VMAT-like plans for magnetic resonance guided radiotherapy: Addressing unmet needs

REPeated mAgnetic resonance Image-guided stereotactic body Radiotherapy (MRIg-reSBRT) for oligometastatic patients: REPAIR, a mono-institutional retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Oligo-progression or further recurrence is an open issue in the multi-integrated management of oligometastatic disease (OMD). Re-irradiation with stereotactic body radiotherapy (re-SBRT) technique could represent a valuable treatment option to improve OMD clinical outcomes. MRI-guided allows real-time visualization of the target volumes and online adaptive radiotherapy (oART). The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity profile of MRI-guided repeated SBRT (MRIg-reSBRT) in the OMD setting and propose a re-SBRT classification.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients (pts) with recurrent liver metastases or abdominal metastatic lesions between 1 and 5 centimeters from liver candidate to MRIg-reSBRT showing geometric overlap between the different SBRT courses and assessing whether they were in field (type 1) or not (type 2).

RESULTS

Eighteen pts completed MRIg-reSBRT course for 25 metastatic hepatic/perihepatic lesions from July 2019 to January 2020. A total of 20 SBRT courses: 15 Type 1 re-SBRT (75%) and 5 Type 2 re-SBRT (25%) was delivered. Mean interval between the first SBRT and MRIg-reSBRT was 8,6 months. Mean prescribed dose for the first treatment was 43 Gy (range 24-50 Gy, mean BEDα/β10=93), while 41 Gy (range 16-50 Gy, mean BEDα/β10=92) for MRIg-reSBRT. Average liver dose was 3,9 Gy (range 1-10 Gy) and 3,7 Gy (range 1,6-8 Gy) for the first SBRT and MRIg-reSBRT, respectively. No acute or late toxicities were reported at a median follow-up of 10,7 months. The 1-year OS and PFS was 73,08% and 50%, respectively. Overall Clinical Benefit was 54%.

CONCLUSIONS

MRIg-reSBRT could be considered an effective and safe option in the multi-integrated treatment of OMD.

Impact of data transfer between treatment planning systems on dosimetric parameters

PURPOSE

In radiotherapy it is often necessary to transfer a patient's DICOM (Digital Imaging and COmmunications in Medicine) dataset from one system to another for re-treatment, plan-summation or registration purposes. The aim of the study is to evaluate effects of dataset transfer between treatment planning systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five patients treated in a 0.35T MR-Linac (MRidian, ViewRay) for locally-advanced pancreatic cancer were enrolled. For each patient, a nominal dose distribution was optimized on the planning MRI. Each plan was daily re-optimized if needed to match the anatomy and exported from MRIdian-TPS (ViewRay Inc.) to Eclipse-TPS (Siemens-Varian). A comparison between the two TPSs was performed considering the PTV and OARs volumes (cc), as well as dose coverages and clinical constraints.

RESULTS

From the twenty-five enrolled patients, 139 plans were included in the data comparison. The median values of percentage PTV volume variation are 10.8 % for each fraction, while percentage differences of PTV coverage have a mean value of -1.4 %. The median values of the percentage OARs volume variation are 16.0 %, 7.0 %, 10.4 % and 8.5 % for duodenum, stomach, small and large bowel, respectively. The percentage variations of the dose constraints are 41.0 %, 52.7 % and 49.8 % for duodenum, stomach and small bowel, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has demonstrated a non-negligible variation in size and dosimetric parameters when datasets are transferred between TPSs. Such variations should be clinically considered. Investigations are focused on DICOM structure algorithm employed by the TPSs during the transfer to understand the cause of such variations.

Evaluation of clinical parallel workflow in online adaptive MR-guided Radiotherapy: A detailed assessment of treatment session times

Introduction

Advancements in MRI-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) enable clinical parallel workflows (CPW) for online adaptive planning (oART), allowing medical physicists (MPs), physicians (MDs), and radiation therapists (RTTs) to perform their tasks simultaneously. This study evaluates the impact of this upgrade on the total treatment time by analyzing each step of the current 0.35T-MRgRT workflow.

