bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
TU‐F‐BRB‐03: Clinical Implementation of MR‐Based Motion Management
Authors: Glide‐Hurst C. 
Published: June 2015

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives:

Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy.
Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization.
Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration.
Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.
TU‐PIS‐Exhibit Hall‐2: How to Move Beyond Dose Monitoring to Imaging Performance Utilization
Authors: Valencia D. 
Published: June 2015

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives:

Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy.
Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization.
Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration.
Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.
TU‐PIS‐Exhibit Hall‐3: Simultaneous tracking of patient and real time staff dose to optimize interventional workflow
Authors: Boon S. 
Published: June 2015

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives:

Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy.
Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization.
Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration.
Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.
TU‐G‐304‐00: New Member Symposium
Authors: Keener Justin 
Published: June 2015

As a new member of AAPM, it's easy to feel overwhelmed by the size and complexity of the association and to be unaware of the benefits and opportunities available to members. At this year's AAPM Annual Meeting in Anaheim, we will host a New Member Symposium where you can learn more about the organization, member resources, opportunities to get involved, and about topics of particular interest to new professionals. We encourage you to take advantage of this great opportunity to learn valuable information and to grow your professional network.Following an introduction from Dr. John Boone, AAPM President; Justin Keener, Chair of the New Professional Subcommittee, will speak on, “Physics of the AAPM.” Next will be Dr. George Sherouse sharing invaluable information in his talk, “Things You Won't Be Able to Say Somebody Should've Told You.”Registered attendees will receive a raffle ticket. Enter to win a complimentary registration for the 2016 Annual Meeting in Washington, DC!In addition, all new members who register for the Symposium will receive a drink ticket, good for one complimentary soda or beer served after the New Member Symposium during the social with Committee Chairs from 4 AAPM Councils: Science, Education, Professional and Administrative.Get your picture taken!!! There will be a photographer there to take pictures for your profile in the AAPM directory.The New Member Symposium is a (free) ticket option when you register online for the Annual Meeting. We hope that you will plan to attend.
TU‐F‐201‐01: General Aspects of Radiochromic Film Dosimetry
Authors: Niroomand‐Rad A. 
Published: June 2015

Since the introduction of radiochromic films (RCF) for radiation dosimetry, the scope of RCF dosimetry has expanded steadily to include many medical applications, such as radiation therapy and diagnostic radiology. The AAPM Task Group (TG) 55 published a report on the recommendations for RCF dosimetry in 1998. As the technology is advancing rapidly, and its routine clinical use is expanding, TG 235 has been formed to provide an update to TG‐55 on radiochromic film dosimetry. RCF dosimetry applications in clinical radiotherapy have become even more widespread, expanding from primarily brachytherapy and radiosurgery applications, and gravitating towards (but not limited to) external beam therapy (photon, electron and protons), such as quality assurance for IMRT, VMAT, Tomotherapy, SRS/SRT, and SBRT. In addition, RCF applications now extend to measurements of radiation dose in particle beams and patients undergoing medical exams, especially fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures and CT. The densitometers/scanners used for RCF dosimetry have also evolved from the He‐Ne laser scanner to CCD‐based scanners, including roller‐based scanner, light box‐based digital camera, and flatbed color scanner. More recently, multichannel RCF dosimetry introduced a new paradigm for external beam dose QA for its high accuracy and efficiency. This course covers in detail the recent advancements in RCF dosimetry.Learning Objectives:

Introduce the paradigm shift on multichannel film dosimetry
Outline the procedures to achieve accurate dosimetry with a RCF dosimetry system
Provide comprehensive guidelines on RCF dosimetry for various clinical applications
One of the speakers has a research agreement from Ashland Inc., the manufacturer of Gafchromic film.
TU‐F‐201‐02: Applications in SRS, SBRT, IMRT, VMAT, and KV Imaging
Authors: Chiu‐Tsao S. 
Published: June 2015

