More on Intensity modulated radiation therapy

I've been reading the NY Times articles about radiation treatments for cancer (as they're unfolding) and I must say the news is rather dire (the link goes to the latest one).  I'm going both ways on this now - wanting to be informed, but also knowing that I'm not likely to change directions on my treatment when I've come this far down the path.

Why not change?  Well, for one, all the data I could gather pointed to better results with this course than if I had chosen surgery.  And my tendency is to think I'm going to be one of the ones who has relatively few problems along the way.  But I don't think other people go into the treatment expecting problems, so that's not a new thing.

I'm not surprised at the problem being reported by the Times, I think because I see it every day. I work in a technology area, but I'm focused on the human side of technology.  The fact that technology outpaces understanding and training is not new. And it doesn't surprise me to find out that controls and regulations on these machines are inadequate or completely absent. And it's certainly not surprising to hear that companies might think of releasing a product just a bit ahead of when they should.

But I found something key about my approach...
And that was the fact I completely left my "development hat" off when doing research into the radiation I'm headed into. I was busy learning what a collimator was, and getting my work calendar blocked off for the treatments.  I forgot to think (about the machines and the computer programs that drive them) - "what happens when the operator/programmer/technician gets confused? How do people know?  How do they test the setup for me (because it's all about me, OK?) before they turn on the machine?  Well, how do they?

There are some graphics about IMRT that I grabbed from the first NY Times article I read on this topic.  I include them here because they helped me understand the machines more, and that helped me understand the problem... which in turn helps me frame questions for my doctors. I think the graphics are fairly self explanatory.

---

 

---

I think I understand exactly how some of the errors occurred... mainly because they're very similar (albeit with less disastrous results) to user errors while managing complex systems.

But these articles, and the sidebars and all the details arms me with questions I will be asking my radiation oncologist when I see him this week.  And I will hope (as I have all along) for the best outcome.