UNASSIGNED: To commission and validate commercial deformable image registration (DIR) systems (SmartAdapt® and Velocity™) using task group 132 (TG-132) digital phantom datasets. Additionally, the study compares and verifies the DIR algorithms of the two systems.
UNASSIGNED: TG-132 digital phantoms were obtained from the American Association of Physicists in Medicine website and imported into SmartAdapt® and Velocity™ systems for commissioning and validation. The registration results were compared with known shifts using rigid registrations and deformable registrations. Virtual head and neck phantoms obtained online (DIR Evaluation Project) and some selected clinical data sets from the department were imported into the two DIR systems. For both of these datasets, DIR was carried out between the source and target images, and the contours were then propagated from the source to the target image data set. The dice similarity coefficient (DSC), mean distance to agreement (MDA), and Jacobian determinant measures were utilised to evaluate the registration results.
UNASSIGNED: The recommended criteria for commissioning and validation of DIR system from TG-132 was error <0.5*voxel dimension (vd). Translation only registration: Both systems met TG-132 recommendations except computed tomography (CT)-positron emission tomography registration in both systems (Velocity ~1.1*vd, SmartAdapt ~1.6*vd). Translational and rotational registration: Both systems failed the criteria for all modalities (For velocity, error ranged from 0.6*vd [CT-CT registration] to 3.4*vd [CT-cone-beam CT (CBCT) registration]. For SmartAdapt® the range was 0.6*vd [CT-CBCT] to 3.6*vd [CT-CT]). Mean ± standard deviation for DSC, MDA and Jacobian metrics were used to compare the DIR results between SmartAdapt® and Velocity™.
UNASSIGNED: The DIR algorithms of SmartAdapt® and Velocity™ were commissioned and their deformation results were compared. Both systems can be used for clinical purpose. While there were only minimal differences between the two systems, Velocity™ provided lower values for parotids, bladder, rectum, and prostate (soft tissue) compared to SmartAdapt. However, for mandible, spinal cord, and femoral heads (rigid structures), both systems showed nearly identical results.

UNASSIGNED: To show the workflow for the commissioning of a MRlinac, and some proposed tests; off-axis targets, output factors for small fields, dose in inhomogeneities, and multileaf collimator quality assurance (MLC QA).
UNASSIGNED: The tests were performed based on TG-142, TG-119, ICRU 97, TRS-398, and TRS-483 recommendations as well as national regulations for radiation protection and safety.
UNASSIGNED: The imaging tests are in agreement with the protocols. The radiation isocenter was 0.34 mm, and for off-axis targets location was up to 0.88 mm. The dose profiles measured and calculated in treatment planning system (TPS) passed in all cases the gamma analysis of 2%/2 mm (global dose differences). The output factors of fields larger than 2 cm × 2 cm are in agreement with the model of the MRlinac in the TPS. However, for smaller fields, their differences are higher than 10%. Picket fence test for different gantry angles showed a maximum leaf deviation up to 0.2 mm. Displacements observed in treatment couch adding weight (50 kg) are lower than 1 mm. Cryostat, bridge, and couch attenuation was up to 1.2%, 10%, and 24%, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: The implemented tests confirm that the studied MRlinac agrees with the standards reported in the literature and that the strict tolerances established as a baseline should allow a smoother implementation of stereotactic treatments in this machine.

Purpose. To evaluate the feasibility of use of an 1.5 T magnetic resonance (MR)-linear accelerator MR-linac for imaging in gynaecologic high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy.Method. Commissioning measurements for MR images quality control, geometric distortion, dwell position accuracy, applicator reconstruction and end-to-end test for a tandem-and-ring applicator were performed following the recommendations of American Brachytherapy Society, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements and Report of the Brachytherapy Working Group of the Spanish Society of Medical Physics. The values for MR-based IGABT were compared to the corresponding values with computed tomography (CT).Results. Measured distorsions for the MR images were less than 0.50 mm compared to the CT images. The differences between 3D displacements for all dwell positions were 0.66 mm and 0.62 mm for the tandem and ring, respectively. The maximum difference is 0.64 mm for the distances from the applicator tip obtained using the films. The CT and MR dose differences for the right and left \'A\' points were 0.9% and -0.7%, respectively. Similar results were observed in terms of dose distribution for CT and Mr The gamma passing rate was 99.3% and 99.5%, respectively.Conclusion. The use of MR images from an MR-linac used in a radiotherapy service for gynaecological brachytherapy was proved to be feasible, safe and precise as the geometrical differences were less than 1 mm, and the dosimetric differences were less than 1% when comparing to the use of CT images for the same purpose.

