Worldwide Quality Assurance networks for radiotherapy dosimetry

Similar documents
ABSORBED DOSE DETERMINATION IN EXTERNAL BEAM RADIOTHERAPY

The IAEA/WHO TLD postal programme for radiotherapy hospitals

Use of the VALIDATOR Dosimetry System for Quality Assurance and Quality Control of Blood Irradiators

What is the Radiotherapy Quality Control Program (PQRT) of the National Cancer Institute Rio de Janeiro/Brazil?

The Calibration Chain: Role of BIPM,

Ionizing Radiation, Czech Republic, CMI (Czech Metrology Institute)

Challenges in small field MV photon dosimetry

ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS (EMR) STREAMLINE CH I PROCESS. Ping Xia, Ph.D. Head of Medical Physics Department of Radiation Oncology Cleveland Clinic

External dosimetry Dosimetry in new radiotherapeutic techniques

Quality Assurance of accelerators; the technologists responsibility

Performance evaluation and quality assurance of Varian enhanced dynamic wedges

Quality Assurance of Radiotherapy Equipment

1. Provide clinical training in radiation oncology physics within a structured clinical environment.

QA of intensity-modulated beams using dynamic MLC log files

kv-& MV-CBCT Imaging for Daily Localization: Commissioning, QA, Clinical Use, & Limitations

The feasibility of a QA program for ISIORT Trials

Accreditation Is Coming

Scripps Proton Therapy Center: Configuration and Implementation

Study the Quality Assurance of Conventional X-ray Machines Using Non Invasive KV meter

Precise Treatment System Clinically Flexible Digital Linear Accelerator. Personalized radiotherapy solutions for everyday treatment care

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION PROTECTION EXTERNAL BEAM & BRACHYTHERAPY QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM AUDIT FORM

High-Energy Electron Beam Therapy Dosimetry with Ionisation Chambers

Radiation Oncology Centers Participating in MassHealth. Daniel Tsai, Assistant Secretary and Director of MassHealth

Session Name: e-health (collaborative)

RapidArc QA Program in Prince of Wales Hospital. Michael L. M. Cheung, Physicist Prince of Wales Hospital Hong Kong

Chapter 12 QUALITY ASSURANCE OF EXTERNAL BEAM RADIOTHERAPY

Albany Medical Center Chief Medical Physicist Radiation Oncology Imaging and Related Services

CHAPTER 10. ACCEPTANCE TESTS AND COMMISSIONING MEASUREMENTS

Quality Assurance. The selection of the equipment. Equipment Specifications. Medical Exposure Directive 97/43 Euratom. Quality Assurance Programme

NIA RADIATION ONCOLOGY CODING STANDARD. Dosimetry Planning

Quality Assurance in Stereotactic. Radiotherapy

Comprehensive Audits of Radiotherapy Practices: A Tool for Quality Improvement. Quality Assurance Team for Radiation Oncology (QUATRO)

QUALITY ASSURANCE OF TREATMENT PLANNING SYSTEMS PRACTICAL EXAMPLES FOR NON-IMRT PHOTON BEAMS

Accreditation a tool to help reduce medical errors. Professor Arthur T Porter PC MD FACR FRCPC FACRO

QUEST improving the quality of urban mobility policies

Measuring Patient Exposure in Interventional Radiology

Medical Physicist Courses in India

MLC Characteristics. Treatment Delivery Systems 2 Field Shaping; Design Characteristics and Dosimetry Issues. Presentation Outline

Chapter XIII. PDD TAR TMR Dose Free Space

Hands-on course Quality Assurance of Advanced Radiation Therapy

MOC Exam Preparation Therapy

Quality Assurance for Treatment Planning Systems

Training & Education Solutions

Training Requirements for the Specialty of Radiation Oncology

8 Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs) and Severe Accident Management Guidelines (SAMGs) - Issue 06

