Yingli Yang1, Minsong Cao1, Ke Sheng1, Yu Gao2, Allen M Chen1, Mitchell Kamrava1, Percy Lee1, Nzhde Agazaryan1, James Lamb1, David H Thomas1, Daniel A Low1, and Peng Hu2
1Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States, 2Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States
Synopsis
Diffusion weighted MRI
is promising for early prediction of response to radiotherapy 1, 2, and for adaptive
radiotherapy, wherein the treatment plan is adapted during treatment based on patients’
response assessed by imaging. Currently DWI-based adaptive radiotherapy is not
widely adopted because of scientific and practical challenges. Most
importantly, the timing for DWI imaging is not well studied without
longitudinal diffusion MRI data at a finer time interval (every 2-5 days)
throughout the course of treatment. A recently commercialized MRI-guided
radiotherapy system (ViewRay) may eliminate the current challenges and bring diffusion
MRI-guided adaptive radiation therapy closer to clinical utility.Introduction
MRI is increasingly
incorporated into radiotherapy workflow. Recently, a MRI-guided radiotherapy
system (ViewRay) has become commercially available. This system has a 0.35
Tesla magnet and 3 Cobalt 60
radiation sources. We hypothesize that such a
system will enable practical adaptive radiotherapy wherein the therapy plan is
adapted during the course of therapy based on tumor response assessed by
diffusion MRI. In this work, we demonstrate for the first time the preliminary
feasibility of a longitudinal diffusion MRI strategy using ViewRay for
assessing patient response to radiotherapy.
Methods
We implemented a spin echo (SE)-based diffusion
sequence on the ViewRay 0.35 Tesla MRI system (18 mT/m maximum gradient and 200
mT/m/ms max slew rate) using a single-shot echo planar imaging (EPI) readout.
The diffusion encoding gradients were symmetrically played on both sides of the
refocusing radiofrequency (RF) pulse of the spin echo. The sequence was tested
in a diffusion phantom and subsequently used for in vivo studies.
Six patients (3 head and
neck cancer, 3 sarcoma) who underwent fractionated radiotherapy were enrolled
in this study. The pulse sequence parameters included: flip angle=90°, echo
time (TE) = 160ms, repetition time (TR) = 2600ms, slice thickness=6 mm, EPI
factor=128, field of view (FOV) = 350 mm × 350 mm, b-values = 0, 100, 200, 300,
400, 500 s/mm2, 5 averages and total scan time of 70 seconds for all 10 slices.
The same pulse sequence was used to acquire longitudinal diffusion data (every
2-5 days) on the 6 patients throughout the entire course of radiotherapy
(ranging from 8-35 fractions). Regions of interest (ROIs) were drawn in the
tumor on the diffusion images based on the GTV contours from each patient’s
standard clinical simulation. To evaluate the reproducibility and reliability
of our ADC measurements, a separate reference ROI was drawn in the brain stem
for the three head and neck cancer patients. The ADC values for these reference
ROIs were not expected to change over the course of the treatment and were used
to assess the reproducibility of our ADC measurements.
Results
In diffusion phantom
studies, the ADC values measured on the ViewRay 0.35T system matched well with
reference ADC values acquired on 3T with <5% error for a range of ground
truth diffusion coefficients of 0.4 - 1.1 ×10-3 mm2/s.
All the patients in this study completed the
longitudinal diffusion MRI with no complications. Each patient underwent 4 - 7
diffusion MRI scans depending on their treatment length. Figure 1 shows ADC
maps from a 45 y.o H&N cancer patient acquired at 7 time points during the
course of treatment. The patient had squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the left
maxillary sinus. The brainstem ADC values remained stable throughout the
treatment and the mean brainstem ADC was between 0.47 ×10-3 mm2/s and 0.57 ×10-3 mm2/s for all 7 times points, which confirms the
reproducibility of our ADC measurements. The mean ADC for the tumor, however,
increased from 1.3 ×10-3 mm2/s at the 4th fraction to 1.6 ×10-3 mm2/s at the 31st fraction. In another head
and neck cancer patient shown in Fig. 2, the brainstem ADC values also remained
relatively stable throughout the treatment (between 0.49 ×10-3 mm2/s to 0.56
×10-3 mm2/s); however, the tumor ADC value substantially decreased from 1.5
×10-3 mm2/s at the 2nd fraction of the treatment to 1.0 ×10-3 mm2/s at the 29th
fraction (33% reduction).
We hypothesize that for
large tumors, our ADC maps may be used to assess localized treatment response
for tumor subregions. Figure 3 shows a sarcoma patient with a 32 x 22 x 14 cm3
tumor. The simulation CT image (Fig. 3a) did not differentiate well between
tumor and surrounding normal tissue. The diffusion-weighted image (Fig. 3b,
b=500) clearly shows the hyper-intense tumor that matched well with the
patient’s gross tumor volume (GTV) contour, which was drawn by a clinical
radiation oncologist based on the simulation CT. In the corresponding ADC map
(Fig. 3c); there was considerable heterogeneity within the tumor. The ADC
values within the right lateral region of the tumor had much higher ADC values
than other regions.
Conclusions
We
demonstrated that longitudinal diffusion MRI on a weekly basis or more often is
feasible at 0.35 Tesla using the ViewRay system. Our longitudinal diffusion
data show different temporal variations in ADC values during the course of
treatment. Larger patient cohort studies are warranted to correlate our
longitudinal diffusion imaging to patient outcome and tumor control. Such an
approach may overcome many of the scientific and practical challenges of diffusion
MRI-based adaptive radiotherapy.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1 P. Bhatnagar, M. Subesinghe, C. Patel,
R. Prestwich, and A.F. Scarsbrook, “Functional imaging for radiation treatment
planning, response assessment, and adaptive therapy in head and neck cancer.,”
Radiographics 33(7), 1909–29 (2013).
2 C. Tsien, Y. Cao, and T. Chenevert,
“Clinical applications for diffusion magnetic resonance imaging in
radiotherapy.,” Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 24(3), 218–26 (2014).
3 D. Le Bihan, E. Breton, D. Lallemand, P.
Grenier, E. Cabanis, and M. Laval-Jeantet, “MR imaging of intravoxel incoherent
motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders.,”
Radiology 161(2), 401–7 (1986).