bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
TU‐E‐137‐01: In‐House Credentialing
Authors: Hevezi J 
Published: July 2013

The issue of in‐house credentialing has taken on added importance with more complex procedures and the recent emphasis on safety, especially in imaging and radiation oncology procedures. Medical Physicists have been categorized as Allied Health Professionals on most hospital and facility rosters with little more than proof of board certification as their chief credentialing statistic. Now, medical staff credentialing bodies have required more specific training in specialty procedures such as IMRT, SRS, SBRT, IGRT and specialized brachytherapy procedure like HDR, eye plaques, prostate seed implants, etc. Vendor training both on and off site for complex planning and treatment delivery systems like VMAT, RapidArc, TrueBeam, Tomotherapy and GammaKnife/ CyberKnife, to list but a few of the new technologies, are paramount in understanding the accurate and safe use of these systems. Societies offer guidelines and standards that may be useful in their applications and should be considered required reading. Departmental guidelines may require proctoring on a minimum number of cases. Although Board Certification bodies credential candidates over a broad range of specialty procedures, practitioners are more and more called on to have a greater detailed knowledge base of these complex systems and procedures. Many Medical Physicists have limited themselves to becoming proficient at one or two of these more specialized technologies. Indeed, the radiological community has answered this call by instituting additional certifications, the CAQ (Certificate of Added Qualification). These are achieved through spending an additional year of fellowship training to attain this detailed training. And, perhaps, Medical Physicists need to look to this additional fellowship training to achieve similar proficiency in one or more of these fields. Perhaps CAMPEP could take on sanctioning of these specialty fellowships. However it is structured, each department will have the onus of deciding on a program to credential Medical Physicists in these new specialty categories.Learning Objectives:1. Understand the structure of hospital and facility credentialing procedures2. Make use of guidelines and standards to apply new technologies properly3. Understand the departmental evaluation of skill sets for complex procedures, proctoring number of case, etc.4. Finally, explore the possibility of a medical physics fellowship to gain more skills and experience in focused specialties
TU‐E‐500‐01: Advanced Technologies for Breast RT
Authors: Li X , White J , Moran J 
Published: July 2013

Breast conservation therapy (BCT) combining lumpectomy and post‐lumpectomy radiation therapy (RT) is a well established alternative to mastectomy for most patients with early stage breast cancer (ESBC). The fact that most of local recurrences occur in close proximity to the original tumor bed indicates that the whole breast irradiation (WBI) may not be necessary in all cases of ESBC. This led to the development of partial breast irradiation (PBI) which reduces the amount of irradiated normal tissue. Moreover, accelerated PBI can shorten the treatment time from 4–5 weeks for the current standard breast RT for ESBC to 5 days. In the current clinical practice of PBI, large CTV to PTV margins (e.g., 1.5 cm) are being used due to the variations in patient setup, anatomy change between treatment fractions, and respiratory motion during the treatment. These large margins limit the patient eligibility for PBI and lead to more normal tissue irradiated with high dose. Advanced technologies, including IMRT, IGRT, respiration motion management, and adaptive replanning, are being rapidly introduced in to the clinic to reduce these large margins and to enable conformal irradiation of either whole or partial breast. The purpose of this session is to review and update physicists on this exciting and rapidly developing area.Learning Objectives:1. Understanding rationale, indications and promise for using advanced RT Technologies for breast cancer2. Review of recent advances in imaging, planning, and delivery technologies for breast RT3. Discussing clinical implementation, and experience for using the advanced technologies for breast RT
TU‐E‐103‐01: Image Quality Models in Advanced CT Applications
Authors: Siewerdsen J , Nishikawa R , Cunningham I , Chen G , Bochud F 
Published: July 2013

The last decade saw the development of new x‐ray tomographic imaging technologies, such as flat‐panel detector cone‐beam CT and tomosynthesis, now prevalent in applications ranging from diagnostic imaging to image‐guided interventions. Such technologies proceeded in stride with models of imaging performance developed to provide a rigorous understanding of the factors governing image quality and help accelerate system design and translation. The decade ahead promises important advances ‐ for example: statistical and iterative model‐based image reconstruction; dual‐energy and spectral tomography; photon counting detectors; phase contrast tomography; and understanding the performance of model and real observers in the context of volumetric data. The theoretical models of imaging performance now developing alongside such advanced technologies are the topic of this symposium. Dr. Nishikawa will introduce the broad and challenging landscape of such technologies and applications. Dr. Siewerdsen will discuss image quality models for dual‐energy CT and the extension from conventional filtered backprojection to statistical / iterative reconstruction methods. Dr. Cunningham will describe the development of cascaded systems analysis for new photon counting detector systems. Dr. Chen will demonstrate how image quality models and performance measurement in x‐ray (absorption) CT can be extended to differential phase‐contrast CT. Finally, Dr. Bochud will address the performance of observers in volumetric data, highlighting newly appreciated factors that are distinct from conventional models and understanding in the context of 2D (or single slice) image interpretation.Learning Objectivess:1. Understand the growing landscape of advanced tomographic imaging technologies and applications.2. Understand how image quality models developed over the last decade for CT, cone‐beam CT, and tomosynthesis can be extended to:a.) dual‐energy / spectral CTb.) statistical and iterative image reconstructionc.) photon counting detectorsd.) differential phase contrast CT3. Understand the distinctions and new considerations in observer performance and image quality assessment in volumetric data..National Institutes of Health. Carestream Health. Siemens Healthcare.
TU‐E‐144‐01: Advanced Novel Technologies & Therapeutic Strategies
Authors: Ferrara K , Griffin R , Guha C , Holland C , Lafon C 
Published: July 2013

