Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “CHECK”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 739 records · Page 41
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-572: Beam Characteristics and Treatment Planning Commissioning for a New Proton Therapy Unit

Purpose: A single-room proton system, the Mevion S250, was introduced into the arena of proton radiotherapy by Mevion Medical Systems. The first unit was installed and operates at the S. Lee Kling Proton Therapy Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital. The objective of this abstract is to report the system's beam characteristics and Eclipse commissioning. Methods: Commissioning data were acquired for modelling longitudinal fluence, virtual source position, effective source position, source size and Bragg peaks in Eclipse. Stoichiometric CT calibration was generated via ICRU44 human. Spread-out Bragg peaks (SOBP) were measured with Parallel Plate Chamber and profiles with solid state detector for model validation. Heterogeneity effects were measured with bone and lung inserts in the beam line. RT dose was computed in a virtual water phantom, and exported from Eclipse to compare with measurements at various depths and axis. SOBPs were fine-tuned with partial shining correction and entry correction to match measurements. Output factor was measured for each individual field with an ADCL ion chamber in a water tank and fitted to a polynomial function to cross-check the monitor unit verification. Results: Ranges of all 24 options were measured within ±1mm tolerance. Modulations met a ±1mm or ±2% tolerance. SOBP flatness met a ±3% tolerance. Distal fall off (80%-20%) were measured between 6mm and 7mm for all options. Virtual source positions varied between 177cm and 195cm, decreasing with field size and range. SOBP generated by Eclipse agreed with measurements within ±3% in the entry region, and ±1%/±1mm in other regions. Sanity check for output achieved 5% accuracy in 98% of cases. Conclusion: The commissioning of the first Mevions S250 proton therapy system met specifications. The unit has been put in clinical operation since 12/17/2013.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-CAMPUS-T-06: Initial Experience of Patient-Specific QA Using a Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy System

Purpose: To illustrate patient QA results for the first 10 patients treated at Scripps Proton Center by comparing point dose measurement using an ion chamber and in-house developed secondary MU program, and the measurement of 2D dose distribution using an ion chamber array. Methods: At the time of writing, 10 patient plans were approved for treatment using Varian ProBeam pencil beam scanning system and Eclipse treatment planning software. We used the IBA CC04 0.04 cm3 ion chamber and PTW Unidos E electrometer for point dose measurement in a small water tank (Sun Nuclear 1D scanner). We developed independent MU check software based on measured pencil beam dose profiles for various energies. We used PTW Octavius 729 XDR array to evaluate 2D planar dose distribution. The 3D gamma at 3%/3 mm local dose was used to compare a 3D calculated dose plan with a 2D measured dose distribution using PTW Verisoft software. All fields were exported to a verification phantom plan and delivered at 0 degrees for simplicity. Results: Comparisons between the CC04 ion chamber measurement and calculated dose agree well within 1%. The PTW Octavius 729 XDR array exhibited some dose rate dependence in high dose rate pencil beam delivery. Nevertheless, the results, used as a relative measurement, passed the gamma criteria of 3%/3mm for greater than 90% of area in all patient fields. Visual inspection showed good agreement between ion chamber dose profile and the calculated plan. The in-house secondary check for MU agreed very well with the plan dose and measurement. The results will be updated with more patients treated. Conclusion: The initial patient specific QA results are encouraging for a new pencil beam scanning only proton therapy system.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

MCTP system model based on linear programming optimization of apertures obtained from sequencing patient image data maps

