At Queensland University of Technology, student radiation therapists receive regular feedback from clinical staff relating to clinical interpersonal skills. Although this is of great value, there is anecdotal evidence that students communicate differently with patients when under observation.

The aim of this pilot was to counter this perceived observer effect by allowing patients to provide students with additional feedback.

Radiotherapy patients from two departments were provided with anonymous feedback forms relating to aspects of student interpersonal skills. Clinical assessors, mentors and students were also provided with feedback forms, including questions about the role of patient feedback. Patient perceptions of student performance were correlated with staff feedback and assessment scores.

Results indicated that the feedback was valued by both students and patients. Students reported that the additional dimension focused them on communication, set goals for development and increased motivation. These changes derived from both feedback and study participation, suggesting that the questionnaires could be a useful teaching tool. Patients scored more generously than mentors, although there was agreement in relative grading.

The anonymous questionnaire is a convenient and valuable method of gathering patient feedback on students. Future iterations will determine the optimum timing for this method of feedback.

Simulation has been effective for changing attitudes towards team-based competencies in many areas, but its role in teaching interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in radiation medicine (RM) is unknown. This study reports on feasibility and IPC outcomes of a team-based simulation event; ‘Radiation Medicine Simulation in Learning Interprofessional Collaborative Experience’ (RM SLICE).

Radiation therapy (RTT), medical physics (MP) and radiation oncology (RO) trainees in a single academic department were eligible. Scheduled closure of a modern RM clinic allowed rotation of five high-fidelity cases in three 105-minute timeslots. A pre/post-survey design evaluated learner satisfaction and interprofessional perceptions. Scales included the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS), UWE Entry Level Interprofessional Questionnaire (UWEIQ), Trainee Test of Team Dynamics and Collaborative Behaviours Scale (CBS).

Twenty-one trainees participated; six ROs (28·57%), six MPs (28·57%) and nine RTTs (42·86%). All cases were conducted, resolved and debriefed within the allotted time. Twenty-one complete sets (100%) of evaluations were returned. Participants reported limited interaction with other professional groups before RM SLICE. Perceptions of team functioning and value of team interaction in ‘establishing or improving the care plan’ were high for all cases, averaging 8·1/10 and 8·9/10. Average CBS scores were 70·4, 71·9 and 69·5, for the three cases, scores increasing between the first and second case for 13/21 (61·9%) participants. RIPLS and UWEIQ scores reflected positive perceptions both pre- and post-event, averaging 83·5 and 85·2 (RIPLS) and 60·6 and 55·7 (UWEIQ), respectively. For all professions for both scales, the average change in score reflected improved IP perceptions, with agreement between scales for 15/20 (75·0%) participants. Overall, perception of IPC averaged 9·14/10, as did the importance of holding such an event annually.

Team-based simulation is feasible in RM and appears to facilitate interprofessional competency-building in high-acuity clinical situations, reflecting positive perceptions of IPC.

In the era of dose escalation for localised prostate cancer, the dose–volume histogram (DVH) is integral to the assessment of rectum and bladder dose constraints. However, reliance on a single planning computerised tomography-based (P-CT) dose distribution may not account for variations in delivered dose that results from deformation of the prostate, bladder and rectum. This study uses cone-beam CT (CBCT) datasets from five patients to investigate the concordance between the dose prediction from the initial treatment plan and the dose delivered during treatment.

The intensity-modulated radiation therapy distribution used for treatment was superimposed on alternate day CBCT images for each patient. Dose metrics and absolute volumes for the prostate, rectum and bladder were extracted from the CBCT-based DVH. Differences in dose and volumes were compared with the P-CT values, and significance was tested using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

For all five case studies, the prostate dose coverage on CBCT plans was lower than predicted with an average reduction of 3% in mean dose. Significant differences in rectal volumes and dose were observed in two out of five and four out of five patients, respectively. Reductions in bladder volume and subsequent increases in dose were observed for three out of five patients.

The DVH from P-CT was unable to consistently predict the dose delivered to the bladder and rectum. The current bowel and bladder preparation protocols used at our institution did not eliminate variation in bladder and rectum volumes for the five patients included in this study.

