Impact of a contouring atlas on radiographer inter-observer variation in male pelvis radiotherapy.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of a MR-based contouring atlas for male pelvis radiotherapy delineation on inter-observer variation to support radiographer led real-time magnetic resonance image guided adaptive radiotherapy (MRgART). MATERIAL/METHODS: Eight RTTs contoured 25 MR images in the Monaco treatment planning system (Monaco 5.40.01), from 5 patients. The prostate, seminal vesicles, bladder, and rectum were delineated before and after the introduction of an atlas developed through multi-disciplinary consensus. Inter-observer contour variations (volume), time to contour and observer contouring confidence were determined at both time-points using a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse both continuous and categorical variables. Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Dice-Jaccard coefficient (DJC) and Hausdorff distance were used to calculate similarity between observers. RESULTS: Although variation in volume definition decreased for all structures among all observers post intervention, the change was not statistically significant. DSC and DJC measurements remained consistent following the introduction of the atlas for all observers. The highest similarity was found in the bladder and prostate whilst the lowest was the seminal vesicles. The mean contouring time for all observers was reduced by 50% following the introduction of the atlas (53 to 27 minutes, p=0.01). For all structures across all observers, the mean contouring confidence increased significantly from 2.3 to 3.5 out of 5 (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Although no significant improvements were observed in contour variation amongst observers, the introduction of the consensus-based contouring atlas improved contouring confidence and speed; key factors for a real-time RTT-led MRgART.

To see or not to see: Evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging sequences for use in MR Linac-based radiotherapy treatment.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: This work evaluated the suitability of MR derived sequences for use in online adaptive RT workflows on a 1.5 Tesla (T) MR-Linear Accelerator (MR Linac). MATERIALS/METHODS: Non-patient volunteers were recruited to an ethics approved MR Linac imaging study. Participants attended 1-3 imaging sessions in which a combination of DIXON, 2D and 3D volumetric T1 and T2 weighted images were acquired axially, with volunteers positioned using immobilisation devices typical for radiotherapy to the anatomical region being scanned. Images from each session were appraised by three independent reviewers to determine optimal sequences over six anatomical regions: head and neck, female and male pelvis, thorax (lung), thorax (breast/chest wall) and abdomen. Site specific anatomical structures were graded by the perceived ability to accurately contour a typical organ at risk. Each structure was independently graded on a 4-point Likert scale as 'Very Clear', 'Clear', 'Unclear' or 'Not visible' by observers, consisting of radiographers (therapeutic and diagnostic) and clinicians. RESULTS: From July 2019 to September 2019, 18 non-patient volunteers underwent 24 imaging sessions in the following anatomical regions: head and neck (n=3), male pelvis (n=4), female pelvis (n=5), lung/oesophagus (n=5) abdomen (n=4) and chest wall/breast (n=3). T2 sequences were the most preferred for perceived ability to contour anatomy in both male and female pelvis. For all other sites T1 weighted DIXON sequences were most favourable. CONCLUSION: This study has determined the preferential sequence selection for organ visualisation, as a pre-requisite to our institution adopting MR-guided radiotherapy for a more diverse range of disease sites.

The impact of gadolinium-based MR contrast on radiotherapy planning for oropharyngeal treatment on the MR Linac.

PURPOSE: Gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) may add value to magnetic resonance (MR)-only radiotherapy (RT) workflows including on hybrid machines such as the MR Linac. The impact of GBCAs on RT dose distributions however have not been well studied. This work used retrospective GBCA-enhanced datasets to assess the dosimetric effect of GBCAs on head and neck plans. METHODS: Ten patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma receiving RT from November 2018 to April 2020 were included in this study. RT planning included contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and MR scans. A contrast agent "contour" was defined by delineating GBCA-enhanced regions using an agreed window/level threshold, transferred to the planning CT and given a standardized electron density (ED) of 1.149 in the Monaco treatment planning system (Elekta AB). Four plans were per patient calculated and compared using two methods: (1) optimized without contrast (Plan A) then recalculated with ED (Plan B), and (2) optimized with contrast ED (Plan C) then without (Plan D). For target parameters minimum and maximum doses to 1cc of PTVs, D95 values, and percent dose differences were calculated. Dose differences for organs-at-risk (OARs) were calculated as a percentage of the clinical tolerance value. For the purposes of this study, ±2% over the whole treatment course was considered to be a clinically acceptable dose deviation. Wilcoxon-signed rank tests were used to determine any dose differences within and between the two methods of optimization and recalculation (p < 0.05). Pearson's correlations were used to establish the relationship between gadolinium uptake volume in a structure (i.e., proportion of structure covered by a density override) and the resulting dose difference. RESULTS: The median percent dose differences for key reportable dosimetric parameters between non-contrast and simulated contrast plans were <1.2% over all fractions over all patients for reportable target parameters (mean 0.34%, range 0.22%-1.02%). The percent dose differences for maximum dose to 1cc of both PTV1 and PTV2 were significantly different after application of density override (p < 0.05) but only in method 2 (Plan C vs. Plan D). For D95 PTV1, there was a statistically significant effect of density override (p < 0.01), however only in method 1 (Plan A vs. Plan B). There were no significant differences between calculation methods of the impact of contrast in most target parameters with the exception of D95 PTV1 (p < 0.01) and for D95 PTV2 (p < 0.05). The median percent dose differences for reportable OAR parameters as a percentage of clinical planning tolerances were <2.0% over a full treatment course (mean 0.65%, range 0.27%-1.62%). There were no significant differences in dose to OARs within or between methods for contrast impact assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Dose differences to targets and OARs in oropharyngeal cancer treatment due to the presence of GBCA were minimal, and this work suggests that prospective in vivo evaluations of impact may not be necessary in this clinical site. Accounting for GBCAs may not be needed in daily adaptive workflows on the MR Linac.

Developing electronic learning to deliver MR safety training in a radiotherapy department.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is used in radiotherapy planning, and increasingly in on-treatment guidance. The potential for the MR environment to be hazardous, without stringent safe working practices, is real. Guidance suggests all workers in MRI undergo annual safety training. To facilitate a tangible MR safety program, an electronic learning module was created and evaluated. METHODS: An existing presentation, normally delivered face-to-face, was modified and questions added to test knowledge. The module was delivered and feedback collected, together with answers to the questions, over three phases to ensure deliverability, clarity, and robustness. These comprised an initial pilot phase for non-MR personnel, an evaluation phase for staff renewing annual MR safety training, and finally for new therapeutic radiographer graduates, a test-retest methodology. RESULTS: Seven participants took part in the initial pilot phase, followed by thirty-one in the evaluation phase. Participants included radiographers (therapeutic and diagnostic), play specialists, clinical oncologists and anaesthetists, physicists and nursing staff. Within the evaluation group, 74.2% achieved a score >80%. Incorrect responses were principally related to questions regarding expected levels of responsibility and working practices, rather than the physics of high magnetic field strengths. The test-retest phase (n = 5) followed. Mean scores prior to learning were 59%, improving to 79% following learning, with the weakest sections mirroring those highlighted within the evaluation phase. DISCUSSION: Transferring MR safety training into an electronic format has provided a standardised, tangible tool that provides evidence of compliance with recommended guidance. CONCLUSIONS: This work illustrates the transition of MR safety learning for radiotherapy staff from passive presentation, to an interactive teaching methodology. The e-learning module has now been implemented within the department.

Therapeutic Radiographers at the Helm: Moving Towards Radiographer-Led MR-Guided Radiotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Magnetic resonance-guided adaptive radiotherapy (MRgART) has the potential to improve treatment processes and outcomes for a variety of tumour sites; however, it requires significant clinical resources. Magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-linac) treatments require a daily multidisciplinary presence for delivery. To facilitate sustainable MRgART models, agreed protocols facilitating therapeutic radiographer (RTT)-led delivery must be developed to establish a service similar to conventional image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). This work provides a clinical perspective on the implementation of a protocol-driven 'clinician-lite' MRgART workflow at one institution. METHODS: To identify knowledge, skills, and competence required at each step in the MRgART workflow, an interdisciplinary informal survey and needs assessment were undertaken to identify additional or enhanced skills required for MRgART, over and above those required for conventional cone-beam computed tomography-based IGRT. The MRgART pathway was critically evaluated by relevant professionals to encourage multidisciplinary input and discussion, allowing an iterative development of the RTT-led workflow. Starting with the simplest online adaptation strategy, consisting of a virtual couch shift and online replanning, clear guidelines were established for the delivery of radical prostate radiotherapy with a reduction in staff numbers present. RESULTS: The MRgART-specific skills identified included MRI safety and screening, MR image acquisition, MRI-based anatomy, multimodality image interpretation and registration, and treatment plan evaluation. These skills were developed in RTTs via tutorials, workshops, focussed self-directed reading, teaching of colleagues, and end-to-end workflow testing. After initial treatments and discussions, roles and responsibilities of the three professional groups (clinicians, RTTs, and physicists) have evolved to achieve a 'clinician-lite' workflow for simple radical prostate treatments. DISCUSSION: Through applying a definitive framework and establishing agreed threshold and action levels for action within anticipated treatment scenarios similar to those in cone-beam computed tomography-based IGRT, we have implemented a 'clinician-lite' workflow for simple adaptive treatments on the MR-linac. The responsibility for online plan evaluation and approval now rests with physicists and RTTs to streamline MRgART. Early evaluation of the framework after treatment of 10 patients has required minimal online clinician input (1.5% of 200 fractions delivered). CONCLUSION: A 'clinician-lite' prostate treatment workflow has been successfully introduced on the MR-linac at our institution and will serve as a model for other tumour sites, using more complex adaptive strategies. Early indications are that this framework has the potential to improve patient throughput and efficiency. Further identification and validation of roles and responsibilities such as online contouring, and more interactive online planning, will facilitate RTTs to fully lead in the online workflow as adaptive radiotherapy becomes ever more complex.