Cyclotron Centre in Poland and 2D thermoluminescence dosimetry

Brochure More information from

MERCER S COMPENSATION ANALYSIS AND REVIEW SYSTEM AN ONLINE TOOL DESIGNED TO TAKE THE WORK OUT OF YOUR COMPENSATION REVIEW PROCESS

Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey 2012 Radiation Therapy Payment Rules

Quality Control and Maintenance Programs

Department of Radiation Oncology H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center Khosrow Javedan M.S, Craig Stevens MD, Ph.D., Ken Forster Ph.D.

thermal Conductivity Testing in Europe - A Review

3D SCANNERTM. 3D Scanning Comes Full Circle. s u n. Your Most Valuable QA and Dosimetry Tools A / B / C. The 3D SCANNER Advantage

Independent corroboration of monitor unit calculations performed by a 3D computerized planning system

International Compliance

Comparison of Epson scanner quality for radiochromic film evaluation

INNOBAROMETER THE INNOVATION TRENDS AT EU ENTERPRISES

Dose Measurement in Mammography; What are we measuring? David E. Hintenlang, Ph.D. DABR University of Florida

TEACHING RADIOTHERAPY PHYSICS CONCEPTS USING SIMULATION: EXPERIENCE WITH STUDENT RADIOGRAPHERS IN LIVERPOOL, UK

BREAST CHARACTERISTICS AND DOSIMETRIC DATA IN X RAY MAMMOGRAPHY - A LARGE SAMPLE WORLDWIDE SURVEY

Analysis of Trajectory Log Files of TrueBeam Medical Electron Linear Accelerator for Patient Specific IMRT QA

RADIATION THERAPY. Dosimetry Pioneers since 1922 NEW

Process Optimization in LINAC QA

GAFCHROMIC DOSIMETRY MEDIA, TYPE HD-V2

Recognition. Radiation Survey Objectives. Objectives. Part 1 Documentation Radiation Source Survey Objectives Radiation Detectors Techniques

Tom Wilson Product Marketing Manager Delivery Systems Varian Medical Systems International AG. CERN Accelerator School, May 2015

How TARGIT Intra-operative Radiotherapy can help Older Patients with Breast cancer

Implementation of Cone-beam CT imaging for Radiotherapy treatment localisation.

Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA)

GAFCHROMIC DOSIMETRY MEDIA TYPE MD-V3

Quality Assurance in Radiotherapy

In room Magnetic Resonance Imaging guided Radiotherapy (MRIgRT( MRIgRT) Jan Lagendijk and Bas Raaymakers

AAPM s TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams

41 T Korea, Rep T Netherlands T Japan E Bulgaria T Argentina T Czech Republic T Greece 50.

Clinical Physics. Dr/Aida Radwan Assistant Professor of Medical Physics Umm El-Qura University

IAEA Human Health Programme

Clinical Trials and Radiation Treatment. Gerard Morton Odette Cancer Centre Sunnybrook Research Institute University of Toronto

SEAAPM Symposium The Practice of Quality Assurance in an Era of Change

Quality Assurance of Advanced Radiation Therapy Hands-on course

Fluoride and Dental Health in Europe

5.2 ASSESSMENT OF X-RAY TUBE LEAKAGE RADIATION AND X-RAY TUBE OUTPUT TOTAL FILTRATION

MVP/Care Core National 2015 Radiation Therapy Prior Authorization List (Effective January 1, 2015)

Multi-Channel Radiochromic Film Dosimetry. Adapted from A.Micke Spain, April 2014

SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT! CONFIRMATION

First Three Years After Project Proton Therapy Facility:

PROFORMA ACCEPTANCE / QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTS OF REMOTE AFTERLOADING BRACHYTHERAPY UNIT

NSS 2014 UK NATIONAL PROGRESS REPORT. March 2014

Radiation therapy involves using many terms you may have never heard before. Below is a list of words you could hear during your treatment.