Methods

The time process of the workflow steps for 254 treatment fractions in 0.35 MRgRT was examined. Patients have been grouped based on disease site, breathing modality (BM) (BHI or FB), and fractionation (stereotactic body RT [SBRT] or standard fractionated long course [LC]). The time spent for the following workflow steps in Adaptive Treatment (ADP) was analyzed: Patient Setup Time (PSt), MRI Acquisition and Matching (MRt), MR Re-contouring Time (RCt), Re-Planning Time (RPt), Treatment Delivery Time (TDt). Also analyzed was the timing of treatments that followed a Simple workflow (SMP), without the online re-planning (PSt + MRt + TDt.).

Results

The time analysis revealed that the ADP workflow (median: 34 min) is significantly (p < 0.05) longer than the SMP workflow (19 min). The time required for ADP treatments is significantly influenced by TDt, constituting 40 % of the total time. The oART steps (RCt + RPt) took 11 min (median), representing 27 % of the entire procedure. Overall, 79.2 % of oART fractions were completed in less than 45 min, and 30.6 % were completed in less than 30 min.

Conclusion

This preliminary analysis, along with the comparative assessment against existing literature, underscores the potential of CPW to diminish the overall treatment duration in MRgRT-oART. Additionally, it suggests the potential for CPW to promote a more integrated multidisciplinary approach in the execution of oART.

Why we should care about gas pockets in online adaptive MRgRT: a dosimetric evaluation

Introduction

Contouring of gas pockets is a time consuming step in the workflow of adaptive radiotherapy. We would like to better understand which gas pockets electronic densitiy should be used and the dosimetric impact on adaptive MRgRT treatment.

Materials and methods

21 CT scans of patients undergoing SBRT were retrospectively evaluated. Anatomical structures were contoured: Gross Tumour Volume (GTV), stomach (ST), small bowel (SB), large bowel (LB), gas pockets (GAS) and gas in each organ respectively STG, SBG, LBG. Average HU in GAS was converted in RED, the obtained value has been named as Gastrointestinal Gas RED (GIGED). Differences of average HU in GAS, STG, SBG and LBG were computed. Three treatment plans were calculated editing the GAS volume RED that was overwritten with: air RED (0.0012), water RED (1.000), GIGED, generating respectively APLAN, WPLAN and the GPLAN. 2-D dose distributions were analyzed by gamma analysis. Parameter called active gas volume (AGV) was calculated as the intersection of GAS with the isodose of 5% of prescription dose.

Results

Average HU value contained in GAS results to be equal to -620. No significative difference was noted between the average HU of gas in different organ at risk. Value of Gamma Passing Rate (GPR) anticorrelates with the AGV for each plan comparison and the threshold value for GPR to fall below 90% is 41, 60 and 139 cc for WPLANvsAPLAN, GPLANvsAPLAN and WPLANvsGPLAN respectively.

Discussions

GIGED is the right RED for Gastrointestinal Gas. Novel AGV is a useful parameter to evaluate the effect of gas pocket on dose distribution.

Online adaptive radiotherapy: Assessment of planning technique and its impact on longitudinal plan quality robustness in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Planning on a static dataset that reflects the simulation day anatomy is routine for SBRT. We hypothesize the quality of on-table adaptive plans is similar to the baseline plan when delivering stereotactic MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy (SMART) for pancreatic cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-seven inoperable PCa patients were prescribed 50 Gy/5-fraction SMART. Baseline planning included: 3-5 mm gastrointestinal (GI) PRV, 50 Gy optimization target (PTVopt) based on GI PRV, conformality rings, and contracted GTV to guide the hotspot. For each adaptation, GI anatomy was re-contoured, followed by re-optimization. Plan quality was evaluated for target coverage (TC = PTVopt V100%/volume), PTV D90% and D80%, homogeneity index (HI = PTVopt D2%/D98%), prescription isodose/target volume (PITV), low-dose conformity (D2cm = maximum dose at 2 cm from PTVopt/Rx dose), and gradient index (R50%=50% Rx isodose volume/PTVopt volume).A novel global planning metric, termed the Pancreas Adaptive Radiotherapy Score (PARTS), was developed and implemented based on GI OAR sparing, PTV/GTV coverage, and conformality. Adaptive robustness (baseline to fraction 1) and stability (difference between two fractions with highest GI PRV variation) were quantified.

