Magnetic resonance biomarkers in radiation oncology: The report of AAPM Task Group 294.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
A magnetic resonance (MR) biologic marker (biomarker) is a measurable quantitative characteristic that is an indicator of normal biological and pathogenetic processes or a response to therapeutic intervention derived from the MR imaging process. There is significant potential for MR biomarkers to facilitate personalized approaches to cancer care through more precise disease targeting by quantifying normal versus pathologic tissue function as well as toxicity to both radiation and chemotherapy. Both of which have the potential to increase the therapeutic ratio and provide earlier, more accurate monitoring of treatment response. The ongoing integration of MR into routine clinical radiation therapy (RT) planning and the development of MR guided radiation therapy systems is providing new opportunities for MR biomarkers to personalize and improve clinical outcomes. Their appropriate use, however, must be based on knowledge of the physical origin of the biomarker signal, the relationship to the underlying biological processes, and their strengths and limitations. The purpose of this report is to provide an educational resource describing MR biomarkers, the techniques used to quantify them, their strengths and weakness within the context of their application to radiation oncology so as to ensure their appropriate use and application within this field.
SUBMITTER: McGee KP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8361924 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:This report provides guidelines for a peer review process between two clinical radiation oncology physicists. While the Task Group's work was primarily focused on ensuring timely and productive independent reviews for physicists in solo practice, these guidelines may also be appropriate for physicists in a group setting, particularly when dispersed over multiple separate clinic locations. To ensure that such reviews enable a collegial exchange of professional ideas and productive critique of the entire clinical physics program, the reviews should not be used as an employee evaluation instrument by the employer. Such use is neither intended nor supported by this Task Group. Detailed guidelines are presented on the minimum content of such reviews, as well as a recommended format for reporting the findings of a review. In consideration of the full schedules faced by most clinical physicists, the process outlined herein was designed to be completed in one working day.
| S-EPMC5723459 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile the review of radiotherapy treatment plans and charts by a medical physicist is a key component of safe, high-quality care, very few specific recommendations currently exist for this task.AimsThe goal of TG-275 is to provide practical, evidence-based recommendations on physics plan and chart review for radiation therapy. While this report is aimed mainly at medical physicists, others may benefit including dosimetrists, radiation therapists, physicians and other professionals interested in quality management.MethodsThe scope of the report includes photon/electron external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), proton radiotherapy, as well as high-dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy for gynecological applications (currently the highest volume brachytherapy service in most practices). The following review time points are considered: initial review prior to treatment, weekly review, and end-of-treatment review. The Task Group takes a risk-informed approach to developing recommendations. A failure mode and effects analysis was performed to determine the highest-risk aspects of each process. In the case of photon/electron EBRT, a survey of all American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) members was also conducted to determine current practices. A draft of this report was provided to the full AAPM membership for comment through a 3-week open-comment period, and the report was revised in response to these comments.ResultsThe highest-risk failure modes included 112 failure modes in photon/electron EBRT initial review, 55 in weekly and end-of-treatment review, 24 for initial review specific to proton therapy, and 48 in HDR brachytherapy. A 103-question survey on current practices was released to all AAPM members who self-reported as working in the radiation oncology field. The response rate was 33%. The survey data and risk data were used to inform recommendations.DiscussionTables of recommended checks are presented and recommendations for best practice are discussed. Suggestions to software vendors are also provided.ConclusionsTG-275 provides specific recommendations for physics plan and chart review which should enhance the safety and quality of care for patients receiving radiation treatments.
| S-EPMC9012523 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dose uncertainty induced by respiratory motion remains a major concern for treating thoracic and abdominal lesions using particle beams. This Task Group report reviews the impact of tumor motion and dosimetric considerations in particle radiotherapy, current motion-management techniques, and limitations for different particle-beam delivery modes (i.e., passive scattering, uniform scanning, and pencil-beam scanning). Furthermore, the report provides guidance and risk analysis for quality assurance of the motion-management procedures to ensure consistency and accuracy, and discusses future development and emerging motion-management strategies. This report supplements previously published AAPM report TG76, and considers aspects of motion management that are crucial to the accurate and safe delivery of particle-beam therapy. To that end, this report produces general recommendations for commissioning and facility-specific dosimetric characterization, motion assessment, treatment planning, active and passive motion-management techniques, image guidance and related decision-making, monitoring throughout therapy, and recommendations for vendors. Key among these recommendations are that: (1) facilities should perform thorough planning studies (using retrospective data) and develop standard operating procedures that address all aspects of therapy for any treatment site involving respiratory motion; (2) a risk-based methodology should be adopted for quality management and ongoing process improvement.