Radiation Therapy. 1. Introduction. 2. Documentation of Compliance. 3. Didactic Competency Requirements. 4. Clinical Competency Requirements

Code of Conduct on the Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources

Get the benefits of Norgren s unique range of Online services

Agilent E363xA Series Programmable DC Power Supplies. Data Sheet

International Organization for Medical Physics Activities related to Radiological Protection of Patients

skills mismatches & finding the right talent incl. quarterly mobility, confidence & job satisfaction

Biomass Pellet Prices Drivers and Outlook What is the worst that can happen?

Safety Initiatives in RT The Role of Process Managment

Digital vs. Analogue Control Systems

Chapter 3: Radiation Dosimeters

Post Treatment Log File Based QA Varian. Krishni Wijesooriya, PhD University of Virginia. D e p a r t m e n t of R a d i a t i o n O n c o l o g y

Machine Tool Inspection & Analyzer solutions

Transcription:

Worldwide Quality Assurance networks for radiotherapy dosimetry Joanna Izewska Dosimetry and Medical Radiation Physics Section dosimetry@iaea.org

Audit in radiotherapy dosimetry Objectives to enhance confidence in accuracy of clinical dosimetry to ensure that QA procedures are adequate to ensure that equipment works as expected On-site audits (limited number of hospitals) QA programmes, mechanical checks, safety, dosimetry, TPS, clinical records Postal audits (large scale) spot checks of one or a few beam parameters

Dosimetry audit networks Dosimetry audit networks Major TLD audit networks: IAEA/WHO: 115 countries, 1350 hospitals EQUAL/ESTRO: mainly EU countries, 500 hospitals RPC/MDACC: mainly USA and Canada, 1300 hospitals Clinical trials ( e.g. EORTC, RTOG, MRC) National audits (mailed, on-site) single dose comparisons (e.g. Belgium, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland) regular audit programmes (e.g. Finland, Germany, New Zealand, UK) IAEA supported national audit networks (18 countries) Approx. 60% of hospitals worldwide participate in audits

IAEA/WHO TLD postal dose audits 1969 - start of the service for hospitals 1981 - service available to SSDLs 1996 - follow-up TLD when deviations outside the 5% acceptance limit are detected Follow-up on-site visits by national SSDLs or IAEA experts when deviations persist 1997 - service offered to Central and Eastern European countries 500 beam checks per year

QA of the IAEA TLD system,, 1997-2003 Reference irradiations by BIPM and PSDLs: n = 116 (Co-60 and X-rays) mean D TLD /D stat = 1.001 SD = 0.8% Comparisons with TLD networks and reference centres: n = 260 (Co-60 and X-rays) mean D TLD /D stat = 1.001 SD = 1.1%

1.05 1.04 1.03 Reference irradiations, BIPM and PSDLs, 1997-2003 D IAEA /D PSDL 1.02 1.01 1.00 0.99 0.98 0.97 BIPM BEV PTB Co-60 PTB X-rays ARPANSA OMH NPL Co-60 NPL X-rays NRC 0.96 0.95 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Year

Reference irradiations: TLD networks and reference centres 1997-2003 1.05 1.04 1.03 1.02 1.01 D TLD /D stat 1.00 0.99 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.95 Co-60 beams X-rays 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Year

IAEA TLD audits for SSDLs Organisation: 80 beam checks per year (56 SSDLs out of 73) 2 irradiation runs per year follow-up TLD for deviations larger than 3.5% acceptance limit Results 1997-2003: 587 beam checks: mean = 1.006, SD = 1.9%, min = 0.88, max = 1.13 96% results within 3.5% acceptance limit before correction, 100% poor results corrected

TLD based audit networks for radiotherapy dosimetry Country participating in the IAEA/WHO TLD service National QA network or participant in international network other than IAEA QA network co-operating with IAEA Country not having radiotherapy or not participating in an audit network

Number of beams checked per region EM 10% AF 3% WP 21% EU 16% Years 1969-2003 115 countries 1339 hospitals 5163 audits SE 14% AM 36%