Purpose: The authors present a hybrid direct multileaf collimator (MLC) aperture optimization model exclusively based on sequencing of patient imaging data to be implemented on a Monte Carlo treatment planning system (MC-TPS) to allow the explicit radiation transport simulation of advanced radiotherapy treatments with optimal results in efficient times for clinical practice. Methods: The planning system (called CARMEN) is a full MC-TPS, controlled through aMATLAB interface, which is based on the sequencing of a novel map, called “biophysical” map, which is generated from enhanced image data of patients to achieve a set of segments actually deliverable. In order to reduce the required computation time, the conventional fluence map has been replaced by the biophysical map which is sequenced to provide direct apertures that will later be weighted by means of an optimization algorithm based on linear programming. A ray-casting algorithm throughout the patient CT assembles information about the found structures, the mass thickness crossed, as well as PET values. Data are recorded to generate a biophysical map for each gantry angle. These maps are the input files for a home-made sequencer developed to take into account the interactions of photons and electrons with the MLC. For each linac (Axesse of Elekta and Primus of Siemens) and energy beam studied (6, 9, 12, 15 MeV and 6 MV), phase space files were simulated with the EGSnrc/BEAMnrc code. The dose calculation in patient was carried out with the BEAMDOSE code. This code is a modified version of EGSnrc/DOSXYZnrc able to calculate the beamlet dose in order to combine them with different weights during the optimization process. Results: Three complex radiotherapy treatments were selected to check the reliability of CARMEN in situations where the MC calculation can offer an added value: A head-and-neck case (Case I) with three targets delineated on PET/CT images and a demanding dose-escalation; a partial breast irradiation case (Case II) solved with photon and electron modulated beams (IMRT + MERT); and a prostatic bed case (Case III) with a pronounced concave-shaped PTV by using volumetric modulated arc therapy. In the three cases, the required target prescription doses and constraints on organs at risk were fulfilled in a short enough time to allow routine clinical implementation. The quality assurance protocol followed to check CARMEN system showed a high agreement with the experimental measurements. Conclusions: A Monte Carlo treatment planning model exclusively based on maps performed from patient imaging data has been presented. The sequencing of these maps allows obtaining deliverable apertures which are weighted for modulation under a linear programming formulation. The model is able to solve complex radiotherapy treatments with high accuracy in an efficient computation time.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

Poster — Thur Eve — 40: Automated Quality Assurance for Remote-Afterloading High Dose Rate Brachytherapy

High dose rate (HDR) remote afterloading brachytherapy involves sending a small, high-activity radioactive source attached to a cable to different positions within a hollow applicator implanted in the patient. It is critical that the source position within the applicator and the dwell time of the source are accurate. Daily quality assurance (QA) tests of the positional and dwell time accuracy are essential to ensure that the accuracy of the remote afterloader is not compromised prior to patient treatment. Our centre has developed an automated, video-based QA system for HDR brachytherapy that is dramatically superior to existing diode or film QA solutions in terms of cost, objectivity, positional accuracy, with additional functionalities such as being able to determine source dwell time and transit time of the source. In our system, a video is taken of the brachytherapy source as it is sent out through a position check ruler, with the source visible through a clear window. Using a proprietary image analysis algorithm, the source position is determined with respect to time as it moves to different positions along the check ruler. The total material cost of the video-based system was under $20, consisting of a commercial webcam and adjustable stand. The accuracy of the position measurement is ±0.2 mm, and the time resolution is 30 msec. Additionally, our system is capable of robustly verifying the source transit time and velocity (a test required by the AAPM and CPQR recommendations), which is currently difficult to perform accurately.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-J-73: Extension of a Clinical OIS/EMR/R&V System to Deliver Safe and Efficient Adaptive Plan-Of-The-Day Treatments Using a Fully Customizable Plan-Library-Based Workflow