Since the introduction of radiochromic films (RCF) for radiation dosimetry, the scope of RCF dosimetry has expanded steadily to include many medical applications, such as radiation therapy and diagnostic radiology. The AAPM Task Group (TG) 55 published a report on the recommendations for RCF dosimetry in 1998. As the technology is advancing rapidly, and its routine clinical use is expanding, TG 235 has been formed to provide an update to TG‐55 on radiochromic film dosimetry. RCF dosimetry applications in clinical radiotherapy have become even more widespread, expanding from primarily brachytherapy and radiosurgery applications, and gravitating towards (but not limited to) external beam therapy (photon, electron and protons), such as quality assurance for IMRT, VMAT, Tomotherapy, SRS/SRT, and SBRT. In addition, RCF applications now extend to measurements of radiation dose in particle beams and patients undergoing medical exams, especially fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures and CT. The densitometers/scanners used for RCF dosimetry have also evolved from the He‐Ne laser scanner to CCD‐based scanners, including roller‐based scanner, light box‐based digital camera, and flatbed color scanner. More recently, multichannel RCF dosimetry introduced a new paradigm for external beam dose QA for its high accuracy and efficiency. This course covers in detail the recent advancements in RCF dosimetry.Learning Objectives:

Introduce the paradigm shift on multichannel film dosimetry
Outline the procedures to achieve accurate dosimetry with a RCF dosimetry system
Provide comprehensive guidelines on RCF dosimetry for various clinical applications
One of the speakers has a research agreement from Ashland Inc., the manufacturer of Gafchromic film.
TU‐F‐201‐03: Applications in Brachytherapy
Authors: Trichter S. 
Published: June 2015

Since the introduction of radiochromic films (RCF) for radiation dosimetry, the scope of RCF dosimetry has expanded steadily to include many medical applications, such as radiation therapy and diagnostic radiology. The AAPM Task Group (TG) 55 published a report on the recommendations for RCF dosimetry in 1998. As the technology is advancing rapidly, and its routine clinical use is expanding, TG 235 has been formed to provide an update to TG‐55 on radiochromic film dosimetry. RCF dosimetry applications in clinical radiotherapy have become even more widespread, expanding from primarily brachytherapy and radiosurgery applications, and gravitating towards (but not limited to) external beam therapy (photon, electron and protons), such as quality assurance for IMRT, VMAT, Tomotherapy, SRS/SRT, and SBRT. In addition, RCF applications now extend to measurements of radiation dose in particle beams and patients undergoing medical exams, especially fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures and CT. The densitometers/scanners used for RCF dosimetry have also evolved from the He‐Ne laser scanner to CCD‐based scanners, including roller‐based scanner, light box‐based digital camera, and flatbed color scanner. More recently, multichannel RCF dosimetry introduced a new paradigm for external beam dose QA for its high accuracy and efficiency. This course covers in detail the recent advancements in RCF dosimetry.Learning Objectives:

Introduce the paradigm shift on multichannel film dosimetry
Outline the procedures to achieve accurate dosimetry with a RCF dosimetry system
Provide comprehensive guidelines on RCF dosimetry for various clinical applications
One of the speakers has a research agreement from Ashland Inc., the manufacturer of Gafchromic film.
TU‐F‐201‐04: Applications in Small Fields and Proton Beams
Authors: Das I. 
Published: June 2015

Since the introduction of radiochromic films (RCF) for radiation dosimetry, the scope of RCF dosimetry has expanded steadily to include many medical applications, such as radiation therapy and diagnostic radiology. The AAPM Task Group (TG) 55 published a report on the recommendations for RCF dosimetry in 1998. As the technology is advancing rapidly, and its routine clinical use is expanding, TG 235 has been formed to provide an update to TG‐55 on radiochromic film dosimetry. RCF dosimetry applications in clinical radiotherapy have become even more widespread, expanding from primarily brachytherapy and radiosurgery applications, and gravitating towards (but not limited to) external beam therapy (photon, electron and protons), such as quality assurance for IMRT, VMAT, Tomotherapy, SRS/SRT, and SBRT. In addition, RCF applications now extend to measurements of radiation dose in particle beams and patients undergoing medical exams, especially fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures and CT. The densitometers/scanners used for RCF dosimetry have also evolved from the He‐Ne laser scanner to CCD‐based scanners, including roller‐based scanner, light box‐based digital camera, and flatbed color scanner. More recently, multichannel RCF dosimetry introduced a new paradigm for external beam dose QA for its high accuracy and efficiency. This course covers in detail the recent advancements in RCF dosimetry.Learning Objectives:

