Simulation-free magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy of prostate cancer
Background and purpose: Despite recent advances of online image-guided high-precision patient positioning and adaptation using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or cone-beam computed tomography (CT), standard radiation therapy pathway still involves a dedicated simulation scan. The aim of this study...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2024-10-01
|
| Series: | Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631624001374 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background and purpose: Despite recent advances of online image-guided high-precision patient positioning and adaptation using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or cone-beam computed tomography (CT), standard radiation therapy pathway still involves a dedicated simulation scan. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and planning quality of integrating a simulation-free treatment planning workflow for adaptive online MRI-guided radiation therapy on a 1.5 T MRI linear accelerator (MRI-Linac) in prostate cancer using diagnostic CT (dCT) scans. Materials and methods: For ten patients with prostate cancer previously treated at the MRI-Linac with adaptive radiation therapy (42.7 Gy in 7 fractions), simulation-free reference plans based on dCT were retrospectively created, and adaptive plans were simulated for the first treatment fraction. Reference and adapted plans derived from both standard and simulation-free workflows were compared with regard to institutional dose/volume criteria, followed by statistical assessment using the paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test with a Bonferroni-corrected significance level of α = 0.025. Results: Simulation-free reference and adapted plans consistently met dose/volume criteria. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between both workflows, except median values for near-maximum dose (D2%) in the planning target volume: 44.2 Gy (standard) vs. 44.5 Gy (simulation-free) in reference plans (p = 0.01), and 44.5 Gy vs. 44.6 Gy in adapted plans (p = 0.01). Conclusion: This study demonstrated the feasibility of simulation-free radiation therapy planning using dCT. Comparable treatment plan quality was observed for both reference and adapted radiation therapy plans in a curative setting for patients with prostate cancer. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2405-6316 |