Purpose: To extend a clinical Record and Verify (R&V) system to enable a safe and fast workflow for Plan-of-the-Day (PotD) adaptive treatments based on patient-specific plan libraries. Methods: Plan libraries for PotD adaptive treatments contain for each patient several pre-treatment generated treatment plans. They may be generated for various patient anatomies or CTV-PTV margins. For each fraction, a Cone Beam CT scan is acquired to support the selection of the plan that best fits the patient’s anatomy-of-the-day. To date, there are no commercial R&V systems that support PotD delivery strategies. Consequently, the clinical workflow requires many manual interventions. Moreover, multiple scheduled plans have a high risk of excessive dose delivery. In this work we extended a commercial R&V system (MOSAIQ) to support PotD workflows using IQ-scripting. The PotD workflow was designed after extensive risk analysis of the manual procedure, and all identified risks were incorporated as logical checks. Results: All manual PotD activities were automated. The workflow first identifies if the patient is scheduled for PotD, then performs safety checks, and continues to treatment plan selection only if no issues were found. The user selects the plan to deliver from a list of candidate plans. After plan selection, the workflow makes the treatment fields of the selected plan available for delivery by adding them to the treatment calendar. Finally, control is returned to the R&V system to commence treatment. Additional logic was added to incorporate off-line changes such as updating the plan library. After extensive testing including treatment fraction interrupts and plan-library updates during the treatment course, the workflow is running successfully in a clinical pilot, in which 35 patients have been treated since October 2014. Conclusion: We have extended a commercial R&V system for improved safety and efficiency in library-based adaptive strategies enabling a wide-spread implementation of those strategies. This work was in part funded by a research grant of Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-03: 3 Year Clinical Experience with the IBA Proton Eyeline

Purpose: Over the past 3 years, more than 50 patients with ocular disease have been treated with a prototype commercial eyeline developed by Ion Beam Applications (IBA). It is particularly crucial for the dosimetry of the machine to be accurate, precise, and reproducible because of the small treatment volumes and several surrounding critical structures. A quality assurance (QA) program has been developed in order to regularly check and record the machine’s dosimetry over time. In this study we have summarized and evaluated three years of patient and system QA data for the eyeline prototype. Methods: In order to accurately deliver the prescribed dose to the patient’s treatment site, an output model was created based on several machine parameters. This output model, along with the requested system parameters, are regularly checked and recorded by a QA program. 10 standard proton fields have been created which have regular QA performed monthly with a water tank and parallel-plate chamber, and recorded in a database. QA has additionally been performed for each patient-specific treatment field. This is to verify and evaluate the patient output model as well as the system parameters for range&modulation combinations different than the standard QA fields. Results: 140 beam measurements have been analyzed for range, modulation, and output. The range is typically within tolerance, although there are about 6 cases where the system did not perform as expected. The modulation appears to be very stable, always being within tolerance. Output for the standard QA fields are typically within 2.5% from the baseline value. The patient output measurements agree within 2.5% from the model. Conclusion: Overall the eyeline performs well within the tolerances set, and the patient output measurements agree within 2% of the model.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-87: A TG-100 Approach for Quality Improvement of Associated Dosimetry Equipment

Purpose: Dosimetry protocols devote so much time to the discussion of ionization chamber choice, use and performance that is easy to forget about the importance of the associated dosimetry equipment (ADE) in radiation dosimetry - barometer, thermometer, electrometer, phantoms, triaxial cables, etc. Improper use and inaccuracy of these devices may significantly affect the accuracy of radiation dosimetry. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the risk factors in the monthly output dosimetry procedure and recommend corrective actions using a TG-100 approach. Methods: A failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) of the monthly linac output check procedure was performed to determine which steps and failure modes carried the greatest risk. In addition, a fault tree analysis (FTA) was performed to expand the initial list of failure modes making sure that none were overlooked. After determining the failure modes with the highest risk priority numbers (RPNs), 11 physicists were asked to score corrective actions based on their ease of implementation and potential impact. The results were aggregated into an impact map to determine the implementable corrective actions. Results: Three of the top five failure modes were related to the thermometer and barometer. The two highest RPN-ranked failure modes were related to barometric pressure inaccuracy due to their high lack-of-detectability scores. Six corrective actions were proposed to address barometric pressure inaccuracy, and the survey results found the following two corrective actions to be implementable: 1) send the barometer for recalibration at a calibration laboratory and 2) check the barometer accuracy against the local airport and correct for elevation. Conclusion: An FMEA on monthly output measurements displayed the importance of ADE for accurate radiation dosimetry. When brainstorming for corrective actions, an impact map is helpful for visualizing the overall impact versus the ease of implementation.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-192: Commissioning of a Commercial 3D Dose Calculation Program