A variety of novel techniques and treatment strategies have been developed and tested through preclinical trials for the clinical application of therapeutic ultrasound in recent years. This session features five invited presentations on the following topics: (1) ultrasound mediated drug delivery — the use of long circulation liposomes with ultrasound used to alter apparent vascular permeability and the use of temperature sensitive liposomes with ultrasound applied to release the drug, (2) high‐frequency ultrasound mapping of tumor vascular hypoxia as a targeting modality for focused ultrasound ablation to complement ionizing radiotherapy, (3) therapeutic ultrasound as an autologous in situ tumor vaccine — tumor‐specific cytotoxic immune response generated in mice receiving combined low energy focused ultrasound and high‐intensity focused ultrasound treatments, (4) sonothrombolysis and ultrasound‐mediated drug delivery for the treatment of cardiovascular disease, and (5) implantable ultrasound device for repeated opening of the blood brain barrier — a promising technology for drug delivery into the brain.Learning Objectives:1. To review the recent advances in therapeutic ultrasound techniques and their potential for clinical applications;2. To understand the physical characteristics and biological effects of these novel therapeutic technologies;3. To identify opportunities for medical physicists in development and assessment of practical treatment strategies utilizing these technologies
TU‐F‐137‐01: Writing and Reviewing Papers for Medical Physics
Authors: Hendee W , Slattery P , Karellas A , Rogers D 
Published: July 2013

Writing and Reviewing Papers for Medical Physics There is an art to writing a scientific paper so that it communicates accurately, succinctly, and comprehensively. Developing this art comes with experience, and sharing that experience with younger physicists is an obligation of senior scientists, especially those with editorial responsibilities for the journal. In this workshop, the preparation of a scientific manuscript will be dissected so participants can appreciate how each part is developed and then assembled into a complete paper. Then the review process for the paper will be discussed, including how to examine a paper and write an insightful and constructive review. Finally, we will consider the challenge of accommodating the concerns and recommendations of a reviewer in preparing a revision of the paper. A second feature of the workshop will be a discussion of the process of electronic submission of a paper for consideration by Medical Physics. The web‐based PeerX‐Press engine for manuscript submission and management will be examined, with attention to special features such as epaps and line‐referencing. Finally, new features of Medical Physics will be explained, such as Vision 20/20 manuscripts, Physics Letters and the standardized formatting of book reviews.Learning Objectives:1. Improve the participants' abilities to write a scientific manuscript.2. Understand the review process for Medical Physics manuscripts and how to participate in and benefit from it.3. Appreciate the many features of the PeerX‐Press electronic management process for Medical Physics manuscripts.4. Develop a knowledge of new features of Medical Physics.
TU‐G‐500‐01: The Science of Clinical Medical Physics D Jaffray1*, E Roelofs2*, T
Authors: Purdie  , Bortfeld T 
Published: July 2013

Medical physicists have a unique role in the clinical setting. In many medical centers, they are often the only individuals with formal research training. The rapid advance in technological innovation within the radiation oncology community has resulted in medical physicists being immersed in the role of technology manager with activities dominated by implementation. When combined with the rising challenges with respect to access to peer‐reviewed funding and changes in the pathway to professional certification, this situation has created open debate in the medical physics community regarding the role of medical physicists as a scientist. In parallel, the emerging trends of personalized cancer medicine, medical informatics, automation, and the drive to establish evidence to support innovative treatments are all highlighting the need for greater scientific engagement in the advancement of medicine. Medical physicists could be positioned to play a key role in the progression of these trends, however, this requires us to take a broader perspective on our talents and unique environment within medicine. In this session, these concepts and issues will be expanded upon and speakers will highlight examples of medical physics research that push the conventional domain. A lively discussion should emerge that will facilitate the further engagement of medical physicists in clinical science.Learning Objectives:1. Understand the challenges related to medical physicists contributing to the science of medicine2. Learn of new frontiers where clinical medical physicists are making important contributions3. Learn of the emerging opportunities for clinical science for medical physicists4. Become aware of the efforts within the medical physics community to facilitate greater engagement
TU‐G‐116‐01: A Roadmap for Installing and Commissioning New Equipment
Authors: Dieterich S , Yang J , Sherouse G , Fahimian B 
Published: July 2013