RESULTS

OAR constraints were met on all baseline (n = 67) and adaptive (n = 318) plans. Coverage for baseline/adaptive plans was mean ± SD at 44.9 ± 5.8 Gy/44.3 ± 5.5 Gy (PTV D80%), 50.1 ± 4.2 Gy/49.1 ± 4.7 Gy (PTVopt D80%), and 80%±18%/74%±18% (TC), respectively. Mean homogeneity and conformality for baseline/adaptive plans were 0.87 ± 0.25/0.81 ± 0.30 (PITV), 3.81 ± 1.87/3.87 ± 2.0 (R50%), 1.53 ± 0.23/1.55 ± 0.23 (HI), and 58%±7%/59%±7% (D2cm), respectively. PARTS was found to be a sensitive metric due to its additive influence of geometry changes on PARTS' sub-metrics. There were no statistical differences (p > 0.05) for stability, except for PARTS (p = 0.04, median difference -0.6%). Statistical differences for robustness when significant were small for most metrics (<2.0% median). Median adaptive re-optimizations were 2.

CONCLUSION

We describe a 5-fraction ablative SMART planning approach for PCa that is robust and stable during on-table adaption, due to gradients controlled by a GI PRV technique and the use of rings. These findings are noteworthy given that daily interfraction anatomic GI OAR differences are routine, thus necessitating on-table adaptation. This work supports feasibility towards utilizing a patient-independent, template on-table adaptive approach.

Magnetic resonance-guided stereotactic body radiation therapy (MRgSBRT) for oligometastatic patients: a single-center experience

PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiotherapy is increasingly used for the treatment of oligometastatic disease. Magnetic resonance-guided stereotactic radiotherapy (MRgSBRT) offers the opportunity to perform dose escalation protocols while reducing the unnecessary irradiation of the surrounding organs at risk. The aim of this retrospective, monoinstitutional study is to evaluate the feasibility and clinical benefit (CB) of MRgSBRT in the setting of oligometastatic patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from oligometastatic patients treated with MRgSBRT were collected. The primary objectives were to define the 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) and local progression-free survival (LPFS) and 24-month overall survival (OS) rate. The objective response rate (ORR) included complete response (CR) and partial response (PR). CB was defined as the achievement of ORR and stable disease (SD). Toxicities were also assessed according to the CTCAE version 5.0 scale.

RESULTS

From February 2017 to March 2021, 59 consecutive patients with a total of 80 lesions were treated by MRgSBRT on a 0.35 T hybrid unit. CR and PR as well as SD were observed in 30 (37.5%), 7 (8.75%), and 17 (21.25%) lesions, respectively. Furthermore, CB was evaluated at a rate of 67.5% with an ORR of 46.25%. Median follow-up time was 14 months (range: 3-46 months). The 12-month LPFS and PFS rates were 70% and 23%, while 24-month OS rate was 93%. No acute toxicity was reported, whereas late pulmonary fibrosis G1 was observed in 9 patients (15.25%).

CONCLUSION

MRgSBRT was well tolerated by patients with reported low toxicity levels and a satisfying CB.

When your MR linac is down: Can an automated pipeline bail you out of trouble?

PURPOSE

The unique treatment delivery technique provided by magnetic resonance guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) can represent a significant drawback when system fail occurs. This retrospective study proposes and evaluates a pipeline to completely automate the workflow necessary to shift a MRgRT treatment to a traditional radiotherapy linac.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients undergoing treatment during the last MRgRT system failure were retrospectively included in this study. The core of the proposed pipeline was based on a tool able to mimic the original MR linac dose distribution. The so obtained dose distribution (AUTO) has been compared with the distribution obtained in the conventional radiotherapy linac (MAN). Plan comparison has been performed in terms of time required to obtain the final dose distribution, DVH parameters, dosimetric indices and visual analogue scales scoring by radiation oncologists.

RESULTS

AUTO plans generation has been obtained within 10 min for all the considered cases. All AUTO plans were found to be within clinical tolerance, showing a mean target coverage variation of 1.7% with a maximum value of 4.3% and a minimum of 0.6% when compared with MAN plans. The highest OARs mean variation has been found for rectum V60 (6.7%). Dosimetric indices showed no relevant differences, with smaller gradient measure in favour of AUTO plans. Visual analogue scales scoring has confirmed comparable plan quality for AUTO plans.

CONCLUSION

The proposed workflow allows a fast and accurate generation of automatic treatment plans. AUTO plans can be considered equivalent to MAN ones, with limited clinical impact in the worst-case scenario.