Purpose: To commission a commercial software package (CSP) that is used as secondary dose calculation check. The CSP uses an independent golden data beam model. However, some parameters can be modified to generate a customer specific model. Plan comparisons and point dose measurements were performed to test if and to what extent the beam model needed adjustment to optimize results. Methods: Beam parameter configurations were compared between the CSP and both TPS. Twelve phantom test plans ranging from simple to complex were generated in two treatment planning systems (TPS). Tests included small field, off axis, EDW, IMRT and VMAT plans. For each plan a point dose was measured to establish ground truth. Lastly, patient plans were compared for both TPS systems and the CSP. Results: Beam parameters agreed within 2%. The output factors for small fields were changed for the 15 MV beam by 2 and 1.5 % for the 1 cm and 2 cm field sizes, respectively. For the 6 MV beam output factors were adjusted by 3−0.8% for field sizes ranging from 1 to 5 cm. The MLC dynamic leaf gap was adjusted by 1.5 mm for 18 MV beam. Differences between the CSP and the TPS were noted in the built-up region. These differences affected the gamma pass rate in the surface region, however this effect is reduced with increasing number of beam angles and does not affect point dose calculations at depth. All IMRT and VMAT plans agreed with the CSP using a gamma pass rate of 95% (3%, 3mm). Conclusion: The CSP is used to verify point doses for all 3D plans generated in our clinic for the last 6 months. No point dose mismatches were encountered since the CSP was implemented. Next, the CSP will be adapted for secondary checks of all IMRT plans. KL had a beta tester agreement with Mobius Medical for an in-kind equipment and software loan.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-321: Dosimetric Evaluation of Non-Coplanar Arcs in VMAT Planning for SBRT Lung Cases: A Planning Study

Purpose: Investigate use of standardized non-coplanar arcs to improve plan quality in lung Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy(SBRT) VMAT planning. Methods: VMAT planning was performed for 9 patients previously treated with SBRT for peripheral lung tumors (tumor size:12.7cc to 32.5cc). For each patient, 7 VMAT plans (couch rotation values:0,5,10,15,20,25,and 30 deg) were generated; the coplanar plans were pushed to meet the RTOG0915 constraints and each non-coplanar plans utilized the same optimization constraints. The following plan dose metrics were used (taken from RTOG 0915): D-2cm: the maximum dose at 2 cm from the PTV, conformality index (CI), gradient index (GI), lung volume receiving 5 Gy (V5) and lung volume receiving 20 Gy (V20). The couch collision clearance was checked for each plan through a dry run using the couch position from the patient’s treatment. Results: Of the 9 cases, one coplanar plan failed to meet two protocol guidelines (both gradient index and D-2cm parameter), and an additional plan failed the D-2cm parameter. When introducing at least 5 degree couch rotation, all plans met the protocol guidelines. The largest feasible couch angle available was 15 to 20 degrees due to gantry collision issues. Non-coplanar plans resulted in the average (standard deviation) reduction of the following metrics: GI by 7.3% (3.7%); lung V20 by 11.1% (3.2%); D-2cm by 12.7% (3.9%). The CI was unchanged (−0.3%±0.6%), and lung V5 increased (3.8%±8.2%). Conclusion: The use of couch rotations as little as 5 degrees allows for plan quality that will meet RTOG0915 constraints while reducing D-2cm, GI, and lung V20. Using default couch rotations while planning SBRT cases will allow for more efficient planning with the stated goal of meeting RTOG0915 criteria for all clinical cases. Gantry clearance checks in the treatment room may be necessary to ensure safe treatments for larger couch rotation values.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-361: Energy Dependent Radiation/light-Field Misalignment On Truebeam Linear Accelerator

