Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Radiotherapy aims to deliver a prescribed dose to the tumor while sparing neighboring organs at risk (OARs). Increasingly complex treatment techniques such as volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and proton therapy have been developed to deliver doses more precisely to the target. While such technologies have improved dose delivery, the implementation of intra‐fraction motion management to verify tumor position at the time of treatment has become increasingly relevant. Artificial intelligence (AI) has recently demonstrated great potential for real‐time tracking of tumors during treatment. However, AI‐based motion management faces several challenges, including bias in training data, poor transparency, difficult data collection, complex workflows and quality assurance, and limited sample sizes. This review presents the AI algorithms used for chest, abdomen, and pelvic tumor motion management/tracking for radiotherapy and provides a literature summary on the topic. We will also discuss the limitations of these AI‐based studies and propose potential improvements.
Radiotherapy aims to deliver a prescribed dose to the tumor while sparing neighboring organs at risk (OARs). Increasingly complex treatment techniques such as volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and proton therapy have been developed to deliver doses more precisely to the target. While such technologies have improved dose delivery, the implementation of intra‐fraction motion management to verify tumor position at the time of treatment has become increasingly relevant. Artificial intelligence (AI) has recently demonstrated great potential for real‐time tracking of tumors during treatment. However, AI‐based motion management faces several challenges, including bias in training data, poor transparency, difficult data collection, complex workflows and quality assurance, and limited sample sizes. This review presents the AI algorithms used for chest, abdomen, and pelvic tumor motion management/tracking for radiotherapy and provides a literature summary on the topic. We will also discuss the limitations of these AI‐based studies and propose potential improvements.
BackgroundReal‐time dose estimation is a key‐prerequisite to enable online intra‐fraction treatment adaptation in magnetic resonance (MR)‐guided radiotherapy (MRgRT). It is an essential component for the assessment of the dosimetric benefits and risks of online adaptive treatments, such as multi‐leaf collimator (MLC)‐tracking.PurposeWe present a proof‐of‐concept for a software workflow for real‐time dose estimation of MR‐guided adaptive radiotherapy based on real‐time data‐streams of the linac delivery parameters and target positions.MethodsA software workflow, combining our in‐house motion management software DynaTrack, a real‐time dose calculation engine that connects to a research version of the treatment planning software (TPS) Monaco (v.6.09.00, Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden) was developed and evaluated. MR‐guided treatment delivery on the Elekta Unity MR‐linac was simulated with and without MLC‐tracking for three prostate patients, previously treated on the Elekta Unity MR‐linac (36.25 Gy/five fractions). Three motion scenarios were used: no motion, regular motion, and erratic prostate motion. Accumulated monitor units (MUs), centre of mass target position and MLC‐leaf positions, were forwarded from DynaTrack at a rate of 25 Hz to a Monte Carlo (MC) based dose calculation engine which utilises the research GPUMCD‐library (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden). A rigid isocentre shift derived from the selected motion scenarios was applied to a bulk density‐assigned session MR‐image. The respective electron density used for treatment planning was accessed through the research Monaco TPS. The software workflow including the online dose reconstruction was validated against offline dose reconstructions. Our investigation showed that MC‐based real‐time dose calculations that account for all linac states (including MUs, MLC positions and target position) were infeasible, hence states were randomly sampled and used for calculation as follows; Once a new linac state was received, a dose calculation with 106 photons was started. Linac states that arrived during the time of the ongoing calculation were put into a queue. After completion of the ongoing calculation, one new linac state was randomly picked from the queue and assigned the MU accumulated from the previous state until the last sample in the queue. The queue was emptied, and the process repeated throughout treatment simulation.ResultsOn average 27% (23%–30%) of received samples were used in the real‐time calculation, corresponding to a calculation time for one linac state of 148 ms. Median gamma pass rate (2%/3 mm local) was 100.0% (99.9%–100%) within the PTV volume and 99.1% (90.1%–99.4.0%) with a 15% dose cut off. Differences in PTVDmean, CTVDmean, RectumD2%, and BladderD2% (offline‐online, % of prescribed dose) were below 0.64%. Beam‐by‐beam comparisons showed deviations below 0.07 Gy. Repeated simulations resulted in standard deviations below 0.31% and 0.12 Gy for the investigated volume and dose criteria respectively.ConclusionsReal‐time dose estimation was successfully performed using the developed software workflow for different prostate motion traces with and without MLC‐tracking. Negligible dosimetric differences were seen when comparing online and offline reconstructed dose, enabling online intra‐fraction treatment decisions based on estimates of the delivered dose.
BackgroundCardiac radioablation is a noninvasive stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) technique to treat patients with refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT) by delivering a single high‐dose fraction to the VT isthmus. Cardiorespiratory motion induces position uncertainties resulting in decreased dose conformality. Electocardiograms (ECG) are typically used during cardiac MRI (CMR) to acquire images in a predefined cardiac phase, thus mitigating cardiac motion during image acquisition.PurposeWe demonstrate real‐time cardiac physiology‐based radiotherapy beam gating within a preset cardiac phase on an MR‐linac.MethodsMR images were acquired in healthy volunteers (n = 5, mean age = 29.6 years, mean heart‐rate (HR) = 56.2 bpm) on the 1.5 T Unity MR‐linac (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden) after obtaining written informed consent. The images were acquired using a single‐slice balance steady‐state free precession (bSSFP) sequence in the coronal or sagittal plane (TR/TE = 3/1.48 ms, flip angle = 48, SENSE = 1.5, , voxel size = , partial Fourier factor = 0.65, frame rate = 13.3 Hz). In parallel, a 4‐lead ECG‐signal was acquired using MR‐compatible equipment. The feasibility of ECG‐based beam gating was demonstrated with a prototype gating workflow using a Quasar MRI4D motion phantom (IBA Quasar, London, ON, Canada), which was deployed in the bore of the MR‐linac. Two volunteer‐derived combined ECG‐motion traces (n = 2, mean age = 26 years, mean HR = 57.4 bpm, peak‐to‐peak amplitude = 14.7 mm) were programmed into the phantom to mimic dose delivery on a cardiac target in breath‐hold. Clinical ECG‐equipment was connected to the phantom for ECG‐voltage‐streaming in real‐time using research software. Treatment beam gating was performed in the quiescent phase (end‐diastole). System latencies were compensated by delay time correction. A previously developed MRI‐based gating workflow was used as a benchmark in this study. A 15‐beam intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plan ( Gy) was delivered for different motion scenarios onto radiochromic films. Next, cardiac motion was then estimated at the basal anterolateral myocardial wall via normalized cross‐correlation‐based template matching. The estimated motion signal was temporally aligned with the ECG‐signal, which were then used for position‐ and ECG‐based gating simulations in the cranial–caudal (CC), anterior–posterior (AP), and right–left (RL) directions. The effect of gating was investigated by analyzing the differences in residual motion at 30, 50, and 70% treatment beam duty cycles.ResultsECG‐based (MRI‐based) beam gating was performed with effective duty cycles of 60.5% (68.8%) and 47.7% (50.4%) with residual motion reductions of 62.5% (44.7%) and 43.9% (59.3%). Local gamma analyses (1%/1 mm) returned pass rates of 97.6% (94.1%) and 90.5% (98.3%) for gated scenarios, which exceed the pass rates of 70.3% and 82.0% for nongated scenarios, respectively. In average, the gating simulations returned maximum residual motion reductions of 88%, 74%, and 81% at 30%, 50%, and 70% duty cycles, respectively, in favor of MRI‐based gating.ConclusionsReal‐time ECG‐based beam gating is a feasible alternative to MRI‐based gating, resulting in improved dose delivery in terms of high rates, decreased dose deposition outside the PTV and residual motion reduction, while by‐passing cardiac MRI challenges.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.