The past decade has seen the increasing integration of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging into radiation therapy (RT). This growth can be contributed to multiple factors, including hardware and software advances that have allowed the acquisition of high‐resolution volumetric data of RT patients in their treatment position (also known as MR simulation) and the development of methods to image and quantify tissue function and response to therapy. More recently, the advent of MR‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) ‐ achieved through the integration of MR imaging systems and linear accelerators ‐ has further accelerated this trend. As MR imaging in RT techniques and technologies, such as MRgRT, gain regulatory approval worldwide, these systems will begin to propagate beyond tertiary care academic medical centers and into more community‐based health systems and hospitals, creating new opportunities to provide advanced treatment options to a broader patient population. Accompanying these opportunities are unique challenges related to their adaptation, adoption, and use including modification of hardware and software to meet the unique and distinct demands of MR imaging in RT, the need for standardization of imaging techniques and protocols, education of the broader RT community (particularly in regards to MR safety) as well as the need to continue and support research, and development in this space. In response to this, an ad hoc committee of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) was formed to identify the unmet needs, roadblocks, and opportunities within this space. The purpose of this document is to report on the major findings and recommendations identified. Importantly, the provided recommendations represent the consensus opinions of the committee’s membership, which were submitted in the committee's report to the AAPM Board of Directors. In addition, AAPM ad hoc committee reports differ from AAPM task group reports in that ad hoc committee reports are neither reviewed nor ultimately approved by the committee’s parent groups, including at the council and executive committee level. Thus, the recommendations given in this summary should not be construed as being endorsed by or official recommendations from the AAPM.
Task group 284 report: magnetic resonance imaging simulation in radiotherapy: considerations for clinical implementation, optimization, and quality assurance
The use of dedicated magnetic resonance simulation (MR‐SIM) platforms in Radiation Oncology has expanded rapidly, introducing new equipment and functionality with the overall goal of improving the accuracy of radiation treatment planning. However, this emerging technology presents a new set of challenges that need to be addressed for safe and effective MR‐SIM implementation. The major objectives of this report are to provide recommendations for commercially available MR simulators, including initial equipment selection, siting, acceptance testing, quality assurance, optimization of dedicated radiation therapy specific MR‐SIM workflows, patient‐specific considerations, safety, and staffing. Major contributions include guidance on motion and distortion management as well as MRI coil configurations to accommodate patients immobilized in the treatment position. Examples of optimized protocols and checklists for QA programs are provided. While the recommendations provided here are minimum requirements, emerging areas and unmet needs are also highlighted for future development.
An analysis of the Arc
CHECK
‐
MR
diode array's performance for ViewRay quality assurance
Abstract The Arc CHECK ‐ MR diode array utilizes a correction system with a virtual inclinometer to correct the angular response dependencies of the diodes. However, this correction system cannot be applied to measurements on the ViewRay MR ‐ IGRT system due to the virtual inclinometer's incompatibility with the ViewRay's multiple simultaneous beams. Additionally, the Arc CHECK 's current correction factors were determined without magnetic field effects taken into account. In the course of performing ViewRay IMRT quality assurance with the Arc CHECK , measurements were observed to be consistently higher than the ViewRay TPS predictions. The goals of this study were to quantify the observed discrepancies and test whether applying the current factors improves the Arc CHECK 's accuracy for measurements on the ViewRay. Gamma and frequency analysis were performed on 19 ViewRay patient plans. Ion chamber measurements were performed at a subset of diode locations using a PMMA phantom with the same dimensions as the Arc CHECK . A new method for applying directionally dependent factors utilizing beam information from the ViewRay TPS was developed in order to analyze the current Arc CHECK correction factors. To test the current factors, nine ViewRay plans were altered to be delivered with only a single simultaneous beam and were measured with the Arc CHECK . The current correction factors were applied using both the new and current methods. The new method was also used to apply corrections to the original 19 ViewRay plans. It was found the Arc CHECK systematically reports doses higher than those actually delivered by the ViewRay. Application of the current correction factors by either method did not consistently improve measurement accuracy. As dose deposition and diode response have both been shown to change under the influence of a magnetic field, it can be concluded the current Arc CHECK correction factors are invalid and/or inadequate to correct measurements on the ViewRay system.