1.8 1.6 TLD audits, hospitals: 1969-2003 ( 60 Co and X-rays) 115 countries 1339 hospitals 5163 audits 1.4 D TLD /D stat 1.2 1.0 0.8 ±5% 0.6 0.4 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Year

IAEA/WHO TLD audits for hospitals, 1969-200 2003 5163 beams audited: 3941 Co-60 beams 1222 high energy X-ray beams mean = 1.012, SD = 8.3% Results within 5% limit: 77% TLD results, 2000-2003 1543 beams audited: 841 Co-60 beams 702 high energy X-ray beams mean = 1.008, SD = 7.6% Results within 5% limit: 86%

TLD results for new hospitals 1997-200 2003 New hospitals N=941,m=1.014 SD=0.081 (dev. within 5%): 77% (dev.>10%): 9% Regular participation N = 1404 beams m=1.007 SD=0.075 (dev. within 5%): 89% (dev.>10%): 5% nr of beams checked 500 400 300 200 100 0 regular participation new hospitals 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 year

Deviations in TLD audits, 2002-2003 2003 misadministration? 1% 6% accident? 9% tolerance accident? 0.5% misadministration? 2% tolerance 5% 84% within requirement 92% within requirement Co-60 units 409 beams checked 67 deviations beyond 5 % (within 5%) (dev. 5-10%) (dev.10-20%) (dev. > 20%) Medical accelerators 425 beams checked 31 deviations beyond 5 %

IAEA/WHO TLD service, 1998-2002 Type of ionisation chambers obsolete 8% local make 5% 0.1-0.3 cc 14% Distribution of TLD results: mean, standard deviation (SD) 1.06 73% Farmer 0.6 cc Data reported in 958 data sheets. mean D TLD /D stat 1.04 1.02 1.00 0.98 0.96 SD 0.1-0.3 cc 0.6 cc obsolete local ion chamber model

Deviations outside 5% limit: 2002 2003 unknown 27% 8% errors in PDD/TMR other reasons 12% 0% calibration in plastic 28% errors in X/D conversion 2% confusion of N D,air and N D.w 23% SSD/SAD setup errors

IAEA/WHO TLD results within 5% limit Fraction of results within 5% limit 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 after follow-up 0.5 1st check 0.4 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 Year

IAEA expert missions The IAEA dosimetry travel kit used for expert missions to radiotherapy hospitals Reasons for problems identified in radiotherapy dosimetry are traced, explained, corrected and reported

IAEA expert missions, example 1 3 EXPERT SSDL EXPERT 2 EXPERT Mission findings: problems with basic dosimetry Reasons: unreliable dosimeters, poor training, staff rotation

However, TLD is not everything Co-60 output 1.100 1.000 0.900 0.800 0.700 0.600 Errors in treatment time calculation with home-made software 1 st TLD 0 200 400 600 800 1000 days 2 nd TLD actual software expert IAEA expert discovered a problem >300 patients, treated with Co-60, affected IAEA mission recommendations on staff training

TLD audits in Central and Eastern Europe 1997-2003 Radiotherapy infrastructure (DIRAC): 28 countries, 378 hospitals, 675 RT units Participants in the IAEA TLD audits, 1997-2003: 22 countries, 190 hospitals, 372 RT units National QA networks: BUL*, CZR, POL, ROM*, UKR* audits offered to ~90 hospitals, approx. 170 RT units 75% HOSPITALS PARTICIPATE IN TLD AUDITS *under development

TLD audits in Central and Eastern Europe IAEA audits 1997-2003 22 countries RUS 180 190 hospitals 372 RT machines 687 beam checks HUN hospitals audits LIT SLR UKR 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 number of hospials/audits 0 5 10 15 20 0 country no.

Distribution of TLD results, 1997-2003 Distribution parameter Number of audits Eastern Europe Other regions All regions 687 1658 2345 Mean 1.006 1.011 1.010 Std. deviation 0.084 0.075 0.077 Fraction within 5% limit 0.82 0.85 0.84

TLD results for hospitals C.- E. Europe, 1997-2003 On average 82% TLD results within the acceptance limit of 5% Great variability of results for among countries A. 10 countries: 95%-100% acceptable results B. 6 countries: above average 83%-94% acceptable results C. 6 countries: poor results below the 82% average

Follow-up of poor results, C.-E. Europe, 1997-2003 Percentage of TLD results within the 5% limit average after correction 100% 92% average before correction 82% A B C

TLD results vs. dosimetry equipment, Central and Eastern Europe, 2000-2003 2003 Number of audits (percentage) Farmer 0.6 cc 0.1 0.3 cc obsolete 257 (49%) 83 (16%) 55 (11%) no equipment reported 122 (24%) Mean 1.004 1.006 1.043 1.017 Standard deviation 0.034 0.038 0.076 0.064

TLD results vs. dosimetry protocols Central and Eastern Europe, 2000-2003 2003 N D,w - based N K - based old N X - based unknown Number of audits (percentage) 140 (35%) 162 (41%) 24 (6%) 69 (18%) Mean 1.006 1.003 1.043 1.025 Standard deviation 0.032 0.029 0.076 0.074

Frequency Age of radiotherapy units in Eastern Europe, countries with poor results 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Data from DIRAC 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 machine age, years n =136 mean = 16 years min = 2 years max = 37 years

Summary: Central & Eastern Europe Better TLD results for regular participation (77% acceptable results in 1 st participation, 89% acceptable results in 2 nd participation or next ) TLD results in Central and Eastern Europe are variable (10 countries have excellent results; 6 countries have good results; 6 countries have poor results). Major investment in equipment and training is necessary in countries with poor results to reach the level of other countries

EQUAL/ESTRO TLD network Set up in 1998 by ESTRO 500 hospitals of European Union (>50%) Programme: output checks for high energy photon and electron beams audit of beam parameters in non-reference conditions audit for photons with MLC Results: 98% of the output checks are within 5% limit 2nd check performed in 10% of the participating centres, because a deviation larger than 5% was observed in at least one of the beam parameters in nonreference conditions. Data presented in the IAEA Symposium Nov. 2002

Cumulative number of beam checks, EQUAL 1200 220 200 1100 180 160 1000 900 number of beams 140 120 100 80 Follow-up 2 nd checks number of beams 800 700 600 500 400 60 40 20 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 time [x2 months] All beams checked 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 All beams checked (total of 2204 beams) 300 200 100 photon (1146 beams) electron (778 beams) photon with MLC (76 beams) 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 time [x2 months] Data presented in the IAEA Symposium Nov. 2002

Radiological Physics Center (RPC) Set up in 1968 1300 hospitals mainly in USA and Canada Audit programme: On-site dosimetry reviews by RPC physicists Remote tools: TLD checks for photons and electrons, review of dosimetry data, treatment records of patients, QA programme, mailable anthropomorphic phantoms for special treatment techniques Data presented in the IAEA Symposium Nov. 2002

1400 RPC audit results TLD audits for photon beams, year 2000 Number of measurements 1200 1000 800 600 400 PHOTON DATA χ = 1.008 S D = 1.8% n = 5177 (number of measurements) TLD output checks: results within 5% limit photons: 97% electrons: 95% 200 After correction: 98% 0 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.99 1 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 TLD to INST On-site visits: 80% of institutions visited receive recommendations to improve their QA programs Data presented in the IAEA Symposium Nov. 2002

National External Audit Group (EAG) supported by National Authority Med. Phys. Group TLD Meas. Lab IAEA SSDL EAG Local RT hospitals

Steps in national TLD audits STEP 1. Beam output in reference conditions, high energy photons STEP 2. dose in reference conditions and in nonreference conditions on-axis a) High energy photons b) High energy energy electron beams, at z max STEP 3. Dose in reference conditions and in nonreference conditions off-axis for open and wedged fields, high energy photons Part 1. symmetric fields Part 2. asymmetric fields.

