| Peer-Reviewed

End-to-End Test for a Radiotherapy Program Based on the Medical Linear Accelerator Installed in a Resource-Limited Oncology Centre in Sub-Saharan Africa

Received: 2 May 2022    Accepted: 14 May 2022    Published: 31 May 2022
Views:       Downloads:
Abstract

Several challenges including the availability of necessary funds and expertise hinder the development and modernization of radiotherapy in resource-scarce countries like those in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This work presents the findings of an end-to-end audit on independent verification of radiation doses delivered by a commercially available medical linear accelerator (linac) installed at Cameroon Oncology Center, a resource-constrained oncology centre in SSA. The medical linac with 6 MV and 18 MV x-rays, and five electron energies ranging from 6–20 MeV was commissioned for clinical use. The mailed TLD dosimetry irradiation systems based on the American Radiological Physics Center technique were used to check the output of the photon beams and electron energies. The end-to-end test was achieved by requesting, imaging and treating the MD Anderson anthropomorphic head and neck phantom using an IMRT technique on our linac. The phantom was irradiated and sent back to the USA for analysis. Evaluation criteria require that an institution’s treatment plan agree within ± 7% of measured TLD doses and that ≥ 85% of pixels pass ± 7%/4 mm gamma analysis for film. Beam output met the required criteria within ± 3%, and our institution’s treatment plan satisfied the established criteria of measured TLD doses and film dose distributions. The gamma-passing rate was ≥ 91%. A resource-constrained oncology centre in SSA has met the MD Anderson humanoid phantom irradiation criteria generally used for credentialing institutions to assure quality and safety of complex radiation treatments. Despite the various challenges faced by resource-constrained countries in SSA, this work demonstrates the practicability of implementing a modern radiotherapy program based on linear accelerator technology in a resource-limited region.

Published in Radiation Science and Technology (Volume 8, Issue 2)
DOI 10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11
Page(s) 22-29
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Radiotherapy, Medical Linac, End-to-End Audit, Cameroon Oncology Center

