Magnetic resonance imaging-based treatment planning for prostate brachytherapy

Toward a deep learning-based magnetic resonance imaging only workflow for postimplant dosimetry in I-125 seed brachytherapy for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The current standard imaging-technique for creating postplans in seed prostate brachytherapy is computed tomography (CT), that is associated with additional radiation exposure and poor soft tissue contrast. To establish a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) only workflow combining improved tissue contrast and high seed detectability, a deep learning-approach for automatic seed segmentation on MRI-scans was developed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients treated with I-125 seed brachytherapy received a postplan-CT and a 1.5 T MRI-scan on nominal day 30 after implantation. For MRI-based seed visualization, DIXON-sequences were acquired and deep learning-based quantitative susceptibility maps (QSM) were generated from 3D-gradient-echo-sequences from 20 patients. Seed segmentations created on CT served as ground truth. For automatic seed segmentation on MRI, a 3D nnU-net model was trained using QSM and DIXON, both solely and combined.

RESULTS

Of the implanted seeds 94.8 ± 2.4% were detected with deep learning automatic segmentation entrained on both QSM and DIXON data. Models trained on the individual sequence data-sets performed worse with detection rates of 87.5 ± 2.6% or 88.6 ± 7.5% for QSM and DIXON respectively. The seed centers identified on CT versus QSM and DIXON were on average 1.8 ± 1.3 mm apart. Postimplant dosimetry for evaluation of positioning inaccuracies revealed only small variations of up to 0.4 ± 4.26 Gy in D90 (dose 90% of the prostate receives) between the standard CT-approach and our MRI-only workflow.

CONCLUSION

The proposed deep learning-based MRI-only workflow provided a promisingly accurate and robust seed localization and thus has the potential to compete with current state-of-the-art CT-based postimplant dosimetry in the future.

Being certain about uncertainties: a robust evaluation method for high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans including the combination of uncertainties

In high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy the combined effect of uncertainties cause a range of possible dose distributions deviating from the nominal plan, and which are not considered during treatment plan evaluation. This could lead to dosimetric misses for critical structures and overdosing of organs at risk. A robust evaluation method to assess the combination of uncertainties during plan evaluation is presented and demonstrated on one HDR prostate ultrasound treatment plan retrospectively. A range of uncertainty scenarios are simulated by changing six parameters in the nominal plan and calculating the corresponding dose distribution. Two methods are employed to change the parameters, a probabilistic approach using random number sampling to evaluate the likelihood of variation in dose distributions, and a combination of the most extreme possible values to access the worst-case dosimetric outcomes. One thousand probabilistic scenarios were run on the single treatment plan with 43.2% of scenarios passing seven of the eight clinical objectives. The prostate D90 had a standard deviation of 4.4%, with the worst case decreasing the dose by up to 27.2%. The urethra D10 was up to 29.3% higher than planned in the worst case. All DVH metrics in the probabilistic scenarios were found to be within acceptable clinical constraints for the plan under statistical tests for significance. The clinical significance of the results from the robust evaluation method presented on any individual treatment plan needs to be compared in the context of a historical data set that contains patient outcomes with robustness analysis data to ascertain a baseline acceptance.

AAPM Task Group Report 303 endorsed by the ABS: MRI Implementation in HDR Brachytherapy-Considerations from Simulation to Treatment

The Task Group (TG) on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Implementation in High Dose Rate (HDR) Brachytherapy - Considerations from Simulation to Treatment, TG 303, was constituted by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine's (AAPM's) Science Council under the direction of the Therapy Physics Committee, the Brachytherapy Subcommittee, and the Working Group on Brachytherapy Clinical Applications. The TG was charged with developing recommendations for commissioning, clinical implementation, and on-going quality assurance (QA). Additionally, the TG was charged with describing HDR brachytherapy (BT) workflows and evaluating practical consideration that arise when implementing MR imaging. For brevity, the report is focused on the treatment of gynecologic and prostate cancer. The TG report provides an introduction and rationale for MRI implementation in BT, a review of previous publications on topics including available applicators, clinical trials, previously published BT related TG reports, and new image guided recommendations beyond CT based practices. The report describes MRI protocols and methodologies, including recommendations for the clinical implementation and logical considerations for MR imaging for HDR BT. Given the evolution from prescriptive to risk-based QA,¹ an example of a risk-based analysis using MRI-based, prostate HDR BT is presented. In summary, the TG report is intended to provide clear and comprehensive guidelines and recommendations for commissioning, clinical implementation, and QA for MRI-based HDR BT that may be utilized by the medical physics community to streamline this process. This report is endorsed by the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Dosimetric outcomes of preoperative treatment planning with intraoperative optimization using stranded seeds in prostate brachytherapy

