Vikneswary Batumalai1,2,3, Lois Charlotte Holloway1,2,3,4,5, Shivani Kumar1,2,3, Kylie Dundas1,2,3, Michael Geoffrey Jameson1,2,3,4, Shalini Kavita Vinod1,3, Geoff P Delaney1,2,3. 1. Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 2. Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 3. South Western Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 4. Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia. 5. Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the current use of imaging technologies for planning and delivery of radiotherapy (RT) in Australia. METHODS: An online survey was emailed to all Australian RT centres in August 2015. The survey inquired about imaging practices during planning and treatment delivery processes. Participants were asked about the types of image-guided RT (IGRT) technologies and the disease sites they were used for, reasons for implementation, frequency of imaging and future plans for IGRT use in their department. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 71% of Australian RT centres. All respondents had access to computed tomography (CT) simulators and regularly co-registered the following scans to the RT: diagnostic CT (50%), diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (95%), planning MRI (34%), planning positron emission tomography (PET) (26%) and diagnostic PET (97%) to aid in tumour delineation. The main reason for in-room IGRT implementation was the use of highly conformal techniques, while the most common reason for under-utilisation was lack of equipment capability. The most commonly used IGRT modalities were kilovoltage (kV) cone-beam CT (CBCT) (97%), kV electronic portal image (EPI) (89%) and megavoltage (MV) EPI (75%). Overall, participants planned to increase IGRT use in planning (33%) and treatment delivery (36%). CONCLUSIONS: IGRT is widely used among Australian RT centres. On the basis of future plans of respondents, the installation of new imaging modalities is expected to increase for both planning and treatment.
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the current use of imaging technologies for planning and delivery of radiotherapy (RT) in Australia. METHODS: An online survey was emailed to all Australian RT centres in August 2015. The survey inquired about imaging practices during planning and treatment delivery processes. Participants were asked about the types of image-guided RT (IGRT) technologies and the disease sites they were used for, reasons for implementation, frequency of imaging and future plans for IGRT use in their department. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 71% of Australian RT centres. All respondents had access to computed tomography (CT) simulators and regularly co-registered the following scans to the RT: diagnostic CT (50%), diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (95%), planning MRI (34%), planning positron emission tomography (PET) (26%) and diagnostic PET (97%) to aid in tumour delineation. The main reason for in-room IGRT implementation was the use of highly conformal techniques, while the most common reason for under-utilisation was lack of equipment capability. The most commonly used IGRT modalities were kilovoltage (kV) cone-beam CT (CBCT) (97%), kV electronic portal image (EPI) (89%) and megavoltage (MV) EPI (75%). Overall, participants planned to increase IGRT use in planning (33%) and treatment delivery (36%). CONCLUSIONS: IGRT is widely used among Australian RT centres. On the basis of future plans of respondents, the installation of new imaging modalities is expected to increase for both planning and treatment.
Authors: Steve Heymann; Giovanna Dipasquale; Nam P Nguyen; Meymey San; Olena Gorobets; Nicolas Leduc; Dirk Verellen; Guy Storme; Hilde Van Parijs; Mark De Ridder; Vincent Vinh-Hung Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020 Jan-Dec
Authors: Jeffrey Barber; Johnson Yuen; Michael Jameson; Laurel Schmidt; Jonathan Sykes; Alison Gray; Nicholas Hardcastle; Callie Choong; Joel Poder; Amy Walker; Adam Yeo; Ben Archibald-Heeren; Kristie Harrison; Annette Haworth; David Thwaites Journal: J Med Radiat Sci Date: 2020-08-02