic or lumbar region may benefit from VMAT treatment, as it reduces the dose to the bowel and kidneys compared with APPA or three-field treatments.

To analyse the preliminary results of CyberKnife stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) boost in primary head and neck cancer patients among Indian population.

A total of nine patients of primary head and neck cancer were treated with CyberKnife SBRT boost after intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The median phase 1 IMRT dose was 54 Gy/27 fractions. Histological types included squamous cell carcinoma (n=7) and adenoid cystic carcinoma (n=2). Response was evaluated using positron emission tomography/computed tomography and detailed clinical examination.

As a preliminary analysis with median follow up of 8 months (range: 6–19 months), phase 2 median tumour volume of 16·3 cc and a median dose of 5 Gy per fraction, eight patients had loco-regionally stable disease and one had distant metastasis. With objective assessment five patients had complete response. Treatment was well tolerated with no grade 3 or more acute toxicities directly related to CyberKnife boost.

CyberKnife SBRT boost is an attractive option for primary head and neck cancers especially where disease is in close proximity to critical structures hindering radical dose delivery. Future prospective analysis and optimum assessment of total biological effective dose (BED) in a properly selected case might actually benefit the use of CyberKnife SBRT boost.

In radiotherapy (RT), there are high requirements for quality assurance (QA) in all the steps of the process. Development of QA systems are demanding in terms of financial and human resources. A national QA programme (KVIST) has been established in Norway to facilitate implementation of QA activity on hospital level.

The KVIST organisation comprises the KVIST team, the reference group (RG) and the working groups (WGs). The KVIST team is multidisciplinary and are employed in permanent positions. The RG acts as an advisory body for the KVIST team in defining and ranking the priority of projects. Relevant national QA projects are identified in collaboration with the RG, and WGs are established to carry out the various projects.

Several national consensus documents have been prepared by the various WGs. Systems for incident handling and activity reporting have been established and clinical audits have been implemented in Norwegian RT. Guidelines for RT of various diagnoses have also been prepared in collaboration with National Cancer groups.

The KVIST programme has been very well acknowledged in the Norwegian RT community. It has succeeded in creating a positive attitude towards QA and improved the communication between centres and the various professions.

The aim of this study was to evaluate planning target volume (PTV) margins for two different locations using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) to ensure that the correct radiation dose is delivered to the tumour when using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).

Setup data were collected from 40 patients treated with IMRT for head and neck cancer (HN) (20 patients) and prostate cancer (20 patients). Setup errors from 720 registration images were analysed to evaluate systematic and random errors. Thereafter, optimal PTV margins were calculated based on International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements 62 (ICRU), Stroom and Parker formulas compared with the Van Herk’s recipe.

To calculate the margins around the PTV, several different formulas have been used. Setup margins ranged between 2–4·3, 2·2–4·6 and 2·1–4·7 mm in X, Y and Z directions, respectively, for HN cases. Similarly, for the prostate site, setup margins ranged between 3·7–8·3, 3·2–6·8 and 3·3–8·2 mm in X, Y and Z directions.

To ensure better coverage of target volume, we adopted a PTV margin of 5 mm for HN PTVs and 10 mm for prostate PTVs in our department.