This study aimed to evaluate the quality of low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy (BT) based on treatment-related dosimetric outcomes. Data of 100 patients treated using LDR BT with stranded seeds from November 2012 to November 2017 were collected. The prescription dose for the prostate was 145 Gy. The dose constraints for the preoperative plan were: V100% ≥ 95%, V150% ≤ 60%, V200% ≤ 20% for the prostate; V100% for rectum, ≤ 1 cc; and V200 Gy for urethra, 0.0 cc. Intraoperative real-time dose calculation and postoperative dose distribution analysis on days 0 and 30 were performed. Median dosimetric outcomes on days 0 and 30 respective were: V100% 92.28% and 92.23%, V200% 18.63% and 25.02%, and D90% 150.88 Gy and 151.46 Gy for the prostate; V100% for the rectum, 0.11 cc and 0.22 cc; and V200 Gy for the urethra, 0.00 cc and 0.00 cc, respectively. Twenty patients underwent additional seed implantation to compensate for insufficient dose coverage of the prostate. No loss or substantial migration of seeds or severe toxicity was reported. With stranded seed implantation and intraoperative optimization, appropriate dose delivery to the prostate without excessive dose to the organs at risk could be achieved.

Low dose rate brachytherapy for primary treatment of localized prostate cancer: A systemic review and executive summary of an evidence-based consensus statement

PURPOSE

The purpose of this guideline is to present evidence-based consensus recommendations for low dose rate (LDR) permanent seed brachytherapy for the primary treatment of prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The American Brachytherapy Society convened a task force for addressing key questions concerning ultrasound-based LDR prostate brachytherapy for the primary treatment of prostate cancer. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify prospective and multi-institutional retrospective studies involving LDR brachytherapy as monotherapy or boost in combination with external beam radiation therapy with or without adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Outcomes included disease control, toxicity, and quality of life.

RESULTS

LDR prostate brachytherapy monotherapy is an appropriate treatment option for low risk and favorable intermediate risk disease. LDR brachytherapy boost in combination with external beam radiation therapy is appropriate for unfavorable intermediate risk and high-risk disease. Androgen deprivation therapy is recommended in unfavorable intermediate risk and high-risk disease. Acceptable radionuclides for LDR brachytherapy include iodine-125, palladium-103, and cesium-131. Although brachytherapy monotherapy is associated with increased urinary obstructive and irritative symptoms that peak within the first 3 months after treatment, the median time toward symptom resolution is approximately 1 year for iodine-125 and 6 months for palladium-103. Such symptoms can be mitigated with short-term use of alpha blockers. Combination therapy is associated with worse urinary, bowel, and sexual symptoms than monotherapy. A prostate specific antigen <= 0.2 ng/mL at 4 years after LDR brachytherapy may be considered a biochemical definition of cure.

CONCLUSIONS

LDR brachytherapy is a convenient, effective, and well-tolerated treatment for prostate cancer.

Comparison between postoperative TRUS-CT fusion with MRI-CT fusion for postimplant quality assurance in prostate LDR permanent seed brachytherapy

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE Permanent seed Low-Dose-Rate brachytherapy is planned and delivered using transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). Post-implant evaluation for quality assurance is usually performed using Computed Tomography (CT). Registration of the CT images with MRI reduces subjectivity in contouring by improving prostate edge detection. We hypothesized that a set of TRUS images post procedure may provide the same benefit. MATERIAL/METHODS Consecutive patients undergoing Low-Dose-Rate prostate brachytherapy were recruited. TRUS images were recorded under anesthesia at completion of their implant. In addition, all patients underwent standard post-implant quality assurance including prostate CT and MRI at day 30. These were co-registered, contoured and seeds were identified. Three independent observers contoured and registered the post implant TRUS images to the Day 30 CT using seed matching. Prostate volumes and dosimetric parameters were compared through Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) to evaluate the concordance between MRI and ultrasound (US). RESULTS 26 patients were recruited from 10/17 to 01/18. Mean prostate volume was 34.5 (SD 10.8) cm³ at baseline on planning TRUS images, 37.4 (SD 11.3) cm³ on Day 0 post implant TRUS and 36.7 (SD 11.7) cm³ on Day 30 MRI. D90 was 112.6% (SD 9.3) on CT-MRI and 112.9% (SD 11.1) on CT-US. V100 was 94.6% (SD 3.8) for CT-MRI, 95.1% (SD 4.3) for CT-US. Student t-tests were used to compare groups. No significant differences were noted. CONCLUSION Post implant TRUS may be useful for quality assurance for post-implant dosimetry particularly if access to an MRI is limited.

A comparison of treatment planning techniques for low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy treatment plans created using three retrospectively applied planning techniques with plans delivered to patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Treatment plans were created retrospectively on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) scans for 26 patients. The technique dubbed 4D Brachytherapy was applied, using TRUS and MRI to obtain prostatic measurements required for the associated webBXT online nomogram. Using a patient's MRI scan to create a treatment plan involving loose seeds was also explored. Plans delivered to patients were made using an intraoperative loose seed TRUS-based planning technique. Prostate V₁₀₀ (%), prostate V₁₅₀ (%), prostate D₉₀ (Gy), rectum D_0.1cc (Gy), rectum D_2cc (Gy), urethra D₁₀ (%), urethra D₃₀ (%), and prostate volumes were measured for each patient. Statistical analysis was used to assess and compare plans.

RESULTS

Prostate volumes measured by TRUS and MRI were significantly different. Prostate volumes calculated by the webBXT online nomogram using TRUS- and MRI-based measurements were not significantly different. Compared with delivered plans, TRUS-based 4D Brachytherapy plans showed significantly lower rectum D_0.1cc (Gy) values, MRI-based 4D Brachytherapy plans showed significantly higher prostate V₁₀₀ (%) values and significantly lower rectum D_0.1cc (Gy), urethra D₁₀ (%), and urethra D₃₀ (%) values, and loose seed MRI-based plans showed significantly lower prostate V₁₀₀ (%), prostate D₉₀ (Gy), rectum D_0.1cc (Gy), rectum D_2cc (Gy), urethra D₁₀ (%), and urethra D₃₀ (%) values.

CONCLUSIONS

TRUS-based 4D Brachytherapy plans showed similar dosimetry to delivered plans; rectal dosimetry was superior. MRI can be integrated into the 4D Brachytherapy workflow. The webBXT online nomogram overestimates the required number of seeds.

Dosimetric evaluation of MRI-to-ultrasound automated image registration algorithms for prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

Identifying dominant intraprostatic lesions (DILs) on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images during prostate high-dose-rate brachytherapy treatment planning remains a significant challenge. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is the tool of choice for DIL identification; however, the geometry of the prostate on mpMRI and on the TRUS may differ significantly, requiring image registration. This study assesses the dosimetric impact attributed to differences in DIL contours generated using commonly available MRI to TRUS automated registration: rigid, semi-rigid, and deformable image registration, respectively.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Ten patients, each with mpMRI and TRUS data sets, were included in this study. Five radiation oncologists with expertise in TRUS-based high-dose-rate brachytherapy were asked cognitively to transfer the DIL from the mpMRI images of each patient to the TRUS image. The contours were analyzed for concordance using simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) algorithm. The impact of DIL contour differences due to registration variability was evaluated by comparing the STAPLE-DIL dosimetry from the reference (STAPLE) plan with that from the evaluation plans (manual and automated registration) for each patient. The dosimetric impact of the automatic registration approach was also validated using a margin expansion that normalizes the volume of the autoregistered DILs to the volumes of the STAPLE-DILs. Dose metrics including D₉₀, D_mean, V₁₅₀, and V₂₀₀ to the prostate and DIL were reported. For urethra and rectum, D₁₀ and V₈₀ were reported.

RESULTS

Significant differences in DIL coverage between reference and evaluation plans were found regardless of the algorithm methodology. No statistical difference was reported in STAPLE-DIL dosimetry when manual registration was used. A margin of 1.5 ± 0.8 mm, 1.1 ± 0.8 mm, and 2.5 ± 1.6 mm was required to be added for rigid, semi-rigid, and deformable registration, respectively, to mitigate the difference in STAPLE-DIL coverage between the evaluation and reference plans.

CONCLUSION

The dosimetric impact of integrating an MRI-delineated DIL into a TRUS-based brachytherapy workflow has been validated in this study. The results show that rigid, semi-rigid, and deformable registration algorithms lead to a significant undercoverage of the DIL D₉₀ and D_mean. A margin of at least 1.5 ± 0.8 mm, 1.1 ± 0.8 mm, and 2.5 ± 1.6 mm is required to be added to the rigid, semi-rigid, and deformable DIL registration to be suitable for DIL-boosting during prostate brachytherapy.

