Cargando…

A Multi-center Prospective Study for Implementation of an MRI-Only Prostate Treatment Planning Workflow

Purpose: This project investigates the feasibility of implementation of MRI-only prostate planning in a prospective multi-center study. Method and Materials: A two-phase implementation model was utilized where centers performed retrospective analysis of MRI-only plans for five patients followed by p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Greer, Peter, Martin, Jarad, Sidhom, Mark, Hunter, Perry, Pichler, Peter, Choi, Jae Hyuk, Best, Leah, Smart, Joanne, Young, Tony, Jameson, Michael, Afinidad, Tess, Wratten, Chris, Denham, James, Holloway, Lois, Sridharan, Swetha, Rai, Robba, Liney, Gary, Raniga, Parnesh, Dowling, Jason
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6727318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31555587
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00826
_version_ 1783449223577993216
author Greer, Peter
Martin, Jarad
Sidhom, Mark
Hunter, Perry
Pichler, Peter
Choi, Jae Hyuk
Best, Leah
Smart, Joanne
Young, Tony
Jameson, Michael
Afinidad, Tess
Wratten, Chris
Denham, James
Holloway, Lois
Sridharan, Swetha
Rai, Robba
Liney, Gary
Raniga, Parnesh
Dowling, Jason
author_facet Greer, Peter
Martin, Jarad
Sidhom, Mark
Hunter, Perry
Pichler, Peter
Choi, Jae Hyuk
Best, Leah
Smart, Joanne
Young, Tony
Jameson, Michael
Afinidad, Tess
Wratten, Chris
Denham, James
Holloway, Lois
Sridharan, Swetha
Rai, Robba
Liney, Gary
Raniga, Parnesh
Dowling, Jason
author_sort Greer, Peter
collection PubMed
description Purpose: This project investigates the feasibility of implementation of MRI-only prostate planning in a prospective multi-center study. Method and Materials: A two-phase implementation model was utilized where centers performed retrospective analysis of MRI-only plans for five patients followed by prospective MRI-only planning for subsequent patients. Feasibility was assessed if at least 23/25 patients recruited to phase 2 received MRI-only treatment workflow. Whole-pelvic MRI scans (T2 weighted, isotropic 1.6 mm voxel 3D sequence) were converted to pseudo-CT using an established atlas-based method. Dose plans were generated using MRI contoured anatomy with pseudo-CT for dose calculation. A conventional CT scan was acquired subsequent to MRI-only plan approval for quality assurance purposes (QA-CT). 3D Gamma evaluation was performed between pseudo-CT calculated plan dose and recalculation on QA-CT. Criteria was 2%, 2 mm criteria with 20% low dose threshold. Gold fiducial marker positions for image guidance were compared between pseudo-CT and QA-CT scan prior to treatment. Results: All 25 patients recruited to phase 2 were treated using the MRI-only workflow. Isocenter dose differences between pseudo-CT and QA-CT were −0.04 ± 0.93% (mean ± SD). 3D Gamma dose comparison pass-rates were 99.7% ± 0.5% with mean gamma 0.22 ± 0.07. Results were similar for the two centers using two different scanners. All gamma comparisons exceeded the 90% pass-rate tolerance with a minimum gamma pass-rate of 98.0%. In all cases the gold fiducial markers were correctly identified on MRI and the distances of all seeds to centroid were within the tolerance of 1.0 mm of the distances on QA-CT (0.07 ± 0.41 mm), with a root-mean-square difference of 0.42 mm. Conclusion: The results support the hypothesis that an MRI-only prostate workflow can be implemented safely and accurately with appropriate quality assurance methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6727318
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67273182019-09-25 A Multi-center Prospective Study for Implementation of an MRI-Only Prostate Treatment Planning Workflow Greer, Peter Martin, Jarad Sidhom, Mark Hunter, Perry Pichler, Peter Choi, Jae Hyuk Best, Leah Smart, Joanne Young, Tony Jameson, Michael Afinidad, Tess Wratten, Chris Denham, James Holloway, Lois Sridharan, Swetha Rai, Robba Liney, Gary Raniga, Parnesh Dowling, Jason Front Oncol Oncology Purpose: This project investigates the feasibility of implementation of MRI-only prostate planning in a prospective multi-center study. Method and Materials: A two-phase implementation model was utilized where centers performed retrospective analysis of MRI-only plans for five patients followed by prospective MRI-only planning for subsequent patients. Feasibility was assessed if at least 23/25 patients recruited to phase 2 received MRI-only treatment workflow. Whole-pelvic MRI scans (T2 weighted, isotropic 1.6 mm voxel 3D sequence) were converted to pseudo-CT using an established atlas-based method. Dose plans were generated using MRI contoured anatomy with pseudo-CT for dose calculation. A conventional CT scan was acquired subsequent to MRI-only plan approval for quality assurance purposes (QA-CT). 3D Gamma evaluation was performed between pseudo-CT calculated plan dose and recalculation on QA-CT. Criteria was 2%, 2 mm criteria with 20% low dose threshold. Gold fiducial marker positions for image guidance were compared between pseudo-CT and QA-CT scan prior to treatment. Results: All 25 patients recruited to phase 2 were treated using the MRI-only workflow. Isocenter dose differences between pseudo-CT and QA-CT were −0.04 ± 0.93% (mean ± SD). 3D Gamma dose comparison pass-rates were 99.7% ± 0.5% with mean gamma 0.22 ± 0.07. Results were similar for the two centers using two different scanners. All gamma comparisons exceeded the 90% pass-rate tolerance with a minimum gamma pass-rate of 98.0%. In all cases the gold fiducial markers were correctly identified on MRI and the distances of all seeds to centroid were within the tolerance of 1.0 mm of the distances on QA-CT (0.07 ± 0.41 mm), with a root-mean-square difference of 0.42 mm. Conclusion: The results support the hypothesis that an MRI-only prostate workflow can be implemented safely and accurately with appropriate quality assurance methods. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-08-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6727318/ /pubmed/31555587 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00826 Text en Copyright © 2019 Greer, Martin, Sidhom, Hunter, Pichler, Choi, Best, Smart, Young, Jameson, Afinidad, Wratten, Denham, Holloway, Sridharan, Rai, Liney, Raniga and Dowling. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Greer, Peter
Martin, Jarad
Sidhom, Mark
Hunter, Perry
Pichler, Peter
Choi, Jae Hyuk
Best, Leah
Smart, Joanne
Young, Tony
Jameson, Michael
Afinidad, Tess
Wratten, Chris
Denham, James
Holloway, Lois
Sridharan, Swetha
Rai, Robba
Liney, Gary
Raniga, Parnesh
Dowling, Jason
A Multi-center Prospective Study for Implementation of an MRI-Only Prostate Treatment Planning Workflow
title A Multi-center Prospective Study for Implementation of an MRI-Only Prostate Treatment Planning Workflow
title_full A Multi-center Prospective Study for Implementation of an MRI-Only Prostate Treatment Planning Workflow
title_fullStr A Multi-center Prospective Study for Implementation of an MRI-Only Prostate Treatment Planning Workflow
title_full_unstemmed A Multi-center Prospective Study for Implementation of an MRI-Only Prostate Treatment Planning Workflow
title_short A Multi-center Prospective Study for Implementation of an MRI-Only Prostate Treatment Planning Workflow
title_sort multi-center prospective study for implementation of an mri-only prostate treatment planning workflow
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6727318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31555587
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00826
work_keys_str_mv AT greerpeter amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT martinjarad amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT sidhommark amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT hunterperry amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT pichlerpeter amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT choijaehyuk amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT bestleah amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT smartjoanne amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT youngtony amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT jamesonmichael amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT afinidadtess amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT wrattenchris amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT denhamjames amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT hollowaylois amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT sridharanswetha amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT rairobba amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT lineygary amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT ranigaparnesh amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT dowlingjason amulticenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT greerpeter multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT martinjarad multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT sidhommark multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT hunterperry multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT pichlerpeter multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT choijaehyuk multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT bestleah multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT smartjoanne multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT youngtony multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT jamesonmichael multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT afinidadtess multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT wrattenchris multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT denhamjames multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT hollowaylois multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT sridharanswetha multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT rairobba multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT lineygary multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT ranigaparnesh multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow
AT dowlingjason multicenterprospectivestudyforimplementationofanmrionlyprostatetreatmentplanningworkflow