Purpose: Verifying the co-incidence of the radiation and light field is recommended by TG-142 for monthly and annual checks. On a digital accelerator, it is simple to verify that beam steering settings are consistent with accepted and commissioned values. This fact should allow for physicists to verify radiation-light-field co-incidence for a single energy and accept that Result for all energies. We present a case where the radiation isocenter deviated for a single energy without any apparent modification to the beam steering parameters. Methods: The radiation isocenter was determined using multiple Methods: Gafchromic film, a BB test, and radiation profiles measured with a diode. Light-field borders were marked on Gafchromic film and then irradiated for all photon energies. Images of acceptance films were compared with films taken four months later. A phantom with a radio-opaque BB was aligned to isocenter using the light-field and imaged using the EPID for all photon energies. An unshielded diode was aligned using the crosshairs and then beam profiles of multiple field sizes were obtained. Field centers were determined using Omni-Pro v7.4 software, and compared to similar scans taken during commissioning. Beam steering parameter files were checked against backups to determine that the steering parameters were unchanged. Results: There were no differences between the configuration files from acceptance. All three tests demonstrated that a single energy had deviated from accepted values by 0.8 mm in the inline direction. The other two energies remained consistent with previous measurements. The deviated energy was re-steered to be within our clinical tolerance. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that radiation-light-field coincidence is an energy dependent effect for modern linacs. We recommend that radiation-light-field coincidence be verified for all energies on a monthly basis, particularly for modes used to treat small fields, as these may drift without influencing results from other tests.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-420: Failure Effects Mode Analysis for Trigeminal Neuralgia Frameless Radiosurgery

Purpose: Functional radiosurgery has been used successfully in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia but presents significant challenges to ensuring the high prescription dose is delivered accurately. A review of existing practice should help direct the focus of quality improvement for this treatment regime. Method: Failure modes and effects analysis was used to identify the processes in preparing radiosurgery treatment for TN. The map was developed by a multidisciplinary team including: neurosurgeon, radiation oncology, physicist and therapist. Potential failure modes were identified for each step in the process map as well as potential causes and end effect. A risk priority number was assigned to each cause. Results: The process map identified 66 individual steps (see attached supporting document). Corrective actions were developed for areas of high risk priority number. Wrong site treatment is at higher risk for trigeminal neuralgia treatment due to the lack of site specific pathologic imaging on MR and CT – additional site specific checks were implemented to minimize the risk of wrong site treatment. Failed collision checks resulted from an insufficient collision model in the treatment planning system and a plan template was developed to address this problem. Conclusion: Failure modes and effects analysis is an effective tool for developing quality improvement in high risk radiotherapy procedures such as functional radiosurgery.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-662: Quick and Efficient Daily QA for Compact PBS Proton Therapy Machine

Purpose: As proton therapy machines become widespread the need for a quick simple routine daily QA like that for linear accelerators becomes more important. Willis-Knighton has developed an accurate and efficient daily QA that can be performed in 15 minutes. Methods: A holder for a 2D ionization chamber array (MatriXX PT) was created that is indexed to the couch to allow for quick setup, lasers accuracy with respect to beam isocenter, and couch reproducibility. Image position/reposition was performed to check Isocentricity accuracy by placing BBs on the MatriXX. The couch coordinates are compared to that of commissioning. Laser positions were confirmed with the MatriXX isocenter. After IGRT, three beams were separately delivered according to setup. For the first beam, range shifter was inserted and dose at R90, field size, flatness and symmetry in X and Y direction was measured. R90 was used so any minor changes in the range shifter can be detected. For the open beam, dose at center of SOBP, flatness and symmetry in X and Y direction was measured. Field size was measured in ±X and ±Y direction at FWHM. This is measured so any variation in spot size will be detected. For the third beam additional solid water was added and dose at R50 was measured so that any variation in beam energy will be detected. Basic mechanical and safety checks were also performed. Results: Medical physicists were able to complete the daily QA and reduce the time by half to two-third from initial daily QA procedure. All the values measured were within tolerance of that of the baseline which was established from water tank and initial MatriXX measurements. Conclusion: The change in daily QA procedure resulted in quick and easy setup and was able to measure all the basic functionality of the proton therapy PBS.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-785: Using Systems Engineering to Design HDR Skin Treatment Operation for Small Lesions to Enhance Patient Safety

