ESTRO 2024 - Abstract Book

S5860

RTT - Service evaluation, quality assurance and risk management

ESTRO 2024

This study was undertaken to assess the quantitative level of dose delivery during VMAT treatment for breast cancer, utilizing transit dosimetry with the EPID for actual patients, and to analyze the factors influencing this delivery. The results revealed a significant correlation between the CV and left breast volume and density during treatment. However, a definitive analysis of the causes of dose delivery accuracy and deviation remained inconclusive, suggesting the need for further research. Based on this study, it is anticipated that the development and improvement of a suitable predictive model can enhance the quality of radiation treatment by predicting and managing dose delivery uncertainties during patient treatment.

Keywords: transit dosimetry, EPID dosimetry, breast VMAT,

108

Mini-Oral

An Australian experience of refining Urology planning guidelines through shared planning

Alan Turner

Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Radiotherapy, Bendigo, Australia

Purpose/Objective:

During periods of low staffing, dosimetry planning workloads can be shared between campuses of a large, high volume Australian Radiation Therapy provider via a cloud-based treatment planning system.

Whilst this practice ensures patients receive timely access to treatment, it is clinically important to ensure that all staff can generate dosimetry to a consistent and acceptable standard

The objective of this study was to identify and quantify any differences in prostate cancer radiotherapy planning practice across the same organisation and to review plan metrics to ensure that plans reflect ideal practice irrespective of planning workload.

Material/Methods:

Part 1 consisted of a structured patient plan swap between campuses during a 4-month period from 1st August 2021 to 30th November 2021. Patients typically have dosimetry planning and quality assurance checks completed by the local treating campus. For this study, the dosimetry planning of randomly selected patients was completed at another campus. Quality assurance checks continued to be completed by the local campus. Radiation Therapists RTTs involved in the plan swap from all campuses would meet regularly via teleconference to discuss any observed variation in routine practice.

Part 2 was a review of plan metrics to evaluate differences between published and observed clinical goals for target and organ-at-risk (OAR) structures. This quantitative assessment included 385 urology patients treated over an 18-