Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T16:04:01.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In vivo dosimetry; essential or unnecessary?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2011

Jenna L Leman
Jenna L Leman*
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy Department, Southampton Oncology Centre Level A, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
*
Correspondence to: Jenna L Leman, Radiotherapy Department, Southampton Oncology Centre Level A, Southampton General Hospital, Tremona road, Southampton, UK. E-mail: Jenna.Leman@SUHT.SWEST.NHS.UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction: The radiotherapy profession has learned from errors made during treatment planning and delivery. Quality assurance in radiotherapy (QART) procedures are implemented to reduce the risk of an error occuring. The chief medical officer, along with others, has recommended that the QART of all departments includes in vivo dosimetry (IVD) to ensure that the delivered dose equals the planned dose.

Why we need IVD: A lot of effort goes into field verification and it is just as vital that dosimetry is verified. Overdose to normal tissue can cause devastating side effects, even death, whilst tumour underdose may compromise control. Without IVD, there is no way of knowing that a patient is receiving an overdose until it is too late. Underdoses are unlikely to manifest without IVD. IVD allows radiotherapists and physicists to correct for dose errors in a timely manner.

Why IVD is unnecessary: Radiotherapy accidents are rare. Implementing IVD is expensive, time consuming and takes resources away from developing techniques which will improve patient outcomes. Current IVD methods are not suitable for modern techniques such as intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

Discussion: IVD appears to be a useful QART tool, particularly as dose escalation techniques develop allowing a higher dose to be delivered to the tumour. Departments may be unwilling to spend time and money on an IVD system that is costly and time consuming if it cannot perform IVD on modern techniques. Electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) can be utilised to perform IVD on complex techniques, such as IMRT and arc therapy, which current IVD methods cannot, however there is currently no EPID IVD system available commercially.

Conclusion: Ideally, all departments would conduct IVD on all new patients. IVD has proven to be an important QART tool, however, until technology is developed to allow EPID to include IVD, the procedure is not likely to be implemented countrywide.