Introduce the paradigm shift on multichannel film dosimetry
Outline the procedures to achieve accurate dosimetry with a RCF dosimetry system
Provide comprehensive guidelines on RCF dosimetry for various clinical applications
One of the speakers has a research agreement from Ashland Inc., the manufacturer of Gafchromic film.
TU‐G‐213‐02: IEC Subcommittee 62B (Diagnostic Imaging Equipment): Recent and Active Projects
Authors: Supanich M. 
Published: June 2015

The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) writes standards that manufacturers of electrical equipment must comply with. Medical electrical equipment, such as medical imaging, radiation therapy, and radiation dosimetry devices, fall under Technical Committee 62. Of particular interest to medical physicists are the standards developed within Subcommittees (SC) 62B, which addresses diagnostic radiological imaging equipment, and 62C, which addresses equipment for radiation therapy, nuclear medicine and dosimetry. For example, a Working Group of SC 62B is responsible for safety and quality assurance standards for CT scanners and a Working Group of SC 62C is responsible for standards that set requirements for dosimetric safety and accuracy of linacs and proton accelerators. IEC standards thus have an impact on every aspect of a medical physicist's job, including equipment testing, shielding design, room layout, and workflow. Consequently, it is imperative that US medical physicists know about existing standards, as well as have input on those under development or undergoing revision.The structure of the IEC and current standards development work will be described in detail. The presentation will explain how US medical physicists can learn about IEC standards and contribute to their development.Learning Objectives:

Learn about the structure of the IEC and the influence that IEC standards have on the design of equipment for radiology and radiation therapy.
Learn about the mechanisms by which the US participates in the development and revision of standards.
Understand the specific requirements of several standards having direct relevance to diagnostic and radiation therapy physicists.
TU‐G‐BRD‐03: IMRT Dosimetry Differences in An Institution with Community and Academic Model
Authors: Srivastava S , Andersen A , Cheng C , Das I 
Published: June 2015

Purpose:Radiation outcome among institutions can be interpreted meaningfully if the dose delivery and prescription to the target volume is documented accurately and consistently. ICRU‐83 recommended specific guidelines in IMRT for target volume definitions and dose reporting. This retrospective study evaluates the pattern of IMRT dose prescription and recording in an academic institution (AI) and a community hospital (CH) models in a single institution with reference to ICRU‐83 recommendation.Materials & Methods:Dosimetric information of 625 (500 from academic and 125 from community) patients treated with IMRT was collected retrospectively from the AI and a CH. The dose‐volume histogram (DVH) for the target volume of each patient was extracted. Standard dose parameters such as D2, D50, D95, D98, D100, as well as the homogeneity index (HI) defined as (D2‐D98)/D50 and monitor units (MUs) were collected.Results:Significant dosimetric variations were observed in disease sites and between AI and CH. The variation in the mean value of D95 for AI is 98.48±4.12 and for CH is 96.41±4.13. A similar pattern was noticed for D50 (104.18±6.04 for AI and 101.05±3.49 for CH). Thus, nearly 95% of patients received dosage higher than 100% to the site viewed by D50 and varied between AI and CH models. The average variation of HI is found to be 0.12±0.08 and 0.11±0.08 for AI and CH model, showing better IMRT treatment plans for academic model compared to community.Conclusion:Even with the implementation of ICRU‐83 guidelines, there is a large variation in dose prescription and delivery in IMRT. The variation is institution and site specific. For any meaningful comparison of the IMRT outcome, strict guidelines for dose reporting should be maintained in every institution.
TU‐G‐BRD‐06: The Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Houston (IROC Houston) QA Center International Activities Outside North America
Authors: Followill D , Kry S , Molineu A , Lowenstein J , Alvarez P , Taylor P , Nguyen H , Hernandez N , Lujano C , Nguyen T , Keith T , Roll J , Tailor A 
Published: June 2015