Calypso® 4D Localization System is a system based on electromagnetic transponders detection enabling precise 3D localisation and continuous tracking of tumour target. This review intended to provide information in order to (1) show how Calypso® 4D Localization System works, (2) to present advantages and disadvantages of this system, (3) to gather information from several clinical studies and, finally, (4) to refer Calypso® System as a tool in dynamic multileaf collimator studies for target motion compensation.

A structured search was carried out on B-On platform. The key words used in this research were ‘Calypso’, ‘Transponder’, ‘Electromagnetic Localization’, ‘Electromagnetic Tracking’, ‘Target Localization’, ‘Intrafraction Motion’ and ‘DMLC’.

Treatment the implanted transponders are excited by an electromagnetic field and resonate back. These frequencies are detected and Calypso® software calculates the position of the transponders. If the movement detected is larger than the limits previously defined, irradiation can be stopped. The system has been proven to be submillimetre accurate.

Calypso® System has been presented as an accurate tool in prostate radiotherapy treatments. The application of this system to other clinical sites is being developed.

The Calypso® System allows real-time localisation and monitoring of the target, without additional ionising radiation administration. It has been a very useful tool in prostate cancer treatment.

Brain tumours are relatively rare disease but present a large medical challenge as there is currently no method for early detection of the tumour and are typically not diagnosed until patients have progressed to symptomatic stage which significantly decreases chances of survival and also minimises treatment efficacy. However, if brain cancers can be diagnosed at early stages and also if clinicians have the potential to prospectively identify patients likely to respond to specific treatments, then there is a very high potential to increase patients’ treatment efficacy and survival. In recent years, there have been several investigations to identify biomarkers for brain cancer risk assessment, early detection and diagnosis, the likelihood of identifying which group of patients will benefit from a particular treatment and monitoring patient response to treatment.

This paper reports on a review of 21 current clinical and emerging biomarkers used in risk assessment, screening for early detection and diagnosis, and monitoring the response of treatment of brain cancers.

Understanding biomarkers, molecular mechanisms and signalling pathways can potentially lead to personalised and targeted treatment via therapeutic targeting of specific genetic aberrant pathways which play key roles in malignant brain tumour formation. The future holds promising for the use of biomarker analysis as a major factor for personalised and targeted brain cancer treatment, since biomarkers have the potential to measure early disease detection and diagnosis, the risk of disease development and progression, improved patient stratification for various treatment paradigms, provide accurate information of patient response to a specific treatment and inform clinicians about the likely outcome of a brain cancer diagnosis independent of the treatment received.

We demonstrated that our proposed planning target volume (PTV) dose–volume factor (PDVF) can be used to evaluate the PTV dose coverage between the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans based on 90 prostate patients.

PDVF were determined from the prostate IMRT and VMAT plans to compare their variation of PTV dose coverage. Comparisons of the PDVF with other plan evaluation parameters such as D5%, D95%, D99%, Dmean, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI) and prostate tumour control probability (TCP) were carried out.

Prostate IMRT and VMAT plans using the 6 MV photon beams were created from 40 and 50 patients, respectively. Dosimetric indices (CI, HI and GI), dose–volume points (D5%, D95%, D99% and Dmean) and prostate TCP were calculated according to the PTV dose–volume histograms (DVHs) of the plans. All PTV DVH curves were fitted using the Gaussian error function (GEF) model. The PDVF were calculated based on the GEF parameters.

From the PTV DVHs of the prostate IMRT and VMAT plans, the average D99% of the PTV for IMRT and VMAT were 74·1 and 74·5 Gy, respectively. The average prostate TCP were 0·956 and 0·958 for the IMRT and VMAT plans, respectively. The average PDVF of the IMRT and VMAT plans were 0·970 and 0·983, respectively. Although both the IMRT and VMAT plans showed very similar prostate TCP, the dosimetric and radiobiological results of the VMAT technique were slightly better than IMRT.

The calculated PDVF for the prostate IMRT and VMAT plans agreed well with other dosimetric and radiobiological parameters in this study. PDVF was verified as an alternative of evaluation parameter in the quality assurance of prostate treatment planning.

Due to the increased degree of modulation and complexity of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans, it is necessary to have a pre-treatment patient-specific quality assurance (QA) programme. The gamma index is commonly used to quantitatively compare two dose distributions. In this study we investigated the sensitivity of single- and multi-gamma criteria techniques to detect multileaf collimator (MLC) positioning errors using the Varian TrueBeam Electronic Portal Imaging DeviceTM (EPID) dosimetry and the ArcCHECKTM device.

All active MLC positions of seven intact prostate patients VMAT plans were randomly changed with a mean value of 0.25, 0.5, 1 and 2 mm and a standard deviation of 0.1 mm on 25, 50, 75 and 100% of the control points. The change in gamma passing rates of six gamma criteria of 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, 3%/1 mm, 2%/2 mm, 2%/1 mm and 1%/1 mm were analysed individually (single-gamma criterion) and as a group (multi-gamma criteria) as a function of the simulated errors. We used the improved and global gamma calculation algorithms with a low dose threshold of 10% in the EPID and ArcCHECK software, respectively. The changes in the planning target volume dose distributions and the organs at risk due to the MLC positioning errors were also studied.

When 25, 50, 75 and 100% of the control points were modified by the introduction of the simulated errors, the smallest detectable errors with the EPID were 2, 1, 0.5 and 0.5 mm, respectively, using the multi-gamma criteria technique. Similarly for the single-gamma criteria technique errors as small as 2, 1, 1 and 1 mm applied to 25, 50, 75 and 100% of the control points, respectively, were detectable using a 2%/2 mm criterion. However, the smallest detectable errors with the ArcCHECK when using the multi-gamma criteria technique were 2, 2 and 1 mm when MLC errors were applied on 50, 75 and 100% of the control points. When only 25% of the control points were affected the ArcCHECK were unable to detect any of the errors applied. No noticeable difference was observed in the sensitivity using the single- or the multi-gamma criteria techniques with the ArcCHECK.

The Varian TrueBeam EPID dosimetry shows a higher sensitivity in detecting MLC positioning errors compared with the ArcCHECK regardless of using the single- or the multi-gamma criteria techniques. Higher sensitivity was observed using the multi-gamma criteria technique compared with the single-criterion technique when using the EPID.

To quantify the relationship between the planning target volume (PTV) dose homogeneity and organs at risk (OARs) sparing in correlation with anatomical parameters in prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

Nine IMRT plans with various target dose constraints’ priorities were created for 15 prostate cancer patients. Selected PTV and OARs parameters were calculated for the patients. A trade-off was assessed between homogeneity index (HI) and OAR sparing. Several anatomical parameters were evaluated to investigate their effects on the OAR sparing and HI.

Inverse exponential relationships were found between the OAR sparing and HI (average R2 of 0·983 and 0·994 for bladder and rectum, respectively). Decreasing the priority led to more OARs sparing (normal tissue complication probability reduction: 97·6 and 74·5%; mean dose reduction: 16·3 and 11·3% for bladder and rectum, respectively) and worsening of the HI (0·095–0·322) but with no significant effect on tumour control probability. Furthermore, OARs volumes, distances between OARs and PTV and their joint volumes had stronger correlations with OARs’ mean doses.

Enforcement of target dose constraints was more effective on the improvement of HIs for the patients with initial high HI values at low dose constraints’ priorities. Reducing the priority had more effects on the OARs sparing compared to HI, especially for the patients with high OAR doses in high priority plans. This can be attributed to smaller distances or greater joint volumes between the OARs and PTV.

Exposure of skin to high doses of radiation may lead to the development of erythematous skin changes. The aims of this study were to measure skin doses and to identify potential factors that may contribute to skin reactions in nasopharyngeal cancer patients undergoing intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).

This study was a prospective study with 21 nasopharyngeal cancer patients treated by IMRT. Personal data were collected and in vivo skin dose measurements were performed using Thermoluminescent dosimeters. All patients were monitored clinically and skin reactions were classified according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was conducted using Statistical Package for Social Sciences Software to identify skin toxicity risk factors.

Grade 1 toxicity was observed in eight patients, Grade 2 in 11 patients and Grade 3 in two patients towards the end of treatment. It was found that accumulative skin doses >7 Gy (p<0·05) was a risk factor for skin toxicity. However, previous or concomitant chemotherapy with radiotherapy and stage of cancer were not significant factors for the severity of skin reactions.

The neck skin should be identified as a sensitive structure for dose optimisation. Skin dose measurement and skin-sparing techniques are highly recommended for head and neck patients treated with IMRT.