Bruce R. Thomadsen

Radiologic and Nuclear Medicine Studies in the United States and Worldwide: Frequency, Radiation Dose, and Comparison with Other Radiation Sources—1950–2007

The U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements and United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic Radiation each conducted respective assessments of all radiation sources in the United States and worldwide. The goal of this article is to summarize and combine the results of these two publicly available surveys and to compare the results with historical information. In the United States in 2006, about 377 million diagnostic and interventional radiologic examinations and 18 million nuclear medicine examinations were performed. The United States accounts for about 12% of radiologic procedures and about one-half of nuclear medicine procedures performed worldwide. In the United States, the frequency of diagnostic radiologic examinations has increased almost 10-fold (1950-2006). The U.S. per-capita annual effective dose from medical procedures has increased about sixfold (0.5 mSv [1980] to 3.0 mSv [2006]). Worldwide estimates for 2000-2007 indicate that 3.6 billion medical procedures with ionizing radiation (3.1 billion diagnostic radiologic, 0.5 billion dental, and 37 million nuclear medicine examinations) are performed annually. Worldwide, the average annual per-capita effective dose from medicine (about 0.6 mSv of the total 3.0 mSv received from all sources) has approximately doubled in the past 10-15 years.

MEDICAL RADIATION EXPOSURE IN THE U.S. IN 2006 : PRELIMINARY RESULTS

Medical radiation exposure of the U.S. population has not been systematically evaluated for almost 25 y. In 1982, the per capita dose was estimated to be 0.54 mSv and the collective dose 124,000 person-Sv. The preliminary estimates of the NCRP Scientific Committee 6-2 medical subgroup are that, in 2006, the per capita dose from medical exposure (not including dental or radiotherapy) had increased almost 600% to about 3.0 mSv and the collective dose had increased over 700% to about 900,000 person-Sv. The largest contributions and increases have come primarily from CT scanning and nuclear medicine. The 62 million CT procedures accounted for 15% of the total number procedures (excluding dental) and over half of the collective dose. Nuclear medicine accounted for about 4% of all procedures but 26% of the total collective dose. Medical radiation exposure is now approximately equal to natural background radiation.

THE ADVERSE EFFECT OF TREATMENT PROLONGATION IN CERVICAL CARCINOMA

PURPOSE Proliferation of surviving tumor clonogens during a course of protracted radiation therapy may be a cause of local failure in cervical carcinoma. The effect of total treatment time was analyzed retrospectively in relation to pelvic control and overall survival for squamous cell carcinomas of the uterine cervix. METHODS AND MATERIALS Two hundred and nine patients (Stage IB-IIIB) treated with a combination of external beam and low dose rate intracavitary irradiation were evaluable for study. Multivariate analysis and Kaplan-Meier statistical methods were used to determine the effect of treatment time on pelvic control and survival at 5 years. RESULTS The median treatment duration was 55 days. For all stages combined, the 5-year survival and pelvic control rates were significantly different with treatment times < 55 days vs. > or = 55 days: 65 and 54% (p = 0.03), 87 and 72% (p = 0.006), respectively. By stage, a shorter treatment duration (i.e., < 55 days vs. > or = 55 days) was significant for 5-year overall survival and pelvic control for Stages IB/IIA and III, but not for Stage IIB: Stage IB/IIA (81 and 67%, 96 and 84%), Stage III disease (52 and 42%, 76 and 55%) and Stage IIB (43 and 50%, 74 and 80%, respectively). Survival decreased 0.6%/day and pelvic control decreased 0.7%/day for each additional day of treatment beyond 55 days for all stages of disease. Additionally, significant late complications were not influenced by treatment time. CONCLUSION These results suggest that prolongation of treatment time is associated with decreased local control and survival in patients with cervical carcinoma. This is consistent with emerging data from other institutions. Therapeutic implications include avoidance of unnecessary treatment breaks, the design of fractionation schemes that decrease treatment duration, and possibly the use of tumor cytostatic drugs during conventional radiation.

American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part II: high-dose-rate brachytherapy.

PURPOSE This report presents an update to the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy guidelines for locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS Members of the ABS with expertise in cervical cancer formulated updated guidelines for HDR brachytherapy using tandem and ring, ovoids, cylinder, or interstitial applicators for locally advanced cervical cancer. These guidelines were written based on medical evidence in the literature and input of clinical experts in gynecologic brachytherapy. RESULTS The ABS affirms the essential curative role of tandem-based brachytherapy in the management of locally advanced cervical cancer. Proper applicator selection, insertion, and imaging are fundamental aspects of the procedure. Three-dimensional imaging with magnetic resonance or computed tomography or radiographic imaging may be used for treatment planning. Dosimetry must be performed after each insertion before treatment delivery. Applicator placement, dose specification, and dose fractionation must be documented, quality assurance measures must be performed, and followup information must be obtained. A variety of dose/fractionation schedules and methods for integrating brachytherapy with external-beam radiation exist. The recommended tumor dose in 2-Gray (Gy) per fraction radiobiologic equivalence (normalized therapy dose) is 80-90Gy, depending on tumor size at the time of brachytherapy. Dose limits for normal tissues are discussed. CONCLUSION These guidelines update those of 2000 and provide a comprehensive description of HDR cervical cancer brachytherapy in 2011.

American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part I: general principles.

PURPOSE To develop brachytherapy recommendations covering aspects of pretreatment evaluation, treatment, and dosimetric issues for locally advanced cervical cancer. METHODS Members of the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) with expertise in cervical cancer brachytherapy formulated updated recommendations for locally advanced (Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stages IB2-IVA) cervical cancer based on literature review and clinical experience. RESULTS The ABS recommends the use of brachytherapy as a component of the definitive treatment of locally advanced cervical carcinoma. Precise applicator placement is necessary to maximize the probability of achieving local control without major side effects. The ABS recommends a cumulative delivered dose of approximately 80-90Gy for definitive treatment. The dose delivered to point A should be reported for all brachytherapy applications regardless of treatment-planning technique. The ABS also recommends adoption of the Groupe Européen Curiethérapie-European Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) guidelines for contouring, image-based treatment planning, and dose reporting. Interstitial brachytherapy may be considered for a small proportion of patients whose disease cannot be adequately encompassed by intracavitary application. It should be performed by practitioners with special expertise in these procedures. CONCLUSIONS Updated ABS recommendations are provided for brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. Practitioners and cooperative groups are encouraged to use these recommendations to formulate their clinical practices and to adopt dose-reporting policies that are critical for outcome analysis.

High dose-rate brachytherapy treatment delivery: Report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 59

The goals of this task group are to examine the current high dose-rate (HDR) treatment delivery practices and to prepare a document to assure safe delivery of HDR treatments. The document consists of detailed HDR procedures for design of an HDR brachytherapy program, staffing and training, treatment specific quality assurance, and emergency procedures. The document provides an extensive quality assurance (QA) check list. It reviews all aspects of HDR treatment delivery safety, including prescription, treatment plan, treatment delivery, and radiation safety.

A dosimetric uncertainty analysis for photon-emitting brachytherapy sources: Report of AAPM Task Group No. 138 and GEC-ESTRO

This report addresses uncertainties pertaining to brachytherapy single-source dosimetry preceding clinical use. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Technical Note 1297 are taken as reference standards for uncertainty formalism. Uncertainties in using detectors to measure or utilizing Monte Carlo methods to estimate brachytherapy dose distributions are provided with discussion of the components intrinsic to the overall dosimetric assessment. Uncertainties provided are based on published observations and cited when available. The uncertainty propagation from the primary calibration standard through transfer to the clinic for air-kerma strength is covered first. Uncertainties in each of the brachytherapy dosimetry parameters of the TG-43 formalism are then explored, ending with transfer to the clinic and recommended approaches. Dosimetric uncertainties during treatment delivery are considered briefly but are not included in the detailed analysis. For low- and high-energy brachytherapy sources of low dose rate and high dose rate, a combined dosimetric uncertainty <5% (k=1) is estimated, which is consistent with prior literature estimates. Recommendations are provided for clinical medical physicists, dosimetry investigators, and source and treatment planning system manufacturers. These recommendations include the use of the GUM and NIST reports, a requirement of constancy of manufacturer source design, dosimetry investigator guidelines, provision of the lowest uncertainty for patient treatment dosimetry, and the establishment of an action level based on dosimetric uncertainty. These recommendations reflect the guidance of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) and the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie-European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) for their members and may also be used as guidance to manufacturers and regulatory agencies in developing good manufacturing practices for sources used in routine clinical treatments.