Learning Objectives:1. To learn how to build a new equipment commissioning project plan using efficient project management methods2. To identify equipment, personnel resources and commissioning time required3. Understand how to account for commissioning new technology with small install base4. Learn to develop a representative commissioning plan for a linac, CK, HDR unit or treatment planning system. Commissioning a large new piece of equipment or software is a core responsibility for a clinical medical physicist, yet it can be a daunting undertaking. Increasingly complex technology requires more complex, commissioning tasks to be completed. Many of these tasks originate from recently published AAPM Task Groups, but there is not yet a good sense in the community of how much time these tasks typically require. Medical Physicists are required to do all recommended tests to ensure patient safety while at the same time being conscious of revenue loss during commissioning time. Therefore, commissioning time needs to budgeted within a fairly tight tolerance.This session will give audiences the tool to develop a commissioning plan including time required, equipment needs, staff needs, and commissioning checklist. The speakers will demonstrate how to develop a sample commissioning plan for a linac, CyberKnife, HDR unit and treatment planning system.
WE‐A‐500‐01: Quality Control of Lung SBRT: Minimizing Uncertainties From Simulation to Treatment
Authors: Yin F , Benedict S , Bradley J , Cai J , Wijesooriya K 
Published: July 2013

Stringent quality control is critical to the success of lung SBRT. However, uncertainties exist in each step of the lung SBRT procedure. Characterization of organ motion using 4DCT may not present true tumor motion excursion due to its low temporal resolution and patients' breathing irregularity. In treatment planning, tumor ITV could be significantly under/over‐estimated by 4DCT. Different delivery techniques such as 3D‐conformal, IMRT/VMAT, may introduce different degrees of uncertainties. The relative pros/cons of each motion management technique are usually not patient‐specifically quantified, leading to uncertainty in finding the optimal technique for the patient. Other uncertainties include the choosing of planning CT, the determination of PTV and gating window, etc. At patient positioning, image guidance is prone to uncertainties due to technical limitations: CBCT may not present true ITV due to patient's irregular breathing. Rotational errors may not be fully corrected without six degree‐of‐freedom couch. At dose delivery, correlation between external motion and tumor motion is uncertain for respiratory‐gated treatment. Tumor motion and size during treatment may be different from those measured at simulation, and may vary between fractions. For physics QAs, uncertainties in dose measurement devices and delivery devices could be substantial with inhomogeneity tissues. Quality control of lung SBRT requires accurate quantification of target motion by using the proper 4D‐imaging technique and parameters based on patient's conditions, quantitative evaluation of different planning techniques, QA of treatment plan using 4D dosimeter and 4D phantom simulations, optimal patient positioning and motion monitoring during treatments.Learning Objectives:1. Provide an evidence‐based systematic review of uncertainties during lung SBRT2. Discuss the root causes of the uncertainties and corresponding quality control strategies3. Present data‐driven practical and effective solutions to minimize the uncertainties
WE‐A‐137‐01: Small Field Dosimetry
Authors: Das I , Sauer O , Ahnesjo A 
Published: July 2013

Specialized radiation treatments such as IMRT, VAT, SRS, Tomotherapy, CyberKnife and Gammaknife use small fields or combination of small fields on the order of few millimeters. Small‐field dosimetry is challenging due to source size obstruction, lack of electronic equilibrium and size of detectors. Source size is dependent on the design of the accelerator and could be obstructed by the collimating system with decreasing field sizes. Electronic equilibrium is a phenomenon associated with the range of secondary particles and hence dependent on the beam energy, spectrum and the composition of the medium. Detectors could be inherently large compared to beam size and may produce volume averaging and perturbations. Recommendations of a good working practice for relative dosimetry measurements (PDD, TMR, output factor etc.) and dose calculations based on formulation of the new IAEA/AAPM non‐compliant dosimetry1 is discussed in the context of small field dosimetry that is adopted in the AAPM TG‐155.2 This course provides insight of TG‐155 that defines small field, provides suitability of a detector and associated correction factor to convert reading to dose. It also provides beam modeling and dose calculations as a critical step in clinical utilization of small field radiotherapy. Small errors in beam data, approximations in dose algorithms, or misaligned field settings can propagate into large errors in planned and delivered dose. The modeling and treatment planning aspects of small field dosimetry is reviewed with emphasis on the most critical parts for ensuring accurate and safe radiation therapy. Please enter your abstract text here.1P. Alfonso, P. Andreo, R. Capote, M. S. Huq, W. Kilby, P. Kjall, T. R. Mackie, H. Palmans, K. Rosser, J. Seuntjens, W. Ullrich and S. Vatnitsky, “A new formalism for refeence dosimetry of small and nonstandard fields,” Med Phys 35, 5179–5186 (2008).2I. J. Das, P. Francescon, A. Ahnesjo, M. M. Aspradakis, C. W. Cheng, G. X. Ding, G. S. Ibbott, M. Oldham, M. S. Huq, C. S. Reft and S. O.A., “Task Group 155 report: Small fields and non‐equilibrium condition photon beam dosimetry,” Med Phys (under review).Learning Objectives:1. Devices that deal with small fields2. Definition of small fields3. Description of absolute and relative dosimetry4. Choice of detector in small field dosimetry5. Correction factors for converting reading to dose6. Understanding the implication of small fields in clinical practice
WE‐A‐WAB‐01: New Technologies Addressing the Range Uncertainty of Proton Therapy
Authors: Parodi K , Polf J , Paganetti H , Schulte R 
Published: July 2013