Purpose:To describe the extent of IROC Houston's (formerly the RPC) QA activities and audit results for radiotherapy institutions outside of North America (NA).Methods:The IROC Houston's QA program components were designed to audit the radiation dose calculation chain from the NIST traceable reference beam calibration, to inclusion of dosimetry parameters used to calculate tumor doses, to the delivery of the radiation dose. The QA program provided to international institutions includes: 1) remote TLD/OSLD audit of machine output, 2) credentialing for advanced technologies, and 3) review of patient treatment records. IROC Houston uses the same standards and acceptance criteria for all of its audits whether for North American or international sites.Results:IROC Houston's QA program has reached out to radiotherapy sites in 43 different countries since 2013 through their participation in clinical trials. In the past two years, 2,778 international megavoltage beam outputs were audited with OSLD/TLD. While the average IROC/Inst ratio is near unity for all sites monitored, there are international regions whose results are significantly different from the NA region. In the past 2 years, 477 and 87 IMRT H&N phantoms were irradiated at NA and international sites, respectively. Regardless of the OSLD beam audit results, the overall pass rate (87 percent) for all international sites (no region separation) is equal to the NA sites. Of the 182 international patient charts reviewed, 10.7 percent of the dose calculation points did not meet our acceptance criterion as compared to 13.6 percent for NA sites. The lower pass rate for NA sites results from a much larger brachytherapy component which has been shown to be more error prone.Conclusion:IROC Houston has expanded its QA services worldwide and continues a long history of improving radiotherapy dose delivery in many countries.Funding received for QA audit services from the Korean GOG, DAHANCA, EORTC, ICON and CMIC Group
TU‐G‐BRD‐07: A Statistical Learning Approach to the Accurate Prediction of MLC Positional Errors During VMAT Delivery
Authors: Carlson J , Park J , Park S , Park J , Choi Y , Ye S 
Published: June 2015

Purpose:To quantify and predict the magnitude of multi‐leaf collimator (MLC) positional errors in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans using statistical learning techniques to allow more accurate representation of the dose distribution expected to be delivered.Methods:A total of 74 VMAT plans used for patient treatments from three separate institutions were acquired. All plans were delivered using a Varian Millennium 120 MLC. The plans were split into training (N=3), validation (N=6) and testing (N=65) sets. From these, numerical features such as individual leaf position and velocity, and categorical features such as whether the leaf was moving towards or away from the isocenter, the bank the leaf was a part of, and the control point (CP) at which the error occurred were extracted. The differences between planned and delivered leaf positions in the training data were used as a target response for the development of a linear regression model, a decision tree model, and a random forest model. Optimized model parameters were found using cross‐validation on the validation set. Performance of each model in predicting the positional errors was assessed using mean absolute error (MAE) and root mean square error (RMSE) on the held‐out test set.Results:The MAE between planned and delivered positions for moving MLCs was 1.27 mm (RMSE = 1.60 mm). The decision tree model had the best performance, the predictions of which had MAE for moving MLCs of 0.27 mm (RMSE = 0.39 mm). Leaf velocity significantly predicted position errors, (β = 0.128, p<0.0001), and explained a significant amount of the variance (r2=0.90, p<0.0001).Conclusion:The decision tree model accurately predicted actual MLC leaf positions during delivery. Incorporating predicted errors into the planned MLC positions leads to a more realistic representation of the leaf locations which can be expected during treatment delivery to the patient.