Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice (J Radiother Pract )

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Description

The Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice is a peer-reviewed journal covering all of the current modalities specific to clinical oncology and radiotherapy. The journal aims to publish research from a wide range of styles and encourage debate and the exchange of information and opinion from within the field of radiotherapy practice and clinical oncology. The journal also aims to encourage technical evaluations and case studies as well as equipment reviews that will be of interest to an international radiotherapy market.

  • Impact factor
    0.00
  • 5-year impact
    0.00
  • Cited half-life
    0.00
  • Immediacy index
    0.00
  • Eigenfactor
    0.00
  • Article influence
    0.00
  • Website
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice website
  • Other titles
    Journal of radiotherapy in practice (Online), Radiotherapy in practice
  • ISSN
    1467-1131
  • OCLC
    57696122
  • Material type
    Document, Periodical, Internet resource
  • Document type
    Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details

Cambridge University Press

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Author's Pre-print on author's personal website, departmental website, social media websites, institutional repository, non-commercial subject-based repositories, such as PubMed Central, Europe PMC or arXiv
    • Author's post-print for HSS journals, on author's personal website, departmental website, institutional repository, non-commercial subject-based repositories, such as PubMed Central, Europe PMC or arXiv, on acceptance of publication
    • Author's post-print for STM journals, on author's personal website on acceptance of publication
    • Author's post-print for STM journals, on departmental website, institutional repository, non-commercial subject-based repositories, such as PubMed Central, Europe PMC or arXiv, after a 6 months embargo
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • Published abstract may be deposited
    • Pre-print to record acceptance for publication
    • Publisher copyright and source must be acknowledged with set statement, for deposit of Authors Post-print or Publisher's version/PDF
    • Must link to publisher version
    • Publisher last reviewed on 07/10/2014
  • Classification
    ​ green

