Dataset Information

Magnetic resonance imaging for brain stereotactic radiotherapy : A review of requirements and pitfalls.

ABSTRACT: Due to its superior soft tissue contrast, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is essential for many radiotherapy treatment indications. This is especially true for treatment planning in intracranial tumors, where MRI has a long-standing history for target delineation in clinical practice. Despite its routine use, care has to be taken when selecting and acquiring MRI studies for the purpose of radiotherapy treatment planning. Requirements on MRI are particularly demanding for intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy, where accurate imaging has a critical role in treatment success. However, MR images acquired for routine radiological assessment are frequently unsuitable for high-precision stereotactic radiotherapy as the requirements for imaging are significantly different for radiotherapy planning and diagnostic radiology. To assure that optimal imaging is used for treatment planning, the radiation oncologist needs proper knowledge of the most important requirements concerning the use of MRI in brain stereotactic radiotherapy. In the present review, we summarize and discuss the most relevant issues when using MR images for target volume delineation in intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Putz F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7182639 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Magnetic resonance imaging for brain stereotactic radiotherapy : A review of requirements and pitfalls.

Putz Florian F Mengling Veit V Perrin Rosalind R Masitho Siti S Weissmann Thomas T Rösch Johannes J Bäuerle Tobias T Janka Rolf R Cavallaro Alexander A Uder Michael M Amarteifio Patrick P Doussin Sylvain S Schmidt Manuel Alexander MA Dörfler Arndt A Semrau Sabine S Lettmaier Sebastian S Fietkau Rainer R Bert Christoph C

Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] 20200323 5

Due to its superior soft tissue contrast, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is essential for many radiotherapy treatment indications. This is especially true for treatment planning in intracranial tumors, where MRI has a long-standing history for target delineation in clinical practice. Despite its routine use, care has to be taken when selecting and acquiring MRI studies for the purpose of radiotherapy treatment planning. Requirements on MRI are particularly demanding for intracranial stereotact ...[more]

PMID: 32206842

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has proven an effective treatment for medically inoperable lung tumors, even for (ultra-)central tumors. Recently, there has been growing interest in radiation-induced cardiac toxicity in lung radiotherapy. More specifically, dose to cardiac (sub-)structures (CS) was found to correlate with survival after radiotherapy.PurposeOur goal is first, to investigate the percentage of patients who require CS sparing in an magnetic resonance imaging guided lung SBRT workflow, and second, to quantify how successful implementation of cardiac sparing would be.MethodsThe patient cohort consists of 34 patients with stage II-IV lung cancer who were treated with SBRT between 2017 and 2020. A mid-position computed tomography (CT) image was used to create treatment plans for the 1.5 T Unity MR-linac (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden) following clinical templates. Under guidance of a cardio-thoracic radiologist, 11 CS were contoured manually for each patient. Dose constraints for five CS were extracted from the literature. Patients were stratified according to their need for cardiac sparing depending on the CS dose in their non-CS constrained MR-linac treatment plans. Cardiac sparing treatment plans (CSPs) were then created and dosimetrically compared with their non-CS constrained treatment plan counterparts. CSPs complied with the departmental constraints and were considered successful when fulfilling all CS constraints, and partially successful if some CS constraints could be fulfilled. Predictors for the need for and feasibility of cardiac sparing were explored, specifically planning target volume (PTV) size, cranio-caudal (CC) distance, 3D distance, and in-field overlap volume histograms (iOVH).Results47% of the patients (16 out of 34) were in need of cardiac sparing. A successful CSP could be created for 62.5% (10 out of 16) of these patients. Partially successful CSPs still complied with two to four CS constraints. No significant difference in dose to organs at risk (OARs) or targets was identified between CSPs and the corresponding non-CS constrained MR-linac plans. The need for cardiac sparing was found to correlate with distance in the CC direction between target and all of the individual CS (Mann-Whitney U-test p-values <10-6 ). iOVHs revealed that complying with dose constraints for CS is primarily determined by in-plane distance and secondarily by PTV size.ConclusionWe demonstrated that CS can be successfully spared in lung SBRT on the MR-linac for most of this patient cohort, without compromising doses to the tumor or to other OARs. CC distance between the target and CS can be used to predict the need for cardiac sparing. iOVHs, in combination with PTV size, can be used to predict if cardiac sparing will be successful for all constrained CS except the left ventricle.

Project description:BackgroundStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is becoming increasingly used in treating localized prostate cancer (PCa), with evidence showing similar toxicity and efficacy profiles when compared with longer courses of definitive radiation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided radiotherapy has multiple potential advantages over standard computed tomography (CT)-guided radiotherapy, including enhanced prostate visualization (abrogating the need for fiducials and MRI fusion), enhanced identification of the urethra, the ability to track the prostate in real-time, and the capacity to perform online adaptive planning. However, it is unknown whether these potential advantages translate into improved outcomes. This phase III randomized superiority trial is designed to prospectively evaluate whether toxicity is lower after MRI-guided versus CT-guided SBRT.MethodsThree hundred men with localized PCa will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to SBRT using CT or MRI guidance. Randomization will be stratified by baseline International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) (≤15 or > 15) and prostate gland volume (≤50 cc or > 50 cc). Five fractions of 8 Gy will be delivered to the prostate over the course of fourteen days, with or without hormonal therapy and elective nodal radiotherapy (to a dose of 5 Gy per fraction) as per the investigator's discretion. The primary endpoint is the incidence of physician-reported acute grade ≥ 2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity (during the first 90 days after SBRT), as assessed by the CTCAE version 4.03 scale. Secondary clinical endpoints include incidence of acute grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, 5-year cumulative incidences of physician-reported late grade ≥ 2 GU and GI toxicity, temporal changes in patient-reported quality of life (QOL) outcomes, 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival and the proportion of fractions of MRI-guided SBRT in which online adaptive radiotherapy is used.DiscussionThe MIRAGE trial is the first randomized trial comparing MRI-guided with standard CT-guided SBRT for localized PCa. The primary hypothesis is that MRI-guided SBRT will lead to an improvement in the cumulative incidence of acute grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity when compared to CT-guided SBRT. The pragmatic superiority design focused on an acute toxicity endpoint will allow an early comparison of the two technologies.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04384770. Date of registration: May 12, 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04384770 PROTOCOL VERSION: Version 2.1, Aug 28, 2020.

