Dataset Information

Rapid multicontrast brain imaging on a 0.35T MR-linac.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) has shown great promise for localization and real-time tumor monitoring. However, to date, quantitative imaging has been limited for low field MRgRT. This work benchmarks quantitative T1, R2*, and Proton Density (PD)mapping in a phantom on a 0.35 T MR-linac and implements a novel acquisition method, STrategically Acquired Gradient Echo (STAGE). To further validate STAGE in a clinical setting, a pilot study was undertaken in a cohort of brain tumor patients to elucidate opportunities for longitudinal functional imaging with an MR-linac in the brain.

Methods

STAGE (two triple-echo gradient echo (GRE) acquisitions) was optimized for a 0.35T low-field MR-linac. Simulations were performed to choose two flip angles to optimize signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and T1-mapping precision. Tradeoffs between SNR, scan time, and spatial resolution for whole-brain coverage were evaluated in healthy volunteers. Data were inputted into a STAGE processing pipeline to yield four qualitative images (T1-weighted, enhanced T1-weighted, proton-density (PD) weighted, and simulated FLuid-Attenuated Inversion Recovery (sFLAIR)), and three quantitative datasets (T1, PD, and R2*). A benchmarking ISMRM/NIST phantom consisting of vials with variable NiCl₂ and MnCl₂ concentrations was scanned using variable flip angles (VFA) (2-60 degrees) and inversion recovery (IR) methods at 0.35 T. STAGE and VFA T1 values of vials were compared to IR T1 values. As measures of agreement with reference values and repeatability, relative error (RE) and coefficient of variability (CV) were calculated, respectively, for quantitative MR values within the phantom vials (spheres). To demonstrate feasibility, longitudinal STAGE data (pretreatment, weekly, and ~ 2 months post-treatment) were acquired in an IRB-approved pilot study of brain tumor cases via the generation of temporal and differential quantitative MRI maps.

Results

In the phantom, RE of measured VFA T1 and STAGE relative to IR reference values were 7.0 ± 2.5% and 9.5 ± 2.2% respectively. RE for the PD vials was 8.1 ± 6.8% and CV for phantom R2* measurements was 10.1 ± 9.9%. Simulations and volunteer experiments yielded final STAGE parameters of FA = 50°/10°, 1 × 1 × 3 mm³ resolution, TR = 40 ms, TE = 5/20/34 ms in 10 min (64 slices). In the pilot study of brain tumor patients, differential maps for R2* and T1 maps were sensitive to local tumor changes and appeared similar to 3 T follow-up MRI datasets.

Conclusion

Quantitative T1, R2*, and PD mapping are promising at 0.35 T agreeing well with reference data. STAGE phantom data offer quantitative representations comparable to traditional methods in a fraction of the acquisition time. Initial feasibility of implementing STAGE at 0.35 T in a patient brain tumor cohort suggests that detectable changes can be observed over time. With confirmation in a larger cohort, results may be implemented to identify areas of recurrence and facilitate adaptive radiation therapy.

SUBMITTER: Nejad-Davarani SP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7677202 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeExternal beam accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) is subject to treatment uncertainties that must be accounted for through planning target volume (PTV) margin. We hypothesize that magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy with reduced PTV margins enabled by real-time cine magnetic resonance image (MRI) target monitoring results in better normal tissue sparing compared with computed tomography (CT)-guided radiation therapy with commonly used clinical PTV margins. In this study, we compare the plan quality of ViewRay MRIdian Linac forward planned intensity modulated radiation therapy and TrueBeam volumetric modulated arc therapy for a novel 3-fraction APBI schedule.Methods and materialsTargets and organs at risk (OARs) were segmented for 10 patients with breast cancer according to NSABP B39/RTOG 0413 protocol. A 3 mm margin was used to generate MR PTV3mm and CT PTV3mm plans, and a 10 mm margin was used for CT PTV10mm. An APBI schedule delivering 24.6 Gy to the clinical target volume and 23.4 Gy to the PTV in 3 fractions was used. OAR dose constraints were scaled down from existing 5-fraction APBI protocols. Target and OAR dose-volume metrics for the following data sets were analyzed using Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test: (1) MR PTV3mm versus CT PTV3mm plans and (2) MR PTV3mm versus CT PTV10mm.ResultsAverage PTVs were 84.3 ± 51.9 cm3 and 82.6 ± 55 cm3 (P = .5) for MR PTV3mm and CT PTV3mm plans, respectively. PTV V23.4Gy, dose homogeneity index, conformity index (CI), and R50 were similar. There was no meaningful difference in OAR metrics, despite MR PTV3mm being larger than the CT PTV3mm in 70% of the patients. Average PTVs for MR PTV3mm and CT PTV10mm plans were 84.3 ± 51.9 cm3 and 131.7 ± 74.4 cm3, respectively (P = .002). PTV V23.4Gy was 99% ± 0.9% versus 97.6% ± 1.4% (P = .03) for MR PTV3mm and CT PTV10mm, respectively. Dose homogeneity index, CI, and R50 were similar. MR PTV3mm plans had better ipsilateral breast (V12.3Gy, 34.8% ± 12.7% vs 44.4% ± 10.9%, P = .002) and chest wall sparing (V24Gy, 8.5 ± 5.5 cm3 vs 21.8 ± 14.9 cm3, P = .004).ConclusionsMR- and CT-based planning systems produced comparable plans when a 3 mm PTV margin was used for both plans. As expected, MR PTV3mm plans produced better ipsilateral breast and chest wall sparing compared with CT PTV10mm. The clinical relevance of these differences in dosimetric parameters is not known.