Purpose: Using systems engineering to design HDR skin treatment operation for small lesions using shielded applicators to enhance patient safety. Methods: Systems engineering is an interdisciplinary field that offers formal methodologies to study, design, implement, and manage complex engineering systems as a whole over their life-cycles. The methodologies deal with human work-processes, coordination of different team, optimization, and risk management. The V-model of systems engineering emphasize two streams, the specification and the testing streams. The specification stream consists of user requirements, functional requirements, and design specifications while the testing on installation, operational, and performance specifications. In implementing system engineering to this project, the user and functional requirements are (a) HDR unit parameters be downloaded from the treatment planning system, (b) dwell times and positions be generated by treatment planning system, (c) source decay be computer calculated, (d) a double-check system of treatment parameters to comply with the NRC regulation. These requirements are intended to reduce human intervention to improve patient safety. Results: A formal investigation indicated that the user requirements can be satisfied. The treatment operation consists of using the treatment planning system to generate a pseudo plan that is adjusted for different shielded applicators to compute the dwell times. The dwell positions, channel numbers, and the dwell times are verified by the medical physicist and downloaded into the HDR unit. The decayed source strength is transferred to a spreadsheet that computes the dwell times based on the type of applicators and prescribed dose used. Prior to treatment, the source strength, dwell times, dwell positions, and channel numbers are double-checked by the radiation oncologist. No dosimetric parameters are manually calculated. Conclusion: Systems engineering provides methodologies to effectively design the HDR treatment operation that minimize human intervention and improve patient safety.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-F-BRB-07: A Plan Comparison Tool to Ensure Robustness and Deliverability in Online-Adaptive Radiotherapy

Purpose: To develop a plan comparison tool that will ensure robustness and deliverability through analysis of baseline and online-adaptive radiotherapy plans using similarity metrics. Methods: The ViewRay MRIdian treatment planning system allows export of a plan file that contains plan and delivery information. A software tool was developed to read and compare two plans, providing information and metrics to assess their similarity. In addition to performing direct comparisons (e.g. demographics, ROI volumes, number of segments, total beam-on time), the tool computes and presents histograms of derived metrics (e.g. step-and-shoot segment field sizes, segment average leaf gaps). Such metrics were investigated for their ability to predict that an online-adapted plan reasonably similar to a baseline plan where deliverability has already been established. Results: In the realm of online-adaptive planning, comparing ROI volumes offers a sanity check to verify observations found during contouring. Beyond ROI analysis, it has been found that simply editing contours and re-optimizing to adapt treatment can produce a delivery that is substantially different than the baseline plan (e.g. number of segments increased by 31%), with no changes in optimization parameters and only minor changes in anatomy. Currently the tool can quickly identify large omissions or deviations from baseline expectations. As our online-adaptive patient population increases, we will continue to develop and refine quantitative acceptance criteria for adapted plans and relate them historical delivery QA measurements. Conclusion: The plan comparison tool is in clinical use and reports a wide range of comparison metrics, illustrating key differences between two plans. This independent check is accomplished in seconds and can be performed in parallel to other tasks in the online-adaptive workflow. Current use prevents large planning or delivery errors from occurring, and ongoing refinements will lead to increased assurance of plan quality.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

MO-B-BRB-00: Optimizing the Treatment Planning Process

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

MO-B-BRB-01: Optimize Treatment Planning Process in Clinical Environment

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

MO-B-BRB-02: Maintain the Quality of Treatment Planning for Time-Constraint Cases

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

MO-B-BRB-03: Systems Engineering Tools for Treatment Planning Process Optimization in Radiation Medicine

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