Publications in this journal

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We studied symptomatic radiation pneumonitis (RP) and changes in pulmonary function tests (PFTs) after loco-regional radiotherapy (LRRT) with V 20 lung constraints in breast cancer (BC).
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 06/2014; 13(2):211-217.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose To analyse interfraction setup using two different image guidance modalities for prostate and head-and-neck (H&N) cancer treatment.Materials and methods Seventy-two prostate and 60 H&N cancer patients, imaged with kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography (KVCBCT) or megavoltage fan beam computed tomography (MVFBCT), were studied retrospectively. The daily displacements in mediolateral (ML), craniocaudal (CC) and anteroposterior (AP) dimensions were investigated. The setup errors were calculated to determine the clinical target volume to planning target volume (CTV-to-PTV) margins.Results Based on 1,606 KVCBCT and 2,054 MVFBCT scans, average interfraction shifts in ML, CC and AP direction for H&N cases were 0·5 ± 1·5, −0·3 ± 2·0, 0·3 ± 1·7 mm using KVCBCT, 0·2 ± 1·9, −0·2 ± 2·4 and 0·0 ± 1·7 mm using MVFBCT. For prostate cases, average interfraction displacements were −0·3 ± 3·9, 0·2 ± 2·4, 0·4 ± 3·8 mm for MVFBCT and −0·2 ± 2·7, −0·6 ± 2·9, −0·5 ± 3·4 mm for KVCBCT. The calculated CTV-to-PTV margins, if determined by image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) data, were 5·6 mm (H&N) and 7·8 mm (prostate) for MVFBCT, compared with 4·8 mm and 7·2 mm for KVCBCT. We observed no statistically significant difference in daily repositioning using KVCBCT and MVFBCT in early, middle and late stages of the treatment course.Conclusion In the absence of IGRT, the CTV-to-PTV margin determined using IGRT data, may be varied for different imaging modalities for prostate and H&N irradiation.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 12/2013; 12(04).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Radiotherapy departments are having to work more efficiently to cope with increasing demand for radiotherapy resources. Radiotherapy treatment room efficiency may be increased by the introduction of hospital clothing as this negates the need for patient changing in the treatment room. However, studies have shown that hospital clothing can have a negative effect on patient dignity. It is therefore important to balance potential time saving with any detriment to patients.Purpose This study examined the effect that hospital clothing had on the time patients spend in the treatment room and aimed to identify patients’ opinions of the clothing.Materials and methods Potential time saving was determined by covertly timing patients currently undergoing radiotherapy treatment as they entered and exited the treatment room. A total of 348 patients were timed in their own clothing and 341 were timed when they wore hospital clothing. The timings of these two groups were compared to determine whether hospital clothing saved treatment unit time. Patient opinions of the clothing were examined by issuing a short questionnaire, designed to gather ordinal data, at the end of their course of treatment. Questionnaires were issued only to patients who had worn hospital clothing in the radiotherapy department.Results Introducing hospital clothing saved a significant amount of treatment room time and patients were generally positive about wearing the clothing.Conclusion It is suggested that hospital clothing is a welcome addition to the radiotherapy department to increase efficiency without detriment to patients.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 12/2013; 12(04).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and purpose Accurate delineation of the target volume and organs at risk (OARs) are vital to ensure systematic errors are small. The use of contrast agents (CAs) in the bladder and rectum may aid contouring and reduce inter and intra-observer variability. The aim of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric effect of the presence of such contrast on the monitor units (MUs), planning target volume (PTV), rectum and bladder.Materials and methods The prostate, seminal vesicles, rectum and bladder were contoured by a single observer on ten patients with bladder and rectal contrast. To evaluate the dosimetric effect of the presence of contrast, the density of the ten patients with contrast in the bladder and rectum was virtually changed to 1 g/cm3. A four-field 15 MV conformal radiation therapy technique was applied in which dose volume histograms and MUs were compared using computed tomographic (CT) density and the 1 g/cm3 density.Results The presence of contrast resulted in a 0·09% (<1 MU) increase in anterior MUs and decrease of 1% (<1 MU) in the posterior beam MUs. Lateral beams were not affected. The PTV and bladder dose increased slightly without contrast. The rectum showed a maximum change of 0·62% dose among the measured dose values. A maximum dose of 0·3 Gy at the 30% volume was also seen.Conclusions The dosimetric effect of bladder and rectal CAs on MUs, dose to the PTV and OARs in using this technique was very small. This would not be clinically significant, but only if the extreme limits of dose volume constraints were being reached.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 12/2013; 12(04).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and purpose To investigate whether inadequate dose to Point-A necessitates treatment plan changes in a time of computed tomography (CT)-image-guided brachytherapy treatment planning for cervix cancer.Materials and methods A total of 125 tandem and ovoid insertions from 25 cervix patients treated were reviewed. CT-image-based treatment planning was carried out for each insertion. Point-A is identified and the dose documented; however, dose optimisation in each plan was based on covering target while limiting critical organ doses (PlanTarget). No attempts were made to equate prescription and Point-A dose. For each insertion, a second hypothetical treatment plan was generated by prescribing dose to Point-A (PlanPoint-A). Plans were inter-compared using dose–volume histogram analyses.Results A total of 250 treatment plans were analysed. For the study population, the median cumulative dose at Point-A was 80 Gy (range 70–95) for PlanTarget compared with 84·25 Gy for PlanPoint-A. Bladder and rectal doses were higher for PlanPoint-A compared with PlanTarget (p < 0·0001). Target D90 did not correlate with Point-A dose (p = 0·60).Conclusions Depending on applicator geometry, tumour size and patient anatomy, Point-A dose may vary in magnitude compared with prescription dose. Treatment plan modifications purely based on inadequate Point-A dose are unnecessary, as these may result in higher organ-at-risk doses and not necessarily improve target coverage.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 12/2013; 12(04).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose This study was designed to study the variations in different geometrical and dosimetric parameters.Materials and methods In this study, two groups comprises 21 and 28 patients, who were treated with 9·5 Gy × 2 Fx and 7·5 Gy × 3 Fx, respectively, using microselectron high-dose rate (HDR) remote control unit. All patients were analysed using orthogonal radiographs to evaluate variations in different parameters.Results Variations in different parameters are more in Group II patients than in Group I patients, which show that the variation in geometrical and dosimetrical parameters increases with increasing HDR number of fractions.Conclusion In the reporting of an outcome of multiple fractionation of HDR treatments resultant dosimetric parameters must be evaluated and must be used for clinical interpretation.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 12/2013; 12(04).