| S-EPMC9306777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Radiation therapy (RT) is an essential component of effective cancer care and is used across nearly all cancer types. The delivery of RT is becoming more precise through rapid advances in both computing and imaging. The direct integration of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with linear accelerators represents an exciting development with the potential to dramatically impact cancer research and treatment. These impacts extend beyond improved imaging and dose deposition. Real-time MRI-guided RT is actively transforming the work flows and capabilities of virtually every aspect of RT. It has the opportunity to change entirely the delivery methods and response assessments of numerous malignancies. This review intends to approach the topic of MRI-based RT guidance from a vendor neutral and international perspective. It also aims to provide an introduction to this topic targeted towards oncologists without a speciality focus in RT. Speciality implications, areas for physician education and research opportunities are identified as they are associated with MRI-guided RT. The uniquely disruptive implications of MRI-guided RT are discussed and placed in context. We further aim to describe and outline important future changes to the speciality of radiation oncology that will occur with MRI-guided RT. The impacts on RT caused by MRI guidance include target identification, RT planning, quality assurance, treatment delivery, training, clinical workflow, tumour response assessment and treatment scheduling. In addition, entirely novel research areas that may be enabled by MRI guidance are identified for future investigation.
| S-EPMC8447225 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A substantial barrier to the single- and multi-institutional aggregation of data to supporting clinical trials, practice quality improvement efforts, and development of big data analytics resource systems is the lack of standardized nomenclatures for expressing dosimetric data. To address this issue, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 263 was charged with providing nomenclature guidelines and values in radiation oncology for use in clinical trials, data-pooling initiatives, population-based studies, and routine clinical care by standardizing: (1) structure names across image processing and treatment planning system platforms; (2) nomenclature for dosimetric data (eg, dose-volume histogram [DVH]-based metrics); (3) templates for clinical trial groups and users of an initial subset of software platforms to facilitate adoption of the standards; (4) formalism for nomenclature schema, which can accommodate the addition of other structures defined in the future. A multisociety, multidisciplinary, multinational group of 57 members representing stake holders ranging from large academic centers to community clinics and vendors was assembled, including physicists, physicians, dosimetrists, and vendors. The stakeholder groups represented in the membership included the AAPM, American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), NRG Oncology, European Society for Radiation Oncology (ESTRO), Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), Children's Oncology Group (COG), Integrating Healthcare Enterprise in Radiation Oncology (IHE-RO), and Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine working group (DICOM WG); A nomenclature system for target and organ at risk volumes and DVH nomenclature was developed and piloted to demonstrate viability across a range of clinics and within the framework of clinical trials. The final report was approved by AAPM in October 2017. The approval process included review by 8 AAPM committees, with additional review by ASTRO, European Society for Radiation Oncology (ESTRO), and American Association of Medical Dosimetrists (AAMD). This Executive Summary of the report highlights the key recommendations for clinical practice, research, and trials.
| S-EPMC7437157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeIntegrating magnetic resonance (MR) into radiotherapy planning has several advantages. This report details the clinical implementation of an MR simulation (MR-planning) program for external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in one of North America's largest radiotherapy programs.Methods and materialsAn MR radiotherapy planning program was developed and implemented at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center in 2016 with two dedicated wide-bore MR platforms (1.5 and 3.0 Tesla). Planning MR was sequentially implemented every 3 months for separate treatment sites, including the central nervous system (CNS), gynecologic (GYN), head and neck (HN), genitourinary (GU), gastrointestinal (GI), breast, and brachial plexus. Essential protocols and processes were detailed in this report, including clinical workflow, optimized MR-image acquisition protocols, MR-adapted patient setup, strategies to overcome risks and challenges, and an MR-planning quality assurance program. This study retrospectively reviewed simulation site data for all MR-planning sessions performed for EBRT over the past 5 years.ResultsFrom July 2016 to December 2021, 8798 MR-planning sessions were carried out, which corresponds to 25% of all computer tomography (CT) simulations (CT-planning) performed during the same period at our institution. There was a progressive rise from 80 MR-planning sessions in 2016 to 1126 in 2017, 1492 in 2018, 1824 in 2019, 2040 in 2020, and 2236 in 2021. As a result, the relative number of planning MR/CT increased from 3% of all planning sessions in 2016 to 36% in 2021. The most common site of MR-planning was CNS (49%), HN (13%), GYN (12%), GU (12%), and others (8%).ConclusionDetailed clinical processes and protocols of our MR-planning program were presented, which have been improved over more than 5 years of robust experience. Strategies to overcome risks and challenges in the implementation process are highlighted. Our work provides details that can be used by institutions interested in implementing an MR-planning program.