Keywords

Radiotherapyin vivo dosimetrydose verificationdosimetry verificationtreatment verificationdosimetric QAradiotherapy QA
Type
Literature Review
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 55 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Henk, JM. A brief history of British radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996; 36:213–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
What radiotherapy is. <http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/about-cancer/treatment/radiotherapy/about/what-radiotherapy-is> Accessed 2 April 2010.+Accessed+2+April+2010.>Google Scholar
International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP). Prevention of accidents to patients undergoing radiation therapy. ICRP 86. Ann ICRP 2001; 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munro, AJ. Hidden danger, obvious opportunity: error and risk in the management of cancer. Br J Radiol 2007; 80:955–966.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, SA, Yarnold, JR, Patterson, D. The severity of late skin damage related to fraction size in women treated by radiotherapy after mastectomy. Radiother Oncol 1987; 8:315–319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldner, G, Zimmermann, F, Feldmann, H, Glocker, S, Wachter-Gerstner, N, Geinitz, H, Becker, G, Pötzi, R, Wambersie, A, Bamberg, M, Molls, M, Wachter, S, Pötter, R. 3-D conformal radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer: a subgroup analysis of rectoscopic findings prior to radiotherapy and acute/late rectal side effects. Radiother Oncol 2006; 78:36–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Department of Heath. Reference Guide to Consent for Examination or Treatment, 2nd edn. Department of Health: London, 2009.Google Scholar
Bomford, CK, Kunkler, IH. Walter and Miller’s Textbook of Radiotherapy: Radiation Physics, Therapy and Oncology. Churchill Livingstone: London, UK, 2002.Google Scholar
Donaldson, L. Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer 2006. Department of Health: London, 2006.Google Scholar
The Royal College of Radiologists, Society and College of Radiographers, Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine, National Patient Safety Agency, British Institute of Radiology. Towards Safer Radiotherapy. The Royal College of Radiologists: London, 2008.Google Scholar
McKenzie, A, Briggs, G, Buchanan, R, Harvey, L, Iles, A, Kirby, M. Can we afford not to implement in-vivo dosimetry? Balancing costs and benefits of checking in radiotherapy. Br J Radiol 2008; 81:681–684.Google Scholar
Edwards, CR, Hamer, E, Mountford, PJ, Moloney, AJ. An update survey of UK in vivo radiotherapy dosimetry practice. Br J Radiol 2007; 80:1011–1014.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eddy, A, Eddy, D. In Cherry, P, Duxbury, A (eds), Practical Radiotherapy Physics and Equipment. Greenwich Medial Media: London, 1999.Google Scholar
van Elmpt, W, McDermott, L, Nijsten, S, Wendling, M, Lambin, P, Mijnheer, B. A literature review of electronic portal imaging for radiotherapy dosimetry. Radiother Oncol 2008; 88:289–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huang, G, Medlam, G, Lee, J, Billingsley, S, Bissonnette, JP, Ringash, J, Kane, G, Hodgson, DC. Error in the delivery of radiation therapy: results of a quality assurance review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 61:1590–1595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
BBC Frontline Scotland. Critical error; the Lisa Norris story. Broadcast 11 June 2007. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6731117.stm> Accessed 3 May 2010.+Accessed+3+May+2010.>Google Scholar
Scottish Executive Publications. Report into unintended overexposure of Lisa Norris at Beatson Oncology Centre, Glasgow in January 2006. Report of an investigation by the inspector appointed by the Scottish Ministers under Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposures) Regulations–IRMER. <http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/10/27084909/0> (2006). Accessed 2 February 2011.+(2006).+Accessed+2+February+2011.>Google Scholar
Shafiq, J, Barton, M, Noble, D, Lemer, C, Donaldson, LJ. An international review of patient safety measures in radiotherapy practice. Radiother Oncol 2009; 92:15–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiorino, C, Corletto, D, Mangili, P, Broggi, S, Bonini, A, Cattaneo, GM, Parisi, R, Rosso, A, Signorotto, P, Villa, E, Calandrino, R. Quality assurance by systematic in vivo dosimetry: results on a large cohort of patients. Radiother Oncol 2000; 56:85–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, R, Morgan, A. In vivo dosimetry: hidden dangers? Br J Radiol 2007; 80:691–692.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cozzi, L, Fogliata, A, Nicolini, G. Pre-treatment verification of intensity modulated photon beams with films and electronic portal imaging–two years of clinical experience. Z Med Phys 2004; 14:239–250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vieira, SC, Bolt, RA, Dirkx, ML, Visser, AG, Heijmen, BJ. Fast, daily linac verification for segmented IMRT using electronic portal imaging. Radiother Oncol 2006; 80:86–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Piermattei, A, Fidanzio, A, Stimato, G, Azario, L, Grimaldi, L, D'Onofrio, G, Cilla, S, Balducci, M, Gambacorta, MA, Di Napoli, N, Cellini, N. In vivo dosimetry by an aSi-based EPID. Med Phys 2006; 33:4414–4422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, MV, McKenzie, A. Can we afford not to implement In vivo dosimetry? Br J Radiol 2008; 81:681–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKay, RI, Williams, PC. The cost effectiveness of In vivo dosimetry is not proven. Br J Radiol 2009; 82:265–266.Google Scholar
Wren, K. Social Influences. Routledge: USA, 1999.Google Scholar
Malicki, J, Litoborski, M, Bogusz-Czerniewicz, M, Swiezewski, A. Cost-effectiveness of the modifications in the quality assurance system in radiotherapy in the example of in-vivo dosimetry. Phys Med 2009; 25:201–206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
NHSLA Factsheet 2: Financial information. <http://www.nhsla.com/home.htm> (2010). Accessed 2 February 2011.+(2010).+Accessed+2+February+2011.>Google Scholar
Lanson, JH, Essers, M, Uiterwaal, GJet al. In vivo dosimetry: An essential part of a quality assurance programme of conformal radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol submitted.Google Scholar
The Royal College of Radiologists, Society and College of Radiographers, Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine, British Institute of Radiology. Implementing in-vivo dosimetry. The Royal College of Radiologists: London, 2008.Google Scholar