Patient Care In Radiotherapy Research Articles

Application d’une nouvelle méthodologie d’analyse de risques a priori dans un service de radiothérapie

Since 2017, IRSN has been developing a new proactive risk analysis method. The Work Complexity Sharing and Exploration Spaces (EPECT in French) were tested for the first time in 2020 in the radiotherapy department of the Gustave Roussy Institute. The EPECT method makes it possible to anchor the analysis of risks incurred by patients in daily work situations and to involve the top management. The time required to involve the teams is comparable to or even less than that required for a conventional risