The delineation of intraprostatic boost regions for radiotherapy using multimodality imaging.

Dose escalation to the prostate improves tumor control but at the expense of increased rectal toxicity. Modern imaging can be used to detect the most common site of recurrence, the intraprostatic lesion (IPL), which has led to the concept of focusing dose escalation to the IPL in order to improve the therapeutic ratio. Imaging must be able to detect lesions with adequate sensitivity and specificity to accurately delineate the IPL. This information must be carefully integrated into the radiotherapy planning process to ensure the dose is targeted to the IPL. This review will consider the role and challenges of multiparametric MRI and PET computed tomography in delineating a tumor boost to be delivered by external beam radiotherapy

Improving fiducial and prostate capsule visualization for radiotherapy planning using MRI.

Background and purpose Intraprostatic fiducial markers (FM) improve the accuracy of radiotherapy (RT) delivery. Here we assess geometric integrity and contouring consistency using a T2*-weighted (T2*W) sequence alone, which allows visualization of the FM.Material and methods Ten patients scanned within the Prostate Advances in Comparative Evidence (PACE) trial (NCT01584258) had prostate images acquired with computed tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging: T2-weighted (T2W) and T2*W sequences. The prostate was contoured independently on each imaging dataset by three clinicians. Interobserver variability was assessed using comparison indices with Monaco ADMIRE (research version 2.0, Elekta AB) and examined for statistical differences between imaging sets. CT and MR images of two test objects were acquired to assess geometric distortion and accuracy of marker positioning. The first was a linear test object comprising straight tubes in three orthogonal directions, the second was a smaller test object with markers suspended in gel.Results Interobserver variability for prostate contouring was lower for both T2W and T2*W compared to CT, this was statistically significant when comparing CT and T2*W images. All markers are visible in T2*W images with 29/30 correctly identified, only 3/30 are visible in T2W images. Assessment of geometric distortion revealed in-plane displacements were under 0.375 mm in MRI, and through plane displacements could not be detected. The signal loss in the MR images is symmetric in relation to the true marker position shown in CT images.Conclusion Prostate T2*W images are geometrically accurate, and yield consistent prostate contours. This single sequence can be used to identify FM and for prostate delineation in a mixed MR-CT workflow

Comparison of prostate delineation on multimodality imaging for MR-guided radiotherapy.

Objective: With increasing incorporation of MRI in radiotherapy, we investigate two MRI sequences for prostate delineation in radiographer-led image guidance.Methods: Five therapeutic radiographers contoured the prostate individually on CT, T 2 weighted (T 2 W) and T 2 * weighted (T 2 *W) imaging for 10 patients. Contours were analysed with Monaco ADMIRE (research v. 2.0) to assess interobserver variability and accuracy by comparison with a gold standard clinician contour. Observers recorded time taken for contouring and scored image quality and confidence in contouring.Results: There is good agreement when comparing radiographer contours to the gold-standard for all three imaging types with Dice similarity co-efficient 0.91-0.94, Cohen's κ 0.85-0.91, Hausdorff distance 4.6-7.6 mm and mean distance between contours 0.9-1.2 mm. In addition, there is good concordance between radiographers across all imaging modalities. Both T 2 W and T 2 *W MRI show reduced interobserver variability and improved accuracy compared to CT, this was statistically significant for T 2 *W imaging compared to CT across all four comparison metrics. Comparing MRI sequences reveals significantly reduced interobserver variability and significantly improved accuracy on T 2 *W compared to T 2 W MRI for DSC and Cohen's κ. Both MRI sequences scored significantly higher compared to CT for image quality and confidence in contouring, particularly T 2 *W. This was also reflected in the shorter time for contouring, measuring 15.4, 9.6 and 9.8 min for CT, T 2 W and T 2 *W MRI respectively. Conclusion: Therapeutic radiographer prostate contours are more accurate, show less interobserver variability and are more confidently and quickly outlined on MRI compared to CT, particularly using T 2 *W MRI. Advances in knowledge: Our work is relevant for MRI sequence choice and development of the roles of the interprofessional team in the advancement of MRI-guided radiotherapy

Automatic reconstruction of the delivered dose of the day using MR-linac treatment log files and online MR imaging

Background and purpose Anatomical changes during external beam radiotherapy prevent the accurate delivery of the intended dose distribution. Resolving the delivered dose, which is currently unknown, is crucial to link radiotherapy doses to clinical outcomes and ultimately improve the standard of care. Material and methods In this study, we present a dose reconstruction workflow based on data routinely acquired during MR-guided radiotherapy. It employs 3D MR images, 2D cine MR images and treatment machine log files to calculate the delivered dose taking intrafractional motion into account. The developed pipeline was used to measure anatomical changes and assess their dosimetric impact in 89 prostate radiotherapy fractions delivered with a 1.5 T MR-linac at our institute. Results Over the course of radiation delivery, the CTV shifted 0.6 mm ± 2.1 mm posteriorly and 1.3 mm ± 1.5 mm inferiorly. When extrapolating the dose changes in each case to 20 fractions, the mean clinical target volume and clinical target volume dose-volume metrics decreased by 1.1 Gy ± 1.6 Gy and 0.1 Gy ± 0.2 Gy, respectively. Bladder did not change (0.0 Gy ± 1.2 Gy), while rectum decreased by 1.0 Gy ± 2.0 Gy. Although anatomical changes and their dosimetric impact were small in the majority of cases, large intrafractional motion caused the delivered dose to substantially deviate from the intended plan in some fractions. Conclusions The presented end-to-end workflow is able to reliably, non-invasively and automatically reconstruct the delivered prostate radiotherapy dose by processing MR-linac treatment log files and online MR images. In the future, we envision this workflow to be adapted to other cancer sites and ultimately to enter widespread clinical use