Intensity-modulated radiation therapy dose prescription, recording, and delivery: Patterns of variability among institutions and treatment planning systems

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Volumn 100, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 300-307

  Das, Indra J ^a   Cheng, Chee Wai ^b   Chopra, Kashmiri L ^c   Mitra, Raj K ^d   Srivastava, Shiv P ^e   Glatstein, Eli ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b MORRISTOWN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c Kennedy Health System   (United States)

^d OCHSNER CLINIC FOUNDATION   (United States)

^e Reid Hospital and Health Care Service   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BRAIN CANCER; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSIMETRY; ELECTRONIC DATA INTERCHANGE; HEAD AND NECK CANCER; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HISTOGRAM; HUMAN; INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT CARE; PRESCRIPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; RADIATION DOSE; RECORDING; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT PLANNING; ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; BRAIN TUMOR; CANCER CENTER; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOTHERAPY; FEMALE; HEAD AND NECK TUMOR; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; NEOPLASM; PROSTATE TUMOR; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHMS; BRAIN NEOPLASMS; CANCER CARE FACILITIES; FEMALE; HEAD AND NECK NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; INDIANA; LOUISIANA; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; NEW JERSEY; PHILADELPHIA; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOTHERAPY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOTHERAPY, INTENSITY-MODULATED; RESEARCH DESIGN; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 40949134246     PISSN: 00278874     EISSN: 14602105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djn020     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. TG-21. A protocol for the determination of absorbed dose from high-energy photon and electron beams. Med Phys. 1983;10(6):741-771.
2. TG-51. AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams. Med Phys. 1999;26(9):1847-1870.
3. Dische S, Saunders MI, Williams C, Hopkins A, Aird E. Precision in reporting the dose given in a course of radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 1993;29(3):287-293.
4. ICRU 29. Dose specification for reporting external beam therapy with photons and electron. Bethesda, MD: ICRU: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 1978 ICRU Report 29.
5. ICRU 50. Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam therapy. Bethesda, MD: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 1993 ICRU Report 50.
6. ICRU 62. Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam therapy (supplement to ICRU Report 50). Bethesda, MD: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 1999 ICRU Report 62.
7. TG-40. Comprehensive QA for radiation oncology: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 40. Med Phys. 1994;21(4):581-618.
8. Mijnheer B. Current clinical practice versus new developments in target volume and dose specification procedures: a contradiction? Acta Oncol. 1997;36(8):785-788.
9. Kukolowicz PF, Mijnheer BJ. Comparison between dose values specified at the ICRU reference point and mean dose to the planning target volume. Radiother Oncol. 1997;42 (3):271-277.
10. Levene MB, Kijewski PK, Chin LM, Bjarngard BE, Hellman S. Computer-controlled radiation therapy. Radiology. 1978;129:769-775.
11. Chin LM, Kijewski P, Svensson GK, Chaffey JT, Levene MB, Bjarngard BE. A computer-controlled radiation therapy machine for pelvic and para-aortic nodal areas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1981;7(1):61-70.
12. Chin LM, Kijewski PK, Svensson GK, Bjarngard BE. Dose optimization with computer-controlled gantry rotation, collimator motion and dose-rate variation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1983;9(5):723-729.
13. Morrill SM, Lam KS, Lane RG, Langer M, Rosen II. Very fast simulated reannealing in radiation therapy treatment plan optimization. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;31(1):179-188.
14. Webb S. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Bristol, UK: Institute of Physics Publishing; 2000.
15. IMRT Collaborative Working Group. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy: current status and issues of interest. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51(4):880-914.
16. Burman C, Kutcher GJ, Emami B, Goitein M. Fitting of normal tissue tolerance data to an analytical function. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21(1):123-135.
17. Kutcher GJ, Burman C, Brewster L, Goitein M, Mohan R. Histogram reduction method for calculating complication probabilities for three-dimensional treatment planning evaluations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21(1):137-146.
18. Niemierko A. Reporting and analyzing dose distribution s: a concept of equivalent uniform dose. Med Phys. 1997;24(1):103-110.
19. Goitein M, Niemierko A. Intensity modulated therapy and inhomogeneous dose to the tumor: a note of caution. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;36(2):519-522.
20. Das IJ, Bieda M, Cheng C, et al. Dosimetric comparison of inverse treatment planning system for IMRT: a collaborative study. Med Phys. 2004;31(6):1750.
21. Cheng CW, Das IJ. Treatment plan evaluation using dose-volume histogram (DVH) and spatial dose-volume histogram (zDVH). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43(5):1143-1150.
22. Boyer AL, Geis P, Grant W, Carol M. Modulated beam conformal therapy for head and neck tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;39(1):227-236.
23. Zhou J, Fei D, Wu Q. Potential of intensity-modulated radiotherapy to escalate doses to head-and-neck cancers: what is the maximal dose? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;57(3):673-682.
24. Vineberg KA, Eisbruch A, Coselmon MM, McShan DL, Kessler ML, Fraass BA. Is uniform target dose possible in IMRT plans in the head and neck? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;52(5):1159-1172.
25. Glatstein E. The return of the snake oil salesmen. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55(3):561-562.
26. Cazzaniga L, Marinoni M, Bossi A, et al. Interphysician variability in defining the planning target volume in the irradiation of prostate and seminal vesicles. Radiother Oncol. 1998;28:293-296.
27. Leunens G, Menten J, Weltens C, Verstraete J, van der Schueren E. Quality assessment of medical decision making in radiation oncology: variability in target volume delineation for brain tumors. Radiother Oncol. 1993;28:169-175.
28. Ketting C, Seymour M, Kalet I, Unger J, Hummel S, Jacky J. Consistency of three-dimensional planning target volumes across physicians and institutions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;37(2):445-453.
29. Van de Steene J, Linthout N, Mey J, et al. Definition of gross tumor volume in lung cancer: inter-observer variability. Radiother Oncol. 2002;62(1):37-49.
30. Hurkmans CW, Borger JH, Pieters BR, Russell NS, Jansen EP, Mijnheer BJ. Variability in target volume delineation on CT scans of the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;50(5):1366-1372.
31. Caldwell CB, Mah K, Ung YC, et al. Observer variation in contouring gross tumor volume in patients with poorly defined non-small-cell lung tumors on CT: the impact of 18FDG-hybrid PET fusion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51(4):923-931.
32. Fiorino C, Reni M, Bolognesi A, Cattaneo GM, Calandrino R. Intra- and inter-observer variability in contouring prostate and seminal vesicles: implications for conformal treatment planning. Radiother Oncol. 1998;47(3):285-292.
33. Huq MS, Das IJ, Steinberg T, Galvin JM. A dosimetric comparison of various multileaf collimators. Phys Med Biol. 2002;47(12) N159-N170.
34. Dong L, Antolak J, Salehpour M, et al. Patient-specific point dose measurement for IMRT monitor unit verification. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56(3):867-877.