Objective. The FLASH effect can potentially be used to improve the therapeutic ratio of radiotherapy (RT) through delivery of Ultra-high-dose-rate (UHDR) irradiation. Research is actively being conducted to translate UHDR-RT and for this purpose the Mobetron is capable of producing electron beams at both UHDR and conventional dose rates for FLASH research and translation. This work presents commissioning of an UHDR Mobetron with end-to-end tests developed for preclinical research.Approach. UHDR electron beams were commissioned with an efficient approach utilizing a 3D-printed water tank and film to fully characterize beam characteristics and dependences on field size, pulse width (PW) and pulse repetition frequency (PRF). This commissioning data was used to implement a beam model using the GAMOS Monte Carlo toolkit for the preclinical research. Then, the workflow for preclinical FLASH irradiation was validated with end-to-end tests delivered to a 3D-printed mouse phantom with internal inhomogeneities.Main results.PDDs, profiles and output factors acquired with radiochromic films were precisely measured, with a PRF that showed little effect on the UHDR beam energy and spatial characteristics. Increasing PW reduced theDmaxand R50by 2.08 mmµs-1and 1.28 mmµs-1respectively. An end-to-end test of the preclinical research workflow showed that both profiles in head-foot and lateral directions were in good agreement with the MC calculations for the heterogeneous 3D printed mouse phantom with Gamma index above 93% for 2 mm/2% criteria, and 99% for 3 mm/3%.Significance. The UHDR Mobetron is a versatile tool for FLASH preclinical research and this comprehensive beam model and workflow was validated to meet the requirements for conducting translational FLASH research.

In this study, we aimed to conduct a survey on the current clinical practice of, staffing for, commissioning of, and staff training for online adaptive radiotherapy (oART) in the institutions that installed commercial oART systems in Japan, and to share the information with institutions that will implement oART systems in future. A web-based questionnaire, containing 107 questions, was distributed to nine institutions in Japan. Data were collected from November to December 2023. Three institutions each with the MRIdian (ViewRay, Oakwood Village, OH, USA), Unity (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden), and Ethos (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA) systems completed the questionnaire. One institution (MRIdian) had not performed oART by the response deadline. Each institution had installed only one oART system. Hypofractionation, and moderate hypofractionation or conventional fractionation were employed in the MRIdian/Unity and Ethos systems, respectively. The elapsed time for the oART process was faster with the Ethos than with the other systems. All institutions added additional staff for oART. Commissioning periods differed among the oART systems owing to provision of beam data from the vendors. Chambers used during commissioning measurements differed among the institutions. Institutional training was provided by all nine institutions. To the best of our knowledge, this was the first survey about oART performed using commercial systems in Japan. We believe that this study will provide useful information to institutions that installed, are installing, or are planning to install oART systems.

CONCLUSIONS: This article suggests why a different approach may be required for commissioning services from third sector providers than from, say, corporate or public providers. English systems for commissioning third sector providers contain both commodified elements (for example formal procurement, provider competition, commissioner-provider separation) and collaborative, relational elements (for example long-term collaboration, reliance on inter-organizational networks). When the two elements conflicted, commissioners and third sector organizations tended to try to work around the commodified elements in order to preserve and develop the collaborative aspects, which suggests that, in practice, they find de-commodified, collaborative methods better adapted to the commissioning of third sector organizations.
UNASSIGNED: When publicly-funded services are outsourced, governments still use multiple governance structures to retain some control over the services provided. Using realist methods the authors systematically compared this aspect of community health activities provided by third sector organizations in six English localities during 2020-2022. Two modes of commissioning coexisted. Commodified commissioning largely embodied Washington consensus models of formal, competitive procurement. A contrasting, collaborative mode of commissioning relied more upon relational, long-term co-operation and networking among organizations. When the two modes conflicted, commissioners often favoured the collaborative mode and sought to adjust their commissioning to make it less commodified.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and characterize a large-area multi-strip ionization chamber (MSIC) for efficient measurement of proton beam spot size and position at a synchrotron-based proton therapy facility.
METHODS: A 420 mm x 320 mm MSIC was designed with 240 vertical strips and 180 horizontal strips at 1.75 mm pitch. The MSIC was characterized by irradiating a grid of proton spots across 17 energies from 73.5 MeV to 235 MeV and comparing to simultaneous measurements made with a reference Gafchromic EBT3 film. Beam profiles, spot sizes, and positions were analyzed. Short term measurement stability and sensitivity were evaluated.
RESULTS: Excellent agreement was demonstrated between the MSIC and EBT3 film for both spot size and position measurements. Spot sizes agreed within ± 0.18 mm for all energies tested. Measured beam spot positions agreed within ± 0.17 mm. The detector showed good short term measurement stability and low noise performance.
CONCLUSIONS: The large-area MSIC enables efficient and accurate proton beam spot characterization across the clinical energy range. The results indicate the MSIC is suitable for pencil beam scanning proton therapy commissioning and quality assurance applications requiring fast spot size and position quantification.