Predictors of urinary toxicity with MRI-assisted radiosurgery for low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

MRI-assisted radiosurgery (MARS) is a modern technique for prostate brachytherapy that provides superior soft tissue contrast. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate treatment planning factors associated with urinary toxicity, particularly damage to the membranous urethra (MUL) and external urethral sphincter (EUS), after MARS.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 227 patients treated with MARS. Comparisons were made between several factors including preimplantation length of the MUL and EUS dosimetric characteristics after implantation with longitudinal changes in American Urological Association (AUA) urinary symptom score.

RESULTS

Rates of grade 3 urinary incontinence and obstructive urinary symptoms were 4% and 2%. A piecewise mixed univariate model revealed that MUL and V₂₀₀, V₁₅₀, V₁₂₅, and D₅ to the EUS were all associated with increased rates of urinary toxicity over time. On univariate logistic regression, MUL >14.2 mm (odds ratio [OR] 2.03 per cm³, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-3.77, p = 0.025), V₁₂₅ to the EUS (OR 3.21 cm³, 95% CI 1.18-8.71, p = 0.022), and use of the I-125 isotope (OR 3.45, 95% CI 1.55-7.70, p = 0.001) were associated with subacute urinary toxicity (i.e., that occurring at 4-8 months). Optimal dose-constraint limits to the EUS were determined to be V₂₀₀ < 0.04 cm³ (p = 0.002), V₁₅₀ < 0.12 cm³ (p = 0.041), V₁₂₅ < 0.45 cm³ (p = 0.033), D₃₀ < 160 Gy (p = 0.004), and D₅ < 218 Gy (p = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

MARS brachytherapy provides detailed anatomic information for treatment planning, implantation, and quality assurance. Overall rates of urinary toxicity are low; however, several dosimetric variables associated with the EUS were found to correlate with urinary toxicity.

The current role of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Prostate multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has shown excellent sensitivity for Gleason ≥7 cancers, especially when their volume is ≥0.5 mL. As a result, performing an mpMRI before prostate biopsy could improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) by adding targeted biopsies to systematic biopsies. Currently, there is a consensus that targeted biopsies improve the detection of csPCa in the repeat biopsy setting and at confirmatory biopsy in patients considering active surveillance. Several prospective multicentric controlled trials recently showed that targeted biopsy also improved csPCa detection in biopsy-naïve patients. The role of mpMRI and targeted biopsy during the follow-up of active surveillance remains unclear. Whether systematic biopsy could be omitted in case of negative mpMRI is also a matter of controversy. mpMRI did show excellent negative predictive values (NPV) in the literature, however, since NPV depends on the prevalence of the disease, negative mpMRI findings should be interpreted in the light of a priori risk for csPCa of the patient. Nomograms combining mpMRI findings and classical risk predictors (age, prostate-specific antigen density, digital rectal examination, etc.) will probably be developed in the future to decide whether a prostate biopsy should be obtained. mpMRI has a good specificity for detecting T3 stage cancers, but its sensitivity is low. It should therefore not be used routinely for staging purposes in low-risk patients. Nomograms combining mpMRI findings and other clinical and biochemical data will also probably be used in the future to better assess the risk of T3 stage disease.

Una mirada global y actualizada del cáncer de próstata

Introducción. El cáncer de próstata es una patología importante en la salud pública y tiene alto impacto mundial. El conocimiento y manejo de esta enfermedad debe ser del dominio de todo médico general y especialista que tenga a cargo pacientes que la padezcan.Objetivo. Obtener una visión actualizada de la epidemiología, los factores de riesgo, la clasificación, el diagnóstico y el tratamiento del cáncer de próstata.Materiales y métodos. Se realizó una búsqueda en las bases de datos Embase y MEDLINE desde enero del 2000 hasta marzo del 2017 mediante la cual se hizo un recorrido a través de las condiciones de riesgo, tamizaje, diagnóstico, nuevos biomarcadores y tratamiento del cáncer de próstata.Resultados. Factores genéticos y medioambientales son foco de estudio en la actualidad. La sospecha diagnóstica del cáncer de próstata sigue siendo con el antígeno específico prostático y el tacto rectal y su diagnóstico se debe hacer con la biopsia de próstata. Se han hecho cambios importantes en cuanto a la clasificación y tratamiento de los pacientes con esta enfermedad.Conclusión. Existe mucha investigación en curso y por venir sobre la prevención, el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de esta condición tan importante, relevante y pertinente para los hombres alrededor del mundo.

The association between the outcomes of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and the anthropometric measurements of the prostate by magnetic resonance imaging

Introduction and objective

To determine the association between the anthropometric measurements by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and perioperative outcomes of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (ELRP).

Materials and Methods

From 2008 to June 2016, 86 patients underwent preoperative MRI prior to undergoing ELRP for localized prostate cancer. We analyzed the associations between anthropometric measurements of MRI and the perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent ELRP.

Results

The mean patient age was 69.61±8.30 years. The medians of operating time and blood loss were 2.30 hours and 725.30ml, respectively. The total post-surgical complication rate was 1.16%. The median hospital stay was 6.50 days. The pathological stages for T2 and T3 were 45.74% and 34.04%, respectively. The rate as positive surgical margins (PSMs) was 18.09% (pT2 and pT3; 6.38% and 9.57%). The angles between pubic bone and prostate gland (angle 1&2), were significantly associated with operative time and hospital stay, respectively (p<0.05). There was no correlation between the pelvimetry and positive surgical margin.

Conclusions

The findings of the present study suggest that anthropometric measurements of the MRI are related to operative difficulties in ELRP. This study confirmed that MRI planning is the key to preventing complications in ELRP.

Comparison of prostate distortion by inflatable and rigid endorectal MRI coils in permanent prostate brachytherapy imaging

PURPOSE

To study the deformation of the prostate by a rigid reusable endorectal coil and a balloon-type endorectal coil (BTC) during MRI of the prostate in brachytherapy imaging.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The prostate gland was contoured on 157 MRI scans from 52 prostate cancer patients undergoing brachytherapy. The curvature of the posterior prostate surface deformation was computed as a measure of prostate distortion and compared between scans with a BTC, rigid endorectal coil (REC), or no endorectal coil. For the nine patients who had MRIs with all three endorectal scenarios, a mean prostate deformation vector was also calculated between scenarios using deformable image registration. These measures of prostate distortion were compared with the prostate anterior-to-posterior to left-to-right ratio (AP/LR) on the largest prostate axial slice.

RESULTS

Significant differences in prostate curvature were found between scans without an endorectal coil versus a REC versus a BTC (p < 0.001). The mean prostate deformation was 3.9 mm due to the BTC and 2.0 mm for the REC (p = 0.012). The mean AP/LR ratio was 0.62 with a BTC versus 0.76 without a coil or 0.73 with a REC (p < 0.001), but no difference existed between scans with a REC versus no coil (p = 0.7). The AP/LR ratio showed moderate correlation with prostate curvature (r = 0.48), and with mean prostate deformation (r = -0.64 to 0.68).

CONCLUSIONS

The REC caused minimal deformation of the prostate compared with a BTC with adequate MR image quality, and calculation of the cross-sectional AP/LR ratio on the largest axial prostate slice can serve as a simple measure of prostate distortion.

[Focal therapies: An alternative option for low-risk prostate cancer management?]

Recommended options for low-risk prostate cancer treatment are active surveillance, radical treatments or watchful waiting. Focal therapies are currently assessed for low risk prostate cancer treatment. Focal therapies can be performed in research protocols. Oncologic results of these focal treatments are encouraging and show excellent tolerance with few complications. Radical treatments are still possible after focal therapies failure. Focal therapies are a possible solution to over-treatment issue of low risk prostate cancers.

Permanent prostate brachytherapy pubic arch evaluation with diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging

PURPOSE

Pubic arch interference (PAI), when it occurs, is often a limiting factor for patients pursuing brachytherapy treatment of prostate cancer. Pre-brachytherapy pubic arch evaluation is often performed by CT or transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), but MRI has increasingly replaced these modalities for prostate cancer evaluation. The purpose of this study was to determine if staging MRI could be used to evaluate PAI and compare it with these other imaging methods.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Forty-one consecutive patients undergoing brachytherapy evaluation had pelvic MRI-, CT-, and TRUS-based brachytherapy simulation. Pubic arch overlap on T2-weighted MRI and CT was determined by contouring the prostate gland on its largest axial slice and superimposing this contour onto the pubic arch bones. The largest degree of overlap of the prostate gland on MRI and CT was used to predict the existence of PAI as determined by TRUS-based simulation. The correlation between prostate contour overlap was also compared between MRI and CT.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients (48%) exhibited PAI on TRUS brachytherapy simulation evaluation. The average (±standard error) amount of prostate contour overlap on the pubic arch on CT was 2.9 ± 0.6 mm and on MRI was 2.0 ± 0.6 mm (linear correlation, R, of 0.783, p < 0.001). CT and MRI were equally predictive of PAI on TRUS evaluation (area under the curve = 0.75).

CONCLUSION

Pre-brachytherapy pubic arch assessment with diagnostic MRI provides similar predictability of PAI compared with CT, potentially obviating the need for additional pre-brachytherapy CT in the setting of staging MRI.

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging for brachytherapists: Anatomy and technique

PURPOSE

To present an overview of mp MRI techniques necessary for high-resolution imaging of prostate.

METHODS

We summarize examples from our clinical experience and concepts from the current literature that illustrate normal prostate anatomy on multiparametric MRI (mp MRI).

RESULTS

Our experience regarding optimal mp MRI image acquisition is provided, as well as a summary of prostate and periprostatic anatomy and anatomical variants that pose challenges for BT.

CONCLUSIONS

mp MRI provides unparalleled assessment of the prostate and periprostatic anatomy, making it the most appropriate imaging modality to facilitate prostate BT treatment planning, implantation, and followup. This work provides an introduction to prostate mp MR imaging, anatomy, and anatomical variants essential for successful integration mp MRI into prostate brachytherapy practice.

Magnetic resonance imaging in prostate brachytherapy: Evidence, clinical end points to data, and direction forward

The integration of multiparametric MRI into prostate brachytherapy has become a subject of interest over the past 2 decades. MRI directed high-dose-rate and low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy offers the potential to improve treatment accuracy and standardize postprocedure quality. This article reviews the evidence to date on MRI utilization in prostate brachytherapy and postulates future pathways for MRI integration.

Clinical use of magnetic resonance imaging across the prostate brachytherapy workflow

MRI produces better soft tissue contrast than does ultrasonography or computed tomography for visualizing male pelvic anatomy and prostate cancer. Better visualization of the tumor and organs at risk could allow better conformation of the dose to the target volumes while at the same time minimizing the dose to critical structures and the associated toxicity. Although the use of MRI for prostate brachytherapy would theoretically result in an improved therapeutic ratio, its implementation been slow, mostly because of technical challenges. In this review, we describe the potential role of MRI at different steps in the treatment workflow for prostate brachytherapy: for patient selection, treatment planning, in the operating room, or for postimplant assessment. We further present the current clinical experience with MRI-guided prostate brachytherapy, both for permanent seed implantation and high-dose-rate brachytherapy.

Learning curve of MRI-based planning for high-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate introduction of MRI-based high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT), including procedure times, dose-volume parameters, and perioperative morbidity.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Study included 42 high-risk prostate cancer patients enrolled in a clinical protocol, offering external beam radiotherapy + two HDRBT 8.5 Gy boosts. Time was recorded for initiation of anesthesia (A), fixation of needle implant (B), end of MR imaging (C), plan approval (D), and end of HDRBT delivery (E). We defined time A-E as total procedure time, A-B as operating room time, B-C as MRI procedure time, C-D as treatment planning time, and D to E as treatment delivery time. Dose-volume parameters were retrieved from the dose planning system. Results from the first 21 patients were compared with the last 21 patients.

RESULTS

Total procedure time, operating room time, MRI procedure time, and treatment planning time decreased significantly from average 7.6 to 5.3 hours (p < 0.01), 3.6 to 2.4 hours (p < 0.01), 1.6 to 0.8 hours (p < 0.01), and 2.0 to 1.3 hours (p < 0.01), respectively. HDRBT delivery time remained unchanged at 0.5 hours. Clinical target volume prostate+3mmD90 fulfilled planning aim in 92% of procedures and increased significantly from average 8.3 to 9.0 Gy (p < 0.01). Urethral D0.1 cm(3) and rectal D2 cm(3) fulfilled planning aim in 78% and 95% of procedures, respectively, and did not change significantly. Hematuria occurred in (95%), hematoma (80%), moderate to strong pain (35%), and urinary retention (5%) of procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

After introduction of MRI-based HDRBT, procedure times were significantly reduced. D90 Clinical target volumeprostate+3mm fulfilled constraints in most patients and improved over time, but not at expense of an increased urethral or rectal dose.

Radiotherapy planning using MRI

The use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in radiotherapy (RT) planning is rapidly expanding. We review the wide range of image contrast mechanisms available to MRI and the way they are exploited for RT planning. However a number of challenges are also considered: the requirements that MR images are acquired in the RT treatment position, that they are geometrically accurate, that effects of patient motion during the scan are minimized, that tissue markers are clearly demonstrated, that an estimate of electron density can be obtained. These issues are discussed in detail, prior to the consideration of a number of specific clinical applications. This is followed by a brief discussion on the development of real-time MRI-guided RT.

