David Parsons, Sean Domal, Eric Chambers, Denise Salazar, Justin Visak, Mona Arbab, Francis Holgado, Dillon Li, Chinasa Okoro, Narine Wandrey, Zohaib Iqbal, Prasanna Alluri, Bin Cai, Hannah Keen, Jennifer Cleaton, Andrew Godley, David Sher, Shahed Badiyan, Asal Rahimi, Mu-Han Lin
{"title":"Feasibility and Impact of an RTT-Driven Workflow for CBCT-Guided Partial Breast Adaptive Radiotherapy.","authors":"David Parsons, Sean Domal, Eric Chambers, Denise Salazar, Justin Visak, Mona Arbab, Francis Holgado, Dillon Li, Chinasa Okoro, Narine Wandrey, Zohaib Iqbal, Prasanna Alluri, Bin Cai, Hannah Keen, Jennifer Cleaton, Andrew Godley, David Sher, Shahed Badiyan, Asal Rahimi, Mu-Han Lin","doi":"10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.03.055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based online adaptive radiotherapy (ART) allows significantly smaller planning target volume (PTV) margins for patients treated with adaptive stereotactic partial breast irradiation (A-SPBI). However, this approach places increased demands on the treatment team, especially physicians. We hypothesize that with appropriate training, physicians' involvement at the treatment console can be reduced by delegating contouring and planning tasks to radiation therapy technologists (RTTs) with a physicist co-pilot without reducing treatment quality.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this prospective study designed to evaluate an RTT-driven workflow, 23 patients undergoing A-SPBI were included, with two treatment plans generated per adaptive fraction. The first plan used contours edited by RTTs under physicist supervision (without physician oversight), and the second plan used contours edited by physicians. RTT-modified plans were compared with physician-edited contours for target coverage (V<sub>100%</sub> and V<sub>95%</sub>) and organ-at-risk (OAR) constraints. Dice coefficient and Hausdorff distance were calculated for target volumes. Following confirmation of RTT contour quality, we initiated the 'remote physician' workflow to further reduce physician demand in the on-couch process. Physician review time was recorded to estimate the reduction in time required for ART. The number of treated fractions before and after implementation was also tracked.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis of 103 adaptive fractions showed mean Dice coefficient 0.96 for the tumor bed. Mean Hausdorff distance was 0.6 mm. Differences in planning target volume coverage were -1.0 ± 2.2% and -0.6 ± 1.3% for V<sub>100%</sub> and V<sub>95%</sub>, respectively. Similar metrics for the tumor bed and clinical target volume had differences <0.4%. Physician time for ART was reduced by 12.3 ± 1.0 minutes per fraction, leading to a 224% increase in ART breast volume at our institution.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Training experienced radiation therapists to perform contouring and planning tasks reduces physician workload without compromising treatment quality during online A-SPBI. Remote contour review ensures ongoing quality and consistency.</p>","PeriodicalId":14215,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.03.055","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based online adaptive radiotherapy (ART) allows significantly smaller planning target volume (PTV) margins for patients treated with adaptive stereotactic partial breast irradiation (A-SPBI). However, this approach places increased demands on the treatment team, especially physicians. We hypothesize that with appropriate training, physicians' involvement at the treatment console can be reduced by delegating contouring and planning tasks to radiation therapy technologists (RTTs) with a physicist co-pilot without reducing treatment quality.
Materials and methods: In this prospective study designed to evaluate an RTT-driven workflow, 23 patients undergoing A-SPBI were included, with two treatment plans generated per adaptive fraction. The first plan used contours edited by RTTs under physicist supervision (without physician oversight), and the second plan used contours edited by physicians. RTT-modified plans were compared with physician-edited contours for target coverage (V100% and V95%) and organ-at-risk (OAR) constraints. Dice coefficient and Hausdorff distance were calculated for target volumes. Following confirmation of RTT contour quality, we initiated the 'remote physician' workflow to further reduce physician demand in the on-couch process. Physician review time was recorded to estimate the reduction in time required for ART. The number of treated fractions before and after implementation was also tracked.
Results: Analysis of 103 adaptive fractions showed mean Dice coefficient 0.96 for the tumor bed. Mean Hausdorff distance was 0.6 mm. Differences in planning target volume coverage were -1.0 ± 2.2% and -0.6 ± 1.3% for V100% and V95%, respectively. Similar metrics for the tumor bed and clinical target volume had differences <0.4%. Physician time for ART was reduced by 12.3 ± 1.0 minutes per fraction, leading to a 224% increase in ART breast volume at our institution.
Conclusions: Training experienced radiation therapists to perform contouring and planning tasks reduces physician workload without compromising treatment quality during online A-SPBI. Remote contour review ensures ongoing quality and consistency.
期刊介绍:
International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics (IJROBP), known in the field as the Red Journal, publishes original laboratory and clinical investigations related to radiation oncology, radiation biology, medical physics, and both education and health policy as it relates to the field.
This journal has a particular interest in original contributions of the following types: prospective clinical trials, outcomes research, and large database interrogation. In addition, it seeks reports of high-impact innovations in single or combined modality treatment, tumor sensitization, normal tissue protection (including both precision avoidance and pharmacologic means), brachytherapy, particle irradiation, and cancer imaging. Technical advances related to dosimetry and conformal radiation treatment planning are of interest, as are basic science studies investigating tumor physiology and the molecular biology underlying cancer and normal tissue radiation response.