References
[1] IARC, World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2021. GLOBOCAN 2020: Estimated cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2020. https://gco.iarc.fr/today/fact-sheets-populations. Accessed June 30, 2021.
[2] Ferlay, J., Ervik, M., Lam F, et al., eds. Global Cancer Observatory: Cancer Today. International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2020. https://gco.iarc.fr/today. Accessed June 30, 2021.
[3] Sung, H., Ferlay, J., Siegel, R. L., Laversanne, M., Soerjomataram, I., Jemel, A., & Bray, F. (2021). Global Can Statistics 2020: Globocan estimates of incidence and mortality for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin, 71 (3), 209–249.
[4] Elith, C., Dempsey, S. E., Findlay, N., & Warren-Forward, H. M. (2011). An introduction to the intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) Techniques, tomotherapy, and VMAT. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, 42 (1), 37–43.
[5] IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency. (2004). Commissioning and Quality Assurance of Computerized Planning Systems for Radiation Treatment of Cancer, Technical Reports Series No. 430. IAEA, Vienna.
[6] IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency. (2016). Accuracy Requirements and Uncertainties in Radiotherapy, IAEA Human Health Series No. 31. IAEA, Vienna.
[7] ICRU International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. (1976). Determination of Absorbed Dose in a Patient Irradiated by Beams of X or Gamma Rays in Radiotherapy Procedures Rep, vol. 24. ICRU, Bethesda (MD).
[8] Klein, E. E., Hanley, J., Bayouth, J., et al. (2009). Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. Medical Physics, 36 (9), 4197–4212.
[9] Thwaites, D. (2013). Accuracy required and achievable in radiotherapy dosimetry: have modern technology and techniques changed our views? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 444, 012006.
[10] Dutreix, A. (1984). When and how can we improve precision in radiotherapy? Radiotherapy and Oncology, 2 (4), 275–292.
[11] Mijnheer, B. J., Battermann, J. J., & Wambersie, A. (1987). What degree of accuracy is required and can be achieved in photon and neutron therapy? Radiotherapy and Oncology, 8 (3), 237–252.
[12] van der Merwe, D., Van Dyk, J., Healy, B., Zubizarreta, E., Izewska, J., Mijnheer, B., & Meghzifene, A. (2017). Accuracy requirements and uncertainties in radiotherapy: a report of the international atomic energy agency. Acta Oncologica, 56 (1), 1–6.
[13] Mayles, W. P. M. (2007). The Glasgow incident – a physicist’s reflections. Clinical Oncology, 19 (1), 4–7.
[14] Williams, M. V. (2007). Radiotherapy near misses, incidents and errors: radiotherapy incident in Glasgow. Clinical Oncology, 19 (1), 1–3.
[15] Ash, D. (2007). Lessons from Epinal. Clinical Oncology, 19 (), 614–615.
[16] Compte, P. J. (2006). Accident de radiothérapie à Épinal. Société Française de Physique Médicale.
[17] IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency. (2001). Investigation of an accidental exposure of radiotherapy patients in Panama. Report of a team of Experts 26 May – 1 June 2001, IAEA, Vienna.
[18] Ash, D., & Bates, T. (1994) Report on the clinical effects of inadvertent radiation underdosage in 1045 patients. Clinical Oncology, 6 (4), 214–25.
[19] Wesolowska, P., Georg, D., Lechner, W., Kazantsev, P., Bokulic, T., Tedgren, A. C. et al. (2019). Testing the methodology for a dosimetric end-to-end audit of IMRT/VMAT: results of IAEA multicentre and national studies. Acta Oncologica, 58 (12), 1731–1739.
[20] Clark, C. H., Jornet, N., & Muren, L. P. (2018). The role of dosimetry audit in achieving high quality radiotherapy. Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology, 5, 85–87.
[21] Lehmann, J., Alves, A., Dunn, L., Shaw, M., Kenny, J., et al. (2018). Dosimetric end-to-end tests in a national audit of 3D conformal radiotherapy. Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology, 6, 5–11.
[22] Alvarez, P., Kry, S. F., Stingo, F., & Followill, D. (2017). TLD and OSLD dosimetry systems for remote audits of radiotherapy external beam. Radiation Measurements, 106, 412–15.
[23] Kron, T., Haworth, A., & Williams, I. (2013). Dosimetry for audit and clinical trials: challenges and requirements. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 444, 012014.
[24] Molineu, A., Hernandez, N., Nguyen, T., Ibbott, G., & Followill, D. (2013). Credentialing results from IMRT irradiations of an anthropomorphic head and neck phantom. Medical Physics, 40 (2), 022101.
[25] Kim, D. W., Chung, K., Chung, W. K., Bae, S. H., Shin, D. O., Hong, S., et al. (2014). Risk of secondary cancers from scattered radiation during intensity-modulated radiotherapies for hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiation Oncology, 9, 109.
[26] Miljanić. S., Bordy, J. M., d'Errico, F., Harrison, R., & Olko, P. (2014). Out-of-field dose measurements in radiotherapy – An overview of activity of EURADOS Working Group 9: Radiation protection in medicine. Radiation Measurements, 71, 270–275.
[27] Lee, N., Chuang, C., Quivery, J. M., et al. (2002). Skin toxicity due to intensity modulated radiotherapy for head-and-neck carcinoma. International Journal of Radiation Oncology. Biology. Physics, 53 (3), 630–637.
[28] Almond PR, Biggs PJ, Coursey BM, Hanson WF, Huq MS, Nath R, R DWO. AAPM’s TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams. Med Phys 1999; 26: 1847–70.
[29] Low, D. A., Harms, W. B., Mutic, S., & Purdy, J. A. (1998). A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. Medical Physics, 25 (5), 656–661.
[30] Low, D. A., & Dempsey, J. F. (2003). Evaluation of the gamma dose distribution comparison method. Medical Physics, 30 (9), 2455–2464.
[31] Ju, T., Simpson, T., Deasy, J. O., & Low, D. A. (2008). Geometric interpretation of the γ dose distribution comparison technique: interpolation-free calculation. Medical Physics, 35 (3), 879–887.
[32] Van der Bijl, E., Van Oers, R. F. M., Olaciregui-Ruiz, I., & Mans, A. (2017). Comparison of gamma- and DVH-based in vivo dosimetric plan evaluation for pelvic VMAT treatments. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 125 (3), 405¬–410.
[33] Hussein, M., Clark, C. H., & Nisbet, A. (2017). Challenges in calculation of the gamma index in radiotherapy – Towards good practice. Physica Medica, 36, 1–11.
[34] Carson, M. E., Molineu, A., Taylor, P. A., Followill, D. S., Stingo, F., & Kry, S. F. (2016). Examining credentialing criteria and poor performance indicators for IROC Houston’s anthropomorphic head and neck phantom. Medical Physics, 43 (12), 6491–6496.
Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Paul Njom Mobit, Paulin Harmoniel Imandi, Nicholas Ade. (2022). End-to-End Test for a Radiotherapy Program Based on the Medical Linear Accelerator Installed in a Resource-Limited Oncology Centre in Sub-Saharan Africa. Radiation Science and Technology, 8(2), 22-29. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Paul Njom Mobit; Paulin Harmoniel Imandi; Nicholas Ade. End-to-End Test for a Radiotherapy Program Based on the Medical Linear Accelerator Installed in a Resource-Limited Oncology Centre in Sub-Saharan Africa. Radiat. Sci. Technol. 2022, 8(2), 22-29. doi: 10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Paul Njom Mobit, Paulin Harmoniel Imandi, Nicholas Ade. End-to-End Test for a Radiotherapy Program Based on the Medical Linear Accelerator Installed in a Resource-Limited Oncology Centre in Sub-Saharan Africa. Radiat Sci Technol. 2022;8(2):22-29. doi: 10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11,
      author = {Paul Njom Mobit and Paulin Harmoniel Imandi and Nicholas Ade},
      title = {End-to-End Test for a Radiotherapy Program Based on the Medical Linear Accelerator Installed in a Resource-Limited Oncology Centre in Sub-Saharan Africa},
      journal = {Radiation Science and Technology},
      volume = {8},
      number = {2},
      pages = {22-29},
      doi = {10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11},
      eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.rst.20220802.11},
      abstract = {Several challenges including the availability of necessary funds and expertise hinder the development and modernization of radiotherapy in resource-scarce countries like those in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This work presents the findings of an end-to-end audit on independent verification of radiation doses delivered by a commercially available medical linear accelerator (linac) installed at Cameroon Oncology Center, a resource-constrained oncology centre in SSA. The medical linac with 6 MV and 18 MV x-rays, and five electron energies ranging from 6–20 MeV was commissioned for clinical use. The mailed TLD dosimetry irradiation systems based on the American Radiological Physics Center technique were used to check the output of the photon beams and electron energies. The end-to-end test was achieved by requesting, imaging and treating the MD Anderson anthropomorphic head and neck phantom using an IMRT technique on our linac. The phantom was irradiated and sent back to the USA for analysis. Evaluation criteria require that an institution’s treatment plan agree within ± 7% of measured TLD doses and that ≥ 85% of pixels pass ± 7%/4 mm gamma analysis for film. Beam output met the required criteria within ± 3%, and our institution’s treatment plan satisfied the established criteria of measured TLD doses and film dose distributions. The gamma-passing rate was ≥ 91%. A resource-constrained oncology centre in SSA has met the MD Anderson humanoid phantom irradiation criteria generally used for credentialing institutions to assure quality and safety of complex radiation treatments. Despite the various challenges faced by resource-constrained countries in SSA, this work demonstrates the practicability of implementing a modern radiotherapy program based on linear accelerator technology in a resource-limited region.},
     year = {2022}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - End-to-End Test for a Radiotherapy Program Based on the Medical Linear Accelerator Installed in a Resource-Limited Oncology Centre in Sub-Saharan Africa
    AU  - Paul Njom Mobit
    AU  - Paulin Harmoniel Imandi
    AU  - Nicholas Ade
    Y1  - 2022/05/31
    PY  - 2022
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11
    DO  - 10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11
    T2  - Radiation Science and Technology
    JF  - Radiation Science and Technology
    JO  - Radiation Science and Technology
    SP  - 22
    EP  - 29
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2575-5943
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rst.20220802.11
    AB  - Several challenges including the availability of necessary funds and expertise hinder the development and modernization of radiotherapy in resource-scarce countries like those in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This work presents the findings of an end-to-end audit on independent verification of radiation doses delivered by a commercially available medical linear accelerator (linac) installed at Cameroon Oncology Center, a resource-constrained oncology centre in SSA. The medical linac with 6 MV and 18 MV x-rays, and five electron energies ranging from 6–20 MeV was commissioned for clinical use. The mailed TLD dosimetry irradiation systems based on the American Radiological Physics Center technique were used to check the output of the photon beams and electron energies. The end-to-end test was achieved by requesting, imaging and treating the MD Anderson anthropomorphic head and neck phantom using an IMRT technique on our linac. The phantom was irradiated and sent back to the USA for analysis. Evaluation criteria require that an institution’s treatment plan agree within ± 7% of measured TLD doses and that ≥ 85% of pixels pass ± 7%/4 mm gamma analysis for film. Beam output met the required criteria within ± 3%, and our institution’s treatment plan satisfied the established criteria of measured TLD doses and film dose distributions. The gamma-passing rate was ≥ 91%. A resource-constrained oncology centre in SSA has met the MD Anderson humanoid phantom irradiation criteria generally used for credentialing institutions to assure quality and safety of complex radiation treatments. Despite the various challenges faced by resource-constrained countries in SSA, this work demonstrates the practicability of implementing a modern radiotherapy program based on linear accelerator technology in a resource-limited region.
    VL  - 8
    IS  - 2
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • Department of Radiation Oncology, Cameroon Oncology Center, Douala, Cameroon

  • Department of Radiation Oncology, Cameroon Oncology Center, Douala, Cameroon

  • Department of Radiation Oncology, Cameroon Oncology Center, Douala, Cameroon

  • Sections