Computerized System for Safety Verification of External Beam Radiation Therapy Planning


      To report an assessment of in-house software, Verifier, developed to improve efficacy and efficiency of the radiation therapy (RT) treatment planning process and quality control review (QCR).

      Methods and Materials

      Radiation therapy plan parameters retrieved from our treatment planning database are used by automated tests to give 75 types of warnings, such as prescription and plan discrepancies. The software is continuously updated on the basis of new issues, ideas, and planning policies. Verifier was retrospectively assessed (2007-2015) by examining impact on treatment plan revisions, frequency of quality improvement incident reports of avoidable RT plan-related safety events, unaddressed issues, and staff efficiency.


      Plan revisions for specific issues declined dramatically in response to implementation of corresponding Verifier tests. Between 2012 and 2015 our institution's total rate of plan revisions dropped from 18.0% to 11.2%. Between 2008 and 2015 specific tests were added to Verifier while the rate of corresponding avoidable safety events was reduced from 0.34% to 0.00% over the same period. Simulations suggest Verifier saves approximately 2 to 5 minutes per QCR.


      The decrease in quantifiable metrics of plan revisions and incident reports suggests automatic RT plan-checking software enhances patient safety and clinical efficiency. Although only modest time savings may be gained using Verifier for the QCR itself, the greater impact on efficiency is through avoiding late-stage plan modifications and improving documentation via automation. We encourage other institutions to consider working toward adding similar technologies to enhance their RT quality assurance programs.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      ASTRO Member Login
      ASTRO Members, full access to the journal is a member benefit. Use your society credentials to access all journal content and features.
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Purchase one-time access:

      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


      1. Bogdanich W. Radiation offers new cures and ways to do harm. The New York Times. January 23, 2010:A1.

      2. Bogdanich W, Rebelo K. A pinpoint beam strays invisibly, harming instead of healing. The New York Times. December 29, 2010:A1.

        • Marks L.B.
        • Light K.L.
        • Hubbs J.L.
        • et al.
        The impact of advanced technologies on treatment deviations in radiation treatment delivery.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007; 69: 1579-1586
        • Fraass B.A.
        • Lash K.L.
        • Matrone G.M.
        • et al.
        The impact of treatment complexity and computer-control delivery technology on treatment delivery errors.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998; 42: 651-659
        • Patton G.A.
        • Gaffney D.K.
        • Moeller J.H.
        Facilitation of radiotherapeutic error by computerized record and verify systems.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 56: 50-57
        • Macklis R.M.
        • Meier T.
        • Weinhous M.S.
        Error rates in clinical radiotherapy.
        J Clin Oncol. 1998; 16: 551-556
        • Huang G.
        • Medlam G.
        • Lee J.
        • et al.
        Error in the delivery of radiation therapy: Results of a quality assurance review.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005; 61: 1590-1595
        • Fraass B.
        • Doppke K.
        • Hunt M.
        • et al.
        American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 53: Quality assurance for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning.
        Med Phys. 1998; 25: 1773-1829
        • Kutcher G.J.
        • Coia L.
        • Gillin M.
        • et al.
        Comprehensive QA for radiation oncology: Report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 40.
        Med Phys. 1994; 21: 581-618
        • Terezakis S.A.
        • Harris K.M.
        • Ford E.
        • et al.
        An evaluation of departmental radiation oncology incident reports: Anticipating a national reporting system.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 85: 919-923
        • American Association of Physicists in Medicine
        Definition of a qualified medical physicist.
        in: Professional/Education/Science Policies. AAPM, Alexandria, VA2011 (1-H)
        • Gibbons J.P.
        • Antolak J.A.
        • Followill D.S.
        • et al.
        Monitor unit calculations for external photon and electron beams: Report of the AAPM Therapy Physics Committee Task Group No. 71.
        Med Phys. 2014; 41: 031501
        • Stern R.L.
        • Heaton R.
        • Fraser M.W.
        • et al.
        Verification of monitor unit calculations for non-IMRT clinical radiotherapy: Report of AAPM Task Group 114.
        Med Phys. 2011; 38: 504-530
        • Yeung T.K.
        • Bortolotto K.
        • Cosby S.
        • et al.
        Quality assurance in radiotherapy: Evaluation of errors and incidents recorded over a 10 year period.
        Radiother Oncol. 2005; 74: 283-291
        • Siochi R.A.
        • Pennington E.C.
        • Waldron T.J.
        • et al.
        Radiation therapy plan checks in a paperless clinic.
        J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009; 10: 2905
        • Furhang E.E.
        • Dolan J.
        • Sillanpaa J.K.
        • et al.
        Automating the initial physics chart checking process.
        J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009; 10: 2855
        • Kalet A.M.
        • Gennari J.H.
        • Ford E.C.
        • et al.
        Bayesian network models for error detection in radiotherapy plans.
        Phys Med Biol. 2015; 60: 2735-2749
        • Li H.H.
        • Wu Y.
        • Yang D.
        • et al.
        Software tool for physics chart checks.
        Pract Radiat Oncol. 2014; 4: e217-e225
        • Damato A.L.
        • Devlin P.M.
        • Bhagwat M.S.
        • et al.
        Independent brachytherapy plan verification software: Improving efficacy and efficiency.
        Radiother Oncol. 2014; 113: 420-424
        • Halabi T.
        • Lu H.M.
        Automating checks of plan check automation.
        J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014; 15: 4889
        • Becker S.J.
        Collision indicator charts for gantry-couch position combinations for Varian linacs.
        J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2011; 12: 3405


      Commenting Guidelines

      To submit a comment for a journal article, please use the space above and note the following:

      • We will review submitted comments as soon as possible, striving for within two business days.
      • This forum is intended for constructive dialogue. Comments that are commercial or promotional in nature, pertain to specific medical cases, are not relevant to the article for which they have been submitted, or are otherwise inappropriate will not be posted.
      • We require that commenters identify themselves with names and affiliations.
      • Comments must be in compliance with our Terms & Conditions.
      • Comments are not peer-reviewed.