Project description:(1) Background: Transfer learning refers to machine learning techniques that focus on acquiring knowledge from related tasks to improve generalization in the tasks of interest. In magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), transfer learning is important for developing strategies that address the variation in MR images from different imaging protocols or scanners. Additionally, transfer learning is beneficial for reutilizing machine learning models that were trained to solve different (but related) tasks to the task of interest. The aim of this review is to identify research directions, gaps in knowledge, applications, and widely used strategies among the transfer learning approaches applied in MR brain imaging; (2) Methods: We performed a systematic literature search for articles that applied transfer learning to MR brain imaging tasks. We screened 433 studies for their relevance, and we categorized and extracted relevant information, including task type, application, availability of labels, and machine learning methods. Furthermore, we closely examined brain MRI-specific transfer learning approaches and other methods that tackled issues relevant to medical imaging, including privacy, unseen target domains, and unlabeled data; (3) Results: We found 129 articles that applied transfer learning to MR brain imaging tasks. The most frequent applications were dementia-related classification tasks and brain tumor segmentation. The majority of articles utilized transfer learning techniques based on convolutional neural networks (CNNs). Only a few approaches utilized clearly brain MRI-specific methodology, and considered privacy issues, unseen target domains, or unlabeled data. We proposed a new categorization to group specific, widely-used approaches such as pretraining and fine-tuning CNNs; (4) Discussion: There is increasing interest in transfer learning for brain MRI. Well-known public datasets have clearly contributed to the popularity of Alzheimer's diagnostics/prognostics and tumor segmentation as applications. Likewise, the availability of pretrained CNNs has promoted their utilization. Finally, the majority of the surveyed studies did not examine in detail the interpretation of their strategies after applying transfer learning, and did not compare their approach with other transfer learning approaches.

Project description:ImportanceMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guidance offers multiple theoretical advantages in the context of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer. However, to our knowledge, these advantages have yet to be demonstrated in a randomized clinical trial.ObjectiveTo determine whether aggressive margin reduction with MRI guidance significantly reduces acute grade 2 or greater genitourinary (GU) toxic effects after prostate SBRT compared with computed tomography (CT) guidance.Design, setting, and participantsThis phase 3 randomized clinical trial (MRI-Guided Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer [MIRAGE]) enrolled men aged 18 years or older who were receiving SBRT for clinically localized prostate adenocarcinoma at a single center between May 5, 2020, and October 1, 2021. Data were analyzed from January 15, 2021, through May 15, 2022. All patients had 3 months or more of follow-up.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1 to SBRT with CT guidance (control arm) or MRI guidance. Planning margins of 4 mm (CT arm) and 2 mm (MRI arm) were used to deliver 40 Gy in 5 fractions.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was the incidence of acute (≤90 days after SBRT) grade 2 or greater GU toxic effects (using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03 [CTCAE v4.03]). Secondary outcomes included CTCAE v4.03-based gastrointestinal toxic effects and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS)-based and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC-26)-based outcomes.ResultsBetween May 2020 and October 2021, 156 patients were randomized: 77 to CT (median age, 71 years [IQR, 67-77 years]) and 79 to MRI (median age, 71 years [IQR, 68-75 years]). A prespecified interim futility analysis conducted after 100 patients reached 90 or more days after SBRT was performed October 1, 2021, with the sample size reestimated to 154 patients. Thus, the trial was closed to accrual early. The incidence of acute grade 2 or greater GU toxic effects was significantly lower with MRI vs CT guidance (24.4% [95% CI, 15.4%-35.4%] vs 43.4% [95% CI, 32.1%-55.3%]; P = .01), as was the incidence of acute grade 2 or greater gastrointestinal toxic effects (0.0% [95% CI, 0.0%-4.6%] vs 10.5% [95% CI, 4.7%-19.7%]; P = .003). Magnetic resonance imaging guidance was associated with a significantly smaller percentage of patients with a 15-point or greater increase in IPSS at 1 month (6.8% [5 of 72] vs 19.4% [14 of 74]; P = .01) and a significantly reduced percentage of patients with a clinically significant (≥12-point) decrease in EPIC-26 bowel scores (25.0% [17 of 68] vs 50.0% [34 of 68]; P = .001) at 1 month.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, compared with CT-guidance, MRI-guided SBRT significantly reduced both moderate acute physician-scored toxic effects and decrements in patient-reported quality of life. Longer-term follow-up will confirm whether these notable benefits persist.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04384770.

Dataset Information

Magnetic resonance imaging for brain stereotactic radiotherapy : A review of requirements and pitfalls.

Publications

Magnetic resonance imaging for brain stereotactic radiotherapy : A review of requirements and pitfalls.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets