Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) markers for MRI-guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy: novel marker-flange for cervical cancer and marker catheters for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To present a novel marker-flange, addressing source-reconstruction uncertainties due to the artifacts of a titanium intracavitary applicator used for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT); and to evaluate 7 different MRI marker agents used for interstitial prostate BT and intracavitary gynecologic HDR BT when treatment plans are guided by MRI. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seven MRI marker agents were analyzed: saline solution, Conray-60, copper sulfate (CuSO4) (1.5 g/L), liquid vitamin E, fish oil, 1% agarose gel (1 g agarose powder per 100 mL distilled water), and a cobalt-chloride complex contrast (C4) (CoCl2/glycine = 4:1). A plastic, ring-shaped marker-flange was designed and tested on both titanium and plastic applicators. Three separate phantoms were designed to test the marker-flange, interstitial catheters for prostate BT, and intracavitary catheters for gynecologic HDR BT. T1- and T2-weighted MRI were analyzed for all markers in each phantom and quantified as percentages compared with a 3% agarose gel background. The geometric accuracy of the MR signal for the marker-flange was measured using an MRI-CT fusion. RESULTS: The CuSO4 and C4 markers on T1-weighted MRI and saline on T2-weighted MRI showed the highest signals. The marker-flange showed hyper-signals of >500% with CuSO4 and C4 on T1-weighted MRI and of >400% with saline on T2-weighted MRI on titanium applicators. On T1-weighted MRI, the MRI signal inaccuracies of marker-flanges were measured <2 mm, regardless of marker agents, and that of CuSO4 was 0.42 ± 0.14 mm. CONCLUSION: The use of interstitial/intracavitary markers for MRI-guided prostate/gynecologic BT was observed to be feasible, providing accurate source pathway reconstruction. The novel marker-flange can produce extremely intense, accurate signals, demonstrating its feasibility for gynecologic HDR BT.

Dosimetric impacts of applicator displacements and applicator reconstruction-uncertainties on 3D image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer.

PURPOSE: To quantify the dosimetric impact of applicator displacements and applicator reconstruction-uncertainties through simulated planning studies of virtual applicator shifts. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty randomly selected high-dose-rate (HDR) titanium tandem-and-ovoid (T&O) plans were retrospectively studied. MRI-guided, conformal brachytherapy (MRIG-CBT) plans were retrospectively generated. To simulate T&O displacement, the whole T&O set was virtually shifted on treatment planning system in the cranial (+) and the caudal (-) direction after each dose calculation. Each shifted plan was compared to an unshifted plan. To simulate T&O reconstruction-uncertainties, each tandem and ovoid was separately shifted along its axis before performing the dose calculation. After the dose calculation, the calculated isodose lines and T&O were moved back to unshifted T&O position. Shifted and shifted-back plan were compared. RESULTS: Regarding the dosimetric impact of the simulated T&O displacements, rectal D2cc values were observed as being the most sensitive to change due to T&O displacement among all dosimetric metrics regardless of point A (p < 0.013) or MRIG-CBT plans (p < 0.0277). To avoid more than 10% change, ± 1.5 mm T&O displacements were accommodated for both point A and MRIG-CBT plans. The dosimetric impact of T&O displacements on sigmoid (p < 0.0005), bladder (p < 0.0001), HR-CTV (p < 0.0036), and point A (p < 0.0015) were significantly larger in the MRIG-CBT plans than point A plans. Regarding the dosimetric impact of T&O reconstruction-uncertainties, less than ± 3.0 mm reconstruction-uncertainties were also required in order to avoid more than 10% dosimetric change in either the point A or MRIG-CBT plans. CONCLUSIONS: The dosimetric impact of simulated T&O displacements was significantly larger in the MRIG-CBT plans than in the point A plans. Either ± 3 mm T&O displacement or a ± 4.5 mm T&O reconstruction-uncertainty could cause greater than 10% dosimetric change for both point A plans and MRIG-CBT plans.