The role of proton therapy in radiation therapy is currently expanding. In the U.S., there are at present 11 clinical proton treatment facilities, with 10 centers operating proton gantries and 6 additional facilities under construction. One of the main challenges in proton therapy is the uncertainty in predicting proton range. Range uncertainties in proton therapy are related to ambiguity in converting x‐ray CT attenuation data to proton relative stopping power and are further compounded by organ deformation and internal motion as well as increasing relative biological effectiveness in the distal part of proton beams. Closely related to this issue is the continued development of image guidance technology in the treatment room that ideally will provide feedback for in‐room treatment plan modifications (adaptive proton therapy). Proton therapy treatment planning applies quite substantial range uncertainty margins, negating, in part, some of the advantages of the finite range. The problem of range uncertainty in proton therapy has been addressed in many ways, the ultimate goal being to reduce this uncertainty to ∼1 mm. Approaches to address this problem include Monte Carlo simulations to study the effects of different sources on proton range uncertainty, studies showing the amount of range uncertainties in patients, robust planning techniques, and various technological and calibration methods that attempt to improve the accuracy of relative proton stopping power and to detect and minimize range errors at the time of treatment, e.g., dual energy CT scanners, proton CT and radiography, prompt gamma registration and monitoring of proton radiation therapy with PET imaging. This symposium will present a broad overview of the current status of modern computational and imaging approaches to addressing the range‐uncertainty problem of proton beams in radiation therapy.Learning Objectives:1. Understand the prevailing range uncertainties in proton therapy and how they can affect clinical practice.2. Learn how the magnitude of range uncertainties has been studied with Monte Carlo simulations and in patients.3. Get an overview of new technologies addressing the range uncertainty problem in proton therapy.4. Learn about principles of proton computed tomography and radiography and how these techniques may be used for better range definition and pre‐treatment quality assurance.5. Learn about the use of prompt gamma emission for proton therapy range verification.6. Learn about the different implementations and initial clinical experience of PET verification of treatment delivery in proton and ion therapy.
WE‐A‐116‐01: MRI Safety
Authors: Och J , Jordan D 
Published: July 2013

Medical physicists are accustomed to dealing with the possibility of biological harm to patients from procedures involving ionizing radiation, whether this is the possibility of erythema in a week or so, or an increased in the relative risk of cancer developing in a decade or two. Accidents in MRI are more concrete. Their impact is immediate and catastrophic. Still, the concept of safety in the MRI facility is not always well addressed or understood. There is confusion about staffing, screening, construction, to name a few concerns. In addition, there is a proliferation in the number of patients presenting for MRI who require clearance based on the presence of one or more implanted devices that may be relative contraindications for MRI. Management of these patients has historically been very conservative, based on limited information about the interactions of these devices with the MR environment. More recently, testing and characterization of both medical devices and MR magnets have improved, but in many cases, there remains a gap in understanding which devices are likely safe to scan in particular MR environments. This session will review MRI safety considerations, with special emphasis on the recent ACR guidance document as well as the current state of MR safety labeling for conditional devices and common conditions of operation for commercially‐available MR scanners. The physicist should gain an understanding of the hazards which must be assessed and available resources.Learning Objectives:1. Read and understand MRI conditional safety labeling for a typical medical device2. Assess the specific physical conditions created by a given MRI scanner for comparison with the safety conditions3. Advise physicians performing MRI of specific risks or concerns for patients with conditional implants that do not meet the safety conditions for a given scanner or study4. Understand the4. Zone concept and how to implement them.5. Staffing concerns, including training and dealing with emergent situations.6. Auditing of the MRI safety program.