Background: While the review of radiotherapy treatment plans and charts by a medical physicist is a key component of safe, high-quality care, very few specific recommendations currently exist for this task. Aims: The goal of TG-275 is to provide practical, evidence-based recommendations on physics plan and chart review for radiation therapy. While this report is aimed mainly at medical physicists, others may benefit including dosimetrists, radiation therapists, physicians and other professionals interested in quality management. Methods: The scope of the report includes photon/electron external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), proton radiotherapy, as well as high-dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy for gynecological applications (currently the highest volume brachytherapy service in most practices). The following review time points are considered: initial review prior to treatment, weekly review, and end-of-treatment review. The Task Group takes a risk-informed approach to developing recommendations. A failure mode and effects analysis was performed to determine the highest-risk aspects of each process. In the case of photon/electron EBRT, a survey of all American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) members was also conducted to determine current practices. A draft of this report was provided to the full AAPM membership for comment through a 3-week open-comment period, and the report was revised in response to these comments.Results: The highest-risk failure modes included 112 failure modes in photon/electron EBRT initial review, 55 in weekly and end-of-treatment review, 24 for initial review specific to proton therapy, and 48 in HDR brachytherapy. A 103-question survey on current practices was released to all AAPM members who self-reported as working in the radiation oncology field. The response rate was 33%. The survey data and risk data were used to inform recommendations. Discussion: Tables of recommended checks are presented and recommendations for best practice are discussed. Suggestions to software vendors are also provided. Conclusions: TG-275 provides specific recommendations for physics plan and chart review which should enhance the safety and quality of care for patients receiving radiation treatments.

In this Letter, we demonstrate high resolution, three-dimensional optical imaging of in vivo blood vessel networks using speckle variance optical coherence tomography, and the quantification of these images through the development of biologically relevant metrics using image processing and segmentation techniques. Extracted three-dimensional metrics include vascular density, vessel tortuosity, vascular network fractal dimension, and tissue vascularity. We demonstrate the ability of this quantitative imaging approach to characterize normal and tumor vascular networks in a preclinical animal model and the potential for quantitative, longitudinal vascular treatment response monitoring.

BackgroundDeep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) reduces heart and left anterior descending artery (LAD) dose during left-sided breast radiation therapy (RT); however there is limited information about which patients derive the most benefit from DIBH. The primary objective of this study was to determine which patients benefit the most from DIBH by comparing percent reduction in mean cardiac dose conferred by DIBH for patients treated with whole breast RT ± boost (WBRT) versus those receiving breast/chest wall plus regional nodal irradiation, including internal mammary chain (IMC) nodes (B/CWRT + RNI) using a modified wide tangent technique. A secondary objective was to determine if DIBH was required to meet a proposed heart dose constraint of Dmean < 4 Gy in these two cohorts.MethodsTwenty consecutive patients underwent CT simulation both free breathing (FB) and DIBH. Patients were grouped into two cohorts: WBRT (n = 11) and B/CWRT + RNI (n = 9). 3D-conformal plans were developed and FB was compared to DIBH for each cohort using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests for continuous variables and McNemar’s test for discrete variables. The percent relative reduction conferred by DIBH in mean heart and LAD dose, as well as lung V20 were compared between the two cohorts using Wilcox rank-sum testing. The significance level was set at 0.05 with Bonferroni correction for multiple testing.ResultsAll patients had comparable target coverage on DIBH and FB. DIBH statistically significantly reduced mean heart and LAD dose for both cohorts. Percent reduction in mean heart and LAD dose with DIBH was significantly larger in the B/CWRT + RNI cohort compared to WBRT group (relative reduction in mean heart and LAD dose: 55.9 % and 72.1 % versus 29.2 % and 43.5 %, p < 0.02). All patients in the WBRT group and five patients (56 %) in the B/CWBRT + RNI group met heart Dmean <4 Gy with FB. All patients met this constraint with DIBH.ConclusionsAll patients receiving WBRT met Dmean Heart < 4 Gy on FB, while only slightly over half of patients receiving B/CWRT + RNI were able to meet this constraint in FB. DIBH allowed a greater reduction in mean heart and LAD dose in patients receiving B/CWRT + RNI, including IMC nodes than patients receiving WBRT. These findings suggest greatest benefit from DIBH treatment for patients receiving regional nodal irradiation.

No abstract