| S-EPMC9903411 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This report addresses uncertainties pertaining to brachytherapy single-source dosimetry preceding clinical use. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Technical Note 1297 are taken as reference standards for uncertainty formalism. Uncertainties in using detectors to measure or utilizing Monte Carlo methods to estimate brachytherapy dose distributions are provided with discussion of the components intrinsic to the overall dosimetric assessment. Uncertainties provided are based on published observations and cited when available. The uncertainty propagation from the primary calibration standard through transfer to the clinic for air-kerma strength is covered first. Uncertainties in each of the brachytherapy dosimetry parameters of the TG-43 formalism are then explored, ending with transfer to the clinic and recommended approaches. Dosimetric uncertainties during treatment delivery are considered briefly but are not included in the detailed analysis. For low- and high-energy brachytherapy sources of low dose rate and high dose rate, a combined dosimetric uncertainty <5% (k=1) is estimated, which is consistent with prior literature estimates. Recommendations are provided for clinical medical physicists, dosimetry investigators, and source and treatment planning system manufacturers. These recommendations include the use of the GUM and NIST reports, a requirement of constancy of manufacturer source design, dosimetry investigator guidelines, provision of the lowest uncertainty for patient treatment dosimetry, and the establishment of an action level based on dosimetric uncertainty. These recommendations reflect the guidance of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) and the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie-European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) for their members and may also be used as guidance to manufacturers and regulatory agencies in developing good manufacturing practices for sources used in routine clinical treatments.
| S-EPMC3033879 | biostudies-other
Project description:Patients with or receiving potentially cardiotoxic treatment for cancer are susceptible to developing decrements in left ventricular mass, diastolic function, or systolic function. They may also experience valvular heart disease, pericardial disease, or intracardiac masses. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance may be used to assess cardiac anatomy, structure, and function and to characterize myocardial tissue. This combination of features facilitates the diagnosis and management of disease processes in patients with or those who have survived cancer. This report outlines and describes prior research involving cardiovascular magnetic resonance for assessing cardiovascular disease in patients with or previously having received treatment for cancer.
| S-EPMC6242266 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Contemporary medical imaging is a cornerstone of care for children with cancer. As 5-year survival rates for children with cancer exceed 80%, imaging technologies have evolved in parallel to include a wide array of modalities. Here, we overview the risks and benefits associated with commonly used imaging modalities and survey the current landscape of medical imaging for children with cancer. We find evidence-based imaging guidelines to assist in protocol development and to guide decision-making for optimal patient care are often lacking. The substantial variation in protocol-based recommendations for imaging both during and following therapy may hinder optimal clinical research and clinical care for children with cancer.
| S-EPMC4636336 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis study investigated whether Magnetic Resonance image biomarkers (MR-IBMs) were associated with xerostomia 12 months after radiotherapy (Xer12m) and to test the hypothesis that the ratio of fat-to-functional parotid tissue is related to Xer12m. Additionally, improvement of the reference Xer12m model based on parotid gland dose and baseline xerostomia, with MR-IBMs was explored.MethodsParotid gland MR-IBMs of 68 head and neck cancer patients were extracted from pre-treatment T1-weighted MR images, which were normalized to fat tissue, quantifying 21 intensity and 43 texture image characteristics. The performance of the resulting multivariable logistic regression models after bootstrapped forward selection was compared with that of the logistic regression reference model. Validity was tested in a small external cohort of 25 head and neck cancer patients.ResultsHigh intensity MR-IBM P90 (the 90th intensity percentile) values were significantly associated with a higher risk of Xer12m. High P90 values were related to high fat concentration in the parotid glands. The MR-IBM P90 significantly improved model performance in predicting Xer12m (likelihood-ratio-test; p = 0.002), with an increase in internally validated AUC from 0.78 (reference model) to 0.83 (P90). The MR-IBM P90 model also outperformed the reference model (AUC = 0.65) on the external validation cohort (AUC = 0.83).ConclusionPre-treatment MR-IBMs were associated to radiation-induced xerostomia, which supported the hypothesis that the amount of predisposed fat within the parotid glands is associated with Xer12m. In addition, xerostomia prediction was improved with MR-IBMs compared to the reference model.
| S-EPMC6625348 | biostudies-literature