1 / 15

Impacting Radiotherapy Safety and QA with Device Improvements

FDA Public Meeting: Device Improvements to Reduce the Number of Under-Doses, Over-Doses, and Misaligned Exposures From Therapeutic Radiation. Impacting Radiotherapy Safety and QA with Device Improvements . Benedick A Fraass, PhD, FAAPM, FASTRO, FACR

bastien
Download Presentation

Impacting Radiotherapy Safety and QA with Device Improvements

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. FDA Public Meeting: Device Improvements to Reduce the Number of Under-Doses, Over-Doses, and Misaligned Exposures From Therapeutic Radiation Impacting Radiotherapy Safety and QA with Device Improvements Benedick A Fraass, PhD, FAAPM, FASTRO, FACR Allen S. Lichter Professor of Radiation Oncology and Director of Radiation Physics, Dept. of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan Chair: ASTRO Multidisciplinary QA Subcommittee AAPM Science Council, Therapy Physics Committee, TG100, Chair: Research Committee

  2. Impacting Radiotherapy Safety and QA with Device Improvements Goal: Describe several issues in which vendor or FDA efforts may help us improve patient safety and QA efficiency and effectiveness

  3. Need 1: Process-based Analysis + QA Imaging, Targets, Normal Anatomy, Beams Dose Calcs Plan Evaluation Inverse Planning MLC Leaf Sequencing Tx Delivery Planning, Prep Download to Delivery System Patient-specific IMRT QA • RT process is complex: we need process-oriented QA to deal with that complexity • The vendor can never “provide” all the QA needed for each potential technique • Vendors, regulators and clinicians all must recognize that we need more than just QA tests for machine features e-chart, Billing Patient Setup w/ Imaging AutomatedTx Delivery, Verification

  4. Imaging, Targets, Normal Anatomy, Beams Dose Calcs Plan Evaluation Inverse Planning MLC Leaf Sequencing Tx Delivery Planning, Prep Patient-specific IMRT QA Download to Delivery System e-chart, Billing Patient Setup w/ Imaging AutomatedTx Delivery, Verification Need 2: Flexibility to put together new and more effective QA processes Patient-specific IMRT QA IMRT Leaf Sequencing Patient-specific IMRT QA Download to Delivery System

  5. Need 2: Flexibility to put together new and more effective QA processes Typical Patient-Specific IMRT QA Check: • Apply IMRT plan to QA phantom • Deliver plan to QA phantom + ion chamber • Check each beam’s intensity (+ dose distrib?) vs calc (with film or 2-D electronic system) • Result: Total dose at one point + confirmation of beam intensities – after lots of work!

  6. Need 2: Flexibility to put together new and more effective QA processes Automating Patient-Specific IMRT QA: By having the flexibility to combine devices and techniques in novel ways:

  7. Need 2: Flexibility to put together new and more effective QA processes Automating Patient-Specific IMRT QA: Litzenberg

  8. Need 2: Flexibility to put together new and more effective QA processes Automating Patient-Specific IMRT QA: When we are driven by clinical needs to look for better ways to do things – we need the flexibility to do things that individual vendors will not have the resources or motivation to do 4% 4%

  9. Imaging, Targets, Normal Anat Beam Arrangement+ Technique Dose to Points Calcs Plan Evaluation MLC Leaf Sequencing Prescription, Inverse Planning MLC Leaf Sequencing Patient-specific IMRT QA Tx Delivery Planning, Prep Download to Delivery System e-chart, Billing Automated Tx Delivery, Verification (Automated) Patient Setup w/ Imaging Need 3: Flexibility to rearrange clinical process workflow The clinical workflow is directly related to the QA needed for modern RT: modifications can make crucial improvements If we identify a process change that can improve safety/quality, we need to have flexibility to implement that change We need better workflow adjustment tools...

  10. Need 4: Vendor-provided QA Tools, Updates • Vendors must make new QA-related devices, tools, methods quickly accessible to users • Note: QA devices must be used routinely before their value, or best uses can be known or proven • FDA: A slow or difficult marketing approval process can make potential products impossible to get, test, develop or implement • This is particularly problematic for software enhancements or modifications that can fix important bugs or make a hardware device or technique useful

  11. Imaging, Targets, Normal Anat Beam Arrangement+ Technique Dose to Points Calcs Plan Evaluation MLC Leaf Sequencing Prescription, Inverse Planning MLC Leaf Sequencing Patient-specific IMRT QA Tx Delivery Planning, Prep Download to Delivery System e-chart, Billing Automated Tx Delivery, Verification (Automated) Patient Setup w/ Imaging Need 5: Treatment Delivery QA and Monitoring: Integrated or Independent ? • Tx delivery QA and monitoring must involve RTTs and convey both qualitative + quantitative info easily and clearly • Monitoring must be integrated for efficiency • Monitoring must be independent for safety

  12. Imaging, Targets, Normal Anat Beam Arrangement+ Technique Dose to Points Calcs Plan Evaluation MLC Leaf Sequencing Prescription, Inverse Planning MLC Leaf Sequencing Patient-specific IMRT QA Tx Delivery Planning, Prep Download to Delivery System e-chart, Billing Automated Tx Delivery, Verification (Automated) Patient Setup w/ Imaging about to move move finished Need 5: Treatment Delivery QA and Monitoring: Integrated or Independent ? (Relatively) independent verification is possible: UM CCRS System: IJROBP 95

  13. Need 6: Collaborative + independent input into vendor design, hazard analyses, usability, and workflow efforts… • Detailed checks of software or hardware design at the end of the product development process are toolate to fix problems or weaknesses • Vendors should incorporate independent input (by clinically knowledgeable experts) into design, hazard analyses, test plan designs, usability • The earlier this happens in the development process, the better for everyone !

  14. Need 7: Vendor support for user groups for sharing of QA methods, issues • Users of a given vendor’s system all have much in common: • QA needs and techniques • Experience with system-specific issues • Knowledge how to solve or avoid problems • Improvements to suggest • Vendors should support user’s groups which help with sharing of this info!

  15. Impacting Radiotherapy Safety and QA with Device Improvements • Support process-based analysis and QA • Flexibility for new + more effective QA processes • Flexibility to rearrange clinical process workflow • More vendor-provided QA tools + methods • Integrated vs independent monitoring • Vendors need collaborative + independent input into design, hazard analysis, usability, workflow • Support of user groups for QA: sharing processes, methods, issues

More Related