UNASSIGNED: FLASH or ultra-high dose rate (UHDR) radiation therapy (RT) has gained attention in recent years for its ability to spare normal tissues relative to conventional dose rate (CDR) RT in various preclinical trials. However, clinical implementation of this promising treatment option has been limited because of the lack of availability of accelerators capable of delivering UHDR RT. Commercial options are finally reaching the market that produce electron beams with average dose rates of up to 1000 Gy/s. We established a framework for the acceptance, commissioning, and periodic quality assurance (QA) of electron FLASH units and present an example of commissioning.
UNASSIGNED: A protocol for acceptance, commissioning, and QA of UHDR linear accelerators was established by combining and adapting standards and professional recommendations for standard linear accelerators based on the experience with UHDR at four clinical centers that use different UHDR devices. Non-standard dosimetric beam parameters considered included pulse width, pulse repetition frequency, dose per pulse, and instantaneous dose rate, together with recommendations on how to acquire these measurements.
UNASSIGNED: The 6- and 9-MeV beams of an UHDR electron device were commissioned by using this developed protocol. Measurements were acquired with a combination of ion chambers, beam current transformers (BCTs), and dose-rate-independent passive dosimeters. The unit was calibrated according to the concept of redundant dosimetry using a reference setup.
UNASSIGNED: This study provides detailed recommendations for the acceptance testing, commissioning, and routine QA of low-energy electron UHDR linear accelerators. The proposed framework is not limited to any specific unit, making it applicable to all existing eFLASH units in the market. Through practical insights and theoretical discourse, this document establishes a benchmark for the commissioning of UHDR devices for clinical use.

UNASSIGNED: We performed computed tomography (CT)-stopping power ratio (SPR) calibration in a carbon-ion therapy facility and evaluated SPR estimation accuracy.
UNASSIGNED: A polybinary tissue model method was used for the calibration of CT numbers and SPR. As a verification by dose calculation, we created a virtual phantom to which the CT-SPR calibration table was applied. Then, SPR was calculated from the change in the range of the treatment planning beam when changing to 19 different CT numbers, and the accuracy of the treatment planning system (TPS) calculation of SPR values from the CT-SPR calibration table was validated. As a verification by measurement, 5 materials (water, milk, olive oil, ethanol, 40% K2HPO4) were placed in a container, and the SPR was obtained by measurement from the change in the range of the beam that passed through the materials.
UNASSIGNED: The results of the dose calculations of the TPS showed that the results agreed within 1% for the lower CT numbers up to 1000 HU, but there was a difference of 3.0% in the higher CT number volume. The difference between the SPR calculated by TPS and the SPR caused by the difference in the energy of the incident particles agreed within 0.51%. The accuracy of SPR estimation was measured, and the error was within 2% for all materials tested.
UNASSIGNED: These results indicate that the SPR estimation errors are within the range of errors that can be expected in particle therapy. From commissioning and verification results, the CT-SPR calibration table obtained during this commissioning process is clinically applicable.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to validate the use of a model-based dose calculation algorithm (MBDCA), Acuros BV, for high dose rate brachytherapy treatment planning for a community-based hospital with a Bravos afterloader. Based on published AAPM recommendations, this work details a practical approach for community-based clinics to complete initial validation of Acuros BV, in order to add a MBDCA to a TG-43 based brachytherapy treatment planning program.
METHODS: Source dimensions and materials used in Acuros BV and TG-43 source models were compared to the physical source. TG-186 testing was completed with standardized test cases externally calculated with Monte Carlo compared to locally calculated with Acuros BV. Point doses calculated using TG-43 were compared to those calculated with Acuros BV in water at various dose grid settings. Secondary dose check software was used to evaluate dose distributions resembling clinical patient plans, both in water and on CT datasets representative of patient anatomy.
RESULTS: The major source of discrepancy of source models was the length of modeled steel cable. TG-186 testing showed that the largest differences between Monte Carlo and Acuros BV dose distributions were located along the source axis for cases calculated in water, as well as located in regions of high dose gradients and within the applicator for the case calculated with a generic shielded applicator. An audit of point doses calculated with both TG-43 and Acuros BV in water found that dose grid settings significantly affected agreement. Secondary dose check software indicated that Acuros BV functioned satisfactorily, and a 5% threshold was adopted for secondary dose checks on gynecologic plans.
CONCLUSIONS: This validation process indicated that Acuros BV met expected standards and affirmed its suitability for integration into this clinical practice\'s brachytherapy treatment planning.