An investigation of tomotherapy beam delivery

Experimental simulations for tomotherapy beam delivery were performed using a computer-controlled phantom positioner, a cylindrical phantom, and a 6 MV x-ray slit beam. Both continuous helical beam and sequential segmented tomotherapy (SST) beam deliveries were evaluated. Beam junctioning problem due to couch indexing error or field width errors presented severe dose uniformity perturbations for SST, while the problem was minimized for helical beam delivery. Longitudinal breathing motions were experimentally simulated for helical and SST beam delivery. While motions reduced the dose uniformity perturbations for SST, small artifacts in dose uniformity can be introduced for helical beam delivery. With typical breath frequency and magnitude, for a slit beam of 2.0 cm width at 4 rpm, the dose uniformity perturbation was not significant. A running start/stop technique was implemented with helical beam delivery to sharpen the 20%-80% longitudinal dose fall-off from 1.5 to 0.5 cm. The latter was comparable to the corresponding dose penumbra of a conventional 6 MV 10 x 10 cm2 field. All together, helical beam delivery showed advantages over SST for tomotherapy beam delivery under similar delivery conditions.

Recommendations of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine on dosimetry, imaging, and quality assurance procedures for 90Y microsphere brachytherapy in the treatment of hepatic malignancies.

Yttrium-90 microsphere brachytherapy of the liver exploits the distinctive features of the liver anatomy to treat liver malignancies with beta radiation and is gaining more wide spread clinical use. This report provides a general overview of microsphere liver brachytherapy and assists the treatment team in creating local treatment practices to provide safe and efficient patient treatment. Suggestions for future improvements are incorporated with the basic rationale for the therapy and currently used procedures. Imaging modalities utilized and their respective quality assurance are discussed. General as well as vendor specific delivery procedures are reviewed. The current dosimetry models are reviewed and suggestions for dosimetry advancement are made. Beta activity standards are reviewed and vendor implementation strategies are discussed. Radioactive material licensing and radiation safety are discussed given the unique requirements of microsphere brachytherapy. A general, team-based quality assurance program is reviewed to provide guidance for the creation of the local procedures. Finally, recommendations are given on how to deliver the current state of the art treatments and directions for future improvements in the therapy.

High dose rate intracavitary brachytherapy for carcinoma of the cervix: the Madison system: I. Clinical and radiobiological considerations.

The decision to use five high dose rate intracavitary (HDR-ICR) insertions at weekly intervals for invasive carcinoma of the cervix treated at the University of Wisconsin Comprehensive Cancer Center (UWCCC) was made clinically. It was based on practical considerations and on previous clinical experience worldwide which showed that between 2 and 16 insertions have been used with apparently acceptable results. Although radiobiological considerations favor a large number of small doses, such a large number of HDR-ICR insertions is not clinically practical. Our strategy was to keep the biological effects of external beam and intracavitary insertions in the same ratio as used on a large series of patients treated here with low dose rate (LDR) therapy. This means keeping the same external beam treatment scheme and finding high dose rate (HDR) doses that are biologically equivalent to the previous LDR therapy, as far as possible. External beam and HDR intracavitary dose schedules for the Madison System of treating cervical carcinoma are described in detail. Because there is more repairable damage in late-reacting normal tissues, there is a bigger loss of sparing in these tissues than in tumors when changing from LDR to HDR, so total doses should be reduced more for equal late complications than for equal tumor control. The clinical decision was made to aim at equal tumor control. The possible increase in late complications has to be avoided by reducing the doses to critical normal tissues using extremely careful anatomic positioning of the HDR sources. Critical normal tissues must be kept further away from the radiation sources so that their doses are about 20% lower than with LDR geometry. This requires an extra separation of some millimeters depending on the anatomy and geometry of the individual insertion. The strategy is that the unfavourable radiobiological effects of a few large fractions must be counteracted by better physical dose distributions with HDR-ICR than with the previous LDR insertions. These good distributions are obtainable with the short exposures at HDR.