Evaluation of the MIM Symphony treatment planning system for low-dose-rate- prostate brachytherapy

MIM Symphony is a recently introduced low‐dose‐rate prostate brachytherapy treatment planning system (TPS). We evaluated the dosimetric and planning accuracy of this new TPS compared to the universally used VariSeed TPS. For dosimetric evaluation of the MIM Symphony version 5.4 TPS, we compared dose calculations from the MIM Symphony TPS with the formalism recommended by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 43 report (TG‐43) and those generated by the VariSeed version 8.0 TPS for iodine‐125 (I‐125; Models 6711 and IAI‐125A), palladium‐103 (Pd‐103; Model 200), and cesium‐131 (Cs‐131; Model Cs‐1). Validation was performed for both line source and point source approximations. As part of the treatment planning validation, first a QA phantom (CIRS Brachytherapy QA Phantom Model 045 SN#D7210‐3) containing three ellipsoid objects with certified volumes was scanned in order to check the volume accuracy of the contoured structures in MIM Symphony. Then the DICOM data containing 100 patient plans from the VariSeed TPS were imported into the MIM Symphony TPS. The 100 plans included 25 each of I‐125 pre‐implant plans, Pd‐103 pre‐implant plans, I‐125 Day 30 plans (i.e., from 1 month after implantation), and Pd‐103 Day 30 plans. The dosimetric parameters (including prostate volume, prostate D90 values, and rectum V100 values) of the 100 plans were calculated independently on the two TPSs. Other TPS tests that were done included verification of source input and geometrical accuracy, data transfer between different planning systems, text printout, 2D dose plots, DVH printout, and template grid accuracy. According to the line source formalism, the dosimetric results between the MIM Symphony TPS and TG‐43 were within 0.5% (0.02 Gy) for r>1 cm. In the line source approximation validation, MIM Symphony TPS values agreed with VariSeed TPS values to within 0.5% (0.09 Gy) for r>1 cm. Similarly, in point source approximation validation, the MIM Symphony values agreed to within 1% of the TG‐43 and VariSeed values for r>1 cm. The volume calculations obtained from the MIM Symphony TPS for the CIRS Brachytherapy QA Phantom were within 1% of the actual volume of the phantom. For the clinical cases, the volume and dosimetric parameter calculations for the prostate and rectum did not differ substantially between the pre‐implant and Day 30 plans. Overall, our investigations showed negligible differences in dosimetry calculations and planning parameters between the two TPSs. The tests done to check the performance of the MIM Symphony TPS, such as the library data, data transfer, isodose and DVH printout, were found to be satisfactory. On the basis of these results, we conclude that the MIM Symphony TPS can be used as an alternative to the VariSeed TPS for low‐dose‐rate prostate brachytherapy.

PACS numbers: 87.53.Jw; 87.55.D‐, 87.55.Qr

Improved dosimetry in prostate brachytherapy using high resolution contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: a feasibility study

Purpose

To assess detailed dosimetry data for prostate and clinical relevant intra- and peri-prostatic structures including neurovascular bundles (NVB), urethra, and penile bulb (PB) from postbrachytherapy computed tomography (CT) versus high resolution contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (HR-CEMRI).

Material and methods

Eleven postbrachytherapy prostate cancer patients underwent HR-CEMRI and CT imaging. Computed tomography and HR-CEMRI images were randomized and 2 independent expert readers created contours of prostate, intra- and peri-prostatic structures on each CT and HR-CEMRI scan for all 11 patients. Dosimetry data including V₁₀₀, D₉₀, and D₁₀₀ was calculated from these contours.

Results

Mean V₁₀₀ values from CT and HR-CEMRI contours were as follows: prostate (98.5% and 96.2%, p = 0.003), urethra (81.0% and 88.7%, p = 0.027), anterior rectal wall (ARW) (8.9% and 2.8%, p < 0.001), left NVB (77.9% and 51.5%, p = 0.002), right NVB (69.2% and 43.1%, p = 0.001), and PB (0.09% and 11.4%, p = 0.005). Mean D₉₀ (Gy) derived from CT and HR-CEMRI contours were: prostate (167.6 and 150.3, p = 0.012), urethra (81.6 and 109.4, p = 0.041), ARW (2.5 and 0.11, p = 0.003), left NVB (98.2 and 58.6, p = 0.001), right NVB (87.5 and 55.5, p = 0.001), and PB (11.2 and 12.4, p = 0.554).

Conclusions

Findings of this study suggest that HR-CEMRI facilitates accurate and meaningful dosimetric assessment of prostate and clinically relevant structures, which is not possible with CT. Significant differences were seen between CT and HR-CEMRI, with volume overestimation of CT derived contours compared to HR-CEMRI.

Magnetic resonance image guided brachytherapy

The application of magnetic resonance image (MRI)-guided brachytherapy has demonstrated significant growth during the past 2 decades. Clinical improvements in cervix cancer outcomes have been linked to the application of repeated MRI for identification of residual tumor volumes during radiotherapy. This has changed clinical practice in the direction of individualized dose administration, and resulted in mounting evidence of improved clinical outcome regarding local control, overall survival as well as morbidity. MRI-guided prostate high-dose-rate and low-dose-rate brachytherapies have improved the accuracy of target and organs-at-risk delineation, and the potential exists for improved dose prescription and reporting for the prostate gland and organs at risk. Furthermore, MRI-guided prostate brachytherapy has significant potential to identify prostate subvolumes and dominant lesions to allow for dose administration reflecting the differential risk of recurrence. MRI-guided brachytherapy involves advanced imaging, target concepts, and dose planning. The key issue for safe dissemination and implementation of high-quality MRI-guided brachytherapy is establishment of qualified multidisciplinary teams and strategies for training and education.

Variability in MRI vs. ultrasound measures of prostate volume and its impact on treatment recommendations for favorable-risk prostate cancer patients: a case series

Background

Prostate volume can affect whether patients qualify for brachytherapy (desired size ≥20 mL and ≤60 mL) and/or active surveillance (desired PSA density ≤0.15 for very low risk disease). This study examines variability in prostate volume measurements depending on imaging modality used (ultrasound versus MRI) and volume calculation technique (contouring versus ellipsoid) and quantifies the impact of this variability on treatment recommendations for men with favorable-risk prostate cancer.

Methods

We examined 70 patients who presented consecutively for consideration of brachytherapy for favorable-risk prostate cancer who had volume estimates by three methods: contoured axial ultrasound slices, ultrasound ellipsoid (height × width × length × 0.523) calculation, and endorectal coil MRI (erMRI) ellipsoid calculation.

Results

Average gland size by the contoured ultrasound, ellipsoid ultrasound, and erMRI methods were 33.99, 37.16, and 39.62 mLs, respectively. All pairwise comparisons between methods were statistically significant (all p < 0.015). Of the 66 patients who volumetrically qualified for brachytherapy on ellipsoid ultrasound measures, 22 (33.33%) did not qualify on ellipsoid erMRI or contoured ultrasound measures. 38 patients (54.28%) had PSA density ≤0.15 ng/dl as calculated using ellipsoid ultrasound volumes, compared to 34 (48.57%) and 38 patients (54.28%) using contoured ultrasound and ellipsoid erMRI volumes, respectively.

Conclusions

The ultrasound ellipsoid and erMRI ellipsoid methods appeared to overestimate ultrasound contoured volume by an average of 9.34% and 16.57% respectively. 33.33% of those who qualified for brachytherapy based on ellipsoid ultrasound volume would be disqualified based on ultrasound contoured and/or erMRI ellipsoid volume. As treatment recommendations increasingly rely on estimates of prostate size, clinicians must consider method of volume estimation.

Dosimetric influence of seed spacers and end-weld thickness for permanent prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to analyze the dosimetric influence of conventional spacers and a cobalt chloride complex contrast (C4) agent, a novel marker for MRI that can also serve as a seed spacer, adjacent to (103)Pd, (125)I, and (131)Cs sources for permanent prostate brachytherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Monte Carlo methods for radiation transport were used to estimate the dosimetric influence of brachytherapy end-weld thicknesses and spacers near the three sources. Single-source assessments and volumetric conditions simulating prior patient treatments were computed. Volume-dose distributions were imported to a treatment planning system for dose-volume histogram analyses.

RESULTS

Single-source assessment revealed that brachytherapy spacers primarily attenuated the dose distribution along the source long axis. The magnitude of the attenuation at 1 cm on the long axis ranged from -10% to -5% for conventional spacers and approximately -2% for C4 spacers, with the largest attenuation for (103)Pd. Spacer perturbation of dose distributions was less than manufacturing tolerances for brachytherapy sources as gleaned by an analysis of end-weld thicknesses. Volumetric Monte Carlo assessment demonstrated that TG-43 techniques overestimated calculated doses by approximately 2%. Specific dose-volume histogram metrics for prostate implants were not perturbed by inclusion of conventional or C4 spacers in clinical models.

CONCLUSIONS

Dosimetric perturbations of single-seed dose distributions by brachytherapy spacers exceeded 10% along the source long axes adjacent to the spacers. However, no dosimetric impact on volumetric parameters was noted for brachytherapy spacers adjacent to (103)Pd, (125)I, or (131)Cs sources in the context of permanent prostate brachytherapy implants.