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and purpose To assess the reliability of post-implant CT (PICT) dosimetry for I-125 prostate seed brachytherapy by investigating the variation between centres in performing PICT through a multi-centre audit.Materials and methods Computerised tomography data sets from four I-125 prostate brachytherapy patients were circulated to nine participating centres. Centres followed local protocol for PICT outlining and seed identification, dosimetry for D90, V100 and V150 for the prostate was reported. Outlines were compared to determine the variation in: quality parameters (D90, V100 and V150), dose-volume histograms and approach to PICT dosimetry between the centres.Results There was significant variation in the prostate outlines drawn by the nine centres; for a prostate with mean volume 43 cm3, the range was 39–57 cm3 which led to variations of D90 of 119–154 Gy (mean 140 Gy) and V100 of 80–93% (mean of 88%). Using automatic seedfinder software reduced discrepancies between centres identifying seeds; overall consistency in seed location was good.Conclusions There was a significant uncertainty in the outlining of the prostate volume for PICT dosimetry with an uncertainty value of around ± 20 Gy on D90. PICT is a valuable technique but its accuracy and consistency limitations must be appreciated.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 12/2013; 12(04).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction Head and neck cancer patients face many demanding events, such as radiation therapy, which can cause anxiety and uncertainty. Studies report that relevant information decreases emotional distress and inadequate communication can lead to increased fear and anxiety. There is a lack of research that describes what radiographers do when they meet the patients. The aim is to explain what radiographers’ do that may lead to less anxiety and uncertainty for head and neck cancer patients.Method This study was conducted via qualitative interviews and took on a phenomenological, hermeneutic approach. Eleven head and neck cancer patients were interviewed 1-month post radiation therapy.Results Successful meetings are characterised by the radiographer smiling, being pleasant, referring to the patient by their name, informing the patient thoroughly, asking open questions and answering questions.Conclusion Head and neck cancer patients feel vulnerable and need the radiographer to create a safe atmosphere when they undergo treatment. Then radiographers reduce uncertainty, provide emotional support, reduce loneliness, provide information and create alliances.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 09/2013; 12(03).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Context Meta-analyses demonstrate single-fraction radiotherapy to be as effective as multi-fraction treatment in palliating painful bone metastases, although surveys suggest reluctance in prescribing single fractions.Aims Assess the factors influencing the choice of dose-fractionation regimen in an unselected population; examine retreatment rates and subsequent skeletal events.Methods Data were extracted from case notes for 120 patients treated in 2000 and 2006 in a single centre serving a defined population; analysis used χ 2 and Fisher's exact statistical tests.Results An 8 Gy fraction was the commonest regimen prescribed (single-fraction delivery rate 53·6%). Tumour site was a significant factor in choice of dose-fractionation schedule. Patients with metastatic breast carcinoma were significantly less likely to receive single-fraction treatment compared with those with metastatic lung carcinoma (year 2000: p = 0·038, 2006: p = 0·001). There was a significantly higher retreatment rate following single-fraction compared with multi-fraction treatment (11% versus 3%). There were two subsequent neural axis compressions and four pathological fractures.Conclusions Single-fraction treatment is the commonest regimen but multiple fractions are still frequently delivered. Better prognosis groups appear more likely to receive multi-fraction treatment, possibly to avoid the need for retreatment. Subsequent skeletal events are rare but carry high morbidity when they occur.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 09/2013; 12(03).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction Prostate implants at the British Columbia Cancer Agency are performed using a pre-planned technique. Physicians can augment the dose distribution using one to five non-planned ‘extra’ seeds and this option is determined without intraoperative feedback. The purpose of this research is to quantify the dosimetric impact of extra seeds and to assess the circumstances under which they are considered necessary.Materials and methods Implanting physicians used a questionnaire to record the three-dimensional location and their rationale for using extra seeds. A plan reconstruction algorithm was used to distinguish the extra seeds from the planned seeds. Distributions with and without extra seeds were calculated to quantify the dosimetric impact to the prostate, urethra and rectum.Results Extra seeds resulted in mean relative increases to V100, V150 and V200 of 3·7%, 13% and 19·1%, respectively. Mean prostate D90 increased from 147 to 156 Gy. Improvements in post-implant quality assurance codes were recorded in 30% of the implants with minimal dose increase to the rectum and urethra. Extra seeds were mainly deposited in the prostate anterior–superior quadrant.Conclusions The use of two to five extra seeds can result in improvements to pre-planned prostate implants, whereas the costs in terms of increased rectal and prostatic urethral dose are relatively minor.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 09/2013; 12(03).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction With recent technological advances in image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT), through cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), more image-related clinical information is being collected, at more frequent intervals throughout the treatment course. As radiation therapy (RT) programmes further develop IGRT technology, the aim of this study is to assess whether the distribution and communication of professional responsibilities is evolving to ensure appropriate use of the technology.Methods Radiation therapists practicing at any of the 14 Ontario RT centres were sent an electronic survey (n = 400). Closed-ended quantitative items addressed perceptions regarding policies, comfort, and professional responsibility in addressing CBCT concerns. Focus was on gynaecological, lung, head and neck (H&N) disease sites. Options for qualitative comments and explanations were included where appropriate.Results Seventy-nine surveys were submitted. Respondents from 12/14 (85·7%) centres used CBCT for at least one of three disease sites, most commonly on a daily basis. Five of these centres (41·7%) did not require radiation oncologist CBCT review, with others requiring it Day 1 or weekly. Potential CBCT observations of concern were grouped as set-up issues, tumour changes, organ-at-risk (OAR) changes, contour changes and ancillary findings (especially lung and airway changes). Respondents believed they consulted another professional about a CBCT in 20·2% of H&N patients, 19·6% of lung patients and 9·7% of gynaecological patients. The level of comfort in doing so varied from 77·0% for H&N to 89·5% for lung. Respondents were most likely to believe themselves responsible for changes in OARs (92·2% believing themselves responsible), and least likely for ancillary findings (62·7%).Conclusions Through preliminary insight from Ontario therapists, a degree of inconsistency is apparent between perceptions, practices and assigned roles in the management of CBCT information. Clear definition of the scope and nature of therapists’ responsibility for interpreting and addressing changes on CBCT images should be developed within each centre.
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice 09/2013; 12(03).