Step 3: non-reference conditions, high energy photons, symmetric fields 3 TLDs 5 cm 10 cm 5 cm 1. 2 TLDs: 10 x 10 cm 2 on-axis open 2. 3 TLDs: 20 x 20 cm 2 profile X, open 3. 3 TLDs: 20 x 20 cm 2 profile Y, open 4. 3 TLDs: 20 x 20 cm 2 profile X, wedged SSD or SAD setup TOTAL: 11 TLDs per beam Steps 1-4: deliver 2 Gy to TLD on axis

TLD network of Argentina Set up of EAG in 1996 90 hospitals: 69 Co-60 units, 42 linacs Audit programme: Photons, reference conditions Photons, non-reference conditions Results till 2003, reference conditions 90%-98% results within 5% limit for Co-60, 98%-100% for high energy x-rays since 1999 no deviations > 10% Non-ref conditions 81%-93% results within 5% limit Data presented in the IAEA Symposium Nov. 2002

TLD network of Brazil Set up of EAG (NCI) in 1999 33/170 hospitals: 36 Co-60 units, 33 linacs Distribution of the results (reference conditions) TLD run beams < 3% 3-5% 5-10% >10% 1 70 77.1 7.1 10.0 5.7 2 60 83.3 15.0 1.7 0 3 68 79.4 19.1 1.5 0 4 67 74.6 25.4 0 0 Data presented in the IAEA Symposium Nov. 2002

frequency TLD programme in Poland Set up of the audit programme in 1991 21 hospitals: 21 Co-60 units, 43 linacs 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Co-60 linac photons linac electrons Co-60 beams N = 55 m =0.5% SD = 2.4% linac photons N = 52 m =-0.9% SD = 2.8% 5 0-10 -8-6 -4-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 deviations [%] linac electrons N = 44 m =0.5% SD = 2.4% Data presented in the IAEA Symposium Nov. 2002

Poland, TLD nonn on-ref. conditions, Co-60 60,, 2004 deviation, % 5 3 1-1 -3-5 0 2 4 6 8 10 centre code 10x10/d=10cm 10x10/d=20cm 8x8/d=10cm 10x20/d=10cm 10wx10/d=10cm

Poland, TLD nonn on-ref. conditions, HE X-rays, X 2004 5 deviation, % 3 1-1 -3 10x10/10 10x10/5 8x8/10 10x20/10 10wx20/10-5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 centre code

Summary: national EAGs National audit systems are an effective means in verifying dosimetry at hospitals easier access to a regular audit for a hospital rapid problem resolution. IAEA has supported several national TLD audit systems and disseminated the methodology to a number of countries. Further development of national audit systems is necessary to respond to the needs (only 40% of local hospitals have participated by 2002 ).

Other dosimetry audit systems Finland, New Zealand On-site audits by the regulatory body, mandatory UK network Round robin runs with solid phantom Czech Republic TLD alternated with on-site visits, mandatory Clinical audit in preparation Audits for clinical trials various phantoms depending on the needs own programme or checks through existing networks (e.g. RPC)

Summary: all networks Approx. 60% of radiotherapy hospitals worldwide participate in an external audit. Audits in developing countries show lower percentage of results within the acceptance limits, particularly for the first participation. The results of beam output checks are satisfactory in industrialised countries, although deviations in non-reference conditions have been observed.

Trends in dosimetry audits Development of audit methodology for modern technology in radiotherapy MLC on-axis by EQUAL/ESTRO IMRT checks by RPC/Houston TLD and radiochromic film H&N phantom filled with 3D gel dosimeter IAEA TLD holder with horizontal arm Postal audits for brachytherapy (EQUAL)

Conclusion Regular participation in external audits is vital for a radiotherapy department Dosimetry audit should be carried out in non-reference conditions, as well as in the reference conditions Investment in equipment and training is necessary for developing countries to reach the level of industrialised countries

Dosimetry audits are recommended for all radiotherapy centres (IAEA Basic Safety Standards) and become mandatory in several countries (Euratom 97/43)