Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology (Jul 2022)

Impact of magnetic resonance-guided versus conventional radiotherapy workflows on organ at risk doses in stereotactic body radiotherapy for lymph node oligometastases

  • Anita M. Werensteijn-Honingh,
  • Petra S. Kroon,
  • Dennis Winkel,
  • J. Carlijn van Gaal,
  • Jochem Hes,
  • Louk M.W. Snoeren,
  • Jaleesa K. Timmer,
  • Christiaan C.P. Mout,
  • Gijsbert H. Bol,
  • Alexis N. Kotte,
  • Wietse S.C. Eppinga,
  • Martijn Intven,
  • Bas W. Raaymakers,
  • Ina M. Jürgenliemk-Schulz

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 23
pp. 66 – 73

Abstract

Read online

Background and purpose: Magnetic resonance (MR)-linac delivery is expected to improve organ at risk (OAR) sparing. In this study, OAR doses were compared for online adaptive MR-linac treatments and conventional cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-linac radiotherapy, taking into account differences in clinical workflows, especially longer session times for MR-linac delivery. Materials and methods: For 25 patients with pelvic/abdominal lymph node oligometastases, OAR doses were calculated for clinical pre-treatment and daily optimized 1.5 T MR-linac treatment plans (5 × 7 Gy) and compared with simulated CBCT-linac plans for the pre-treatment and online anatomical situation. Bowelbag and duodenum were re-contoured on MR-imaging acquired before, during and after each treatment session. OAR hard constraint violations, D0.5cc and D10cc values were evaluated, focusing on bowelbag and duodenum. Results: Overall, hard constraints for all OAR were violated less often in daily online MR-linac treatment plans compared with CBCT-linac: in 5% versus 22% of fractions, respectively. D0.5cc and D10cc values did not differ significantly. When taking treatment duration and intrafraction motion into account, estimated delivered doses to bowelbag and duodenum were lower with CBCT-linac if identical planning target volume (PTV) margins were used for both modalities. When reduced PTV margins were achievable with MR-linac treatment, bowelbag doses were lower compared with CBCT-linac. Conclusions: Compared with CBCT-linac treatments, the online adaptive MR-linac approach resulted in fewer hard planning constraint violations compared with single-plan CBCT-linac delivery. With respect to other bowelbag/duodenum dose-volume parameters, the longer duration of MR-linac treatment sessions negatively impacts the potential dosimetric benefit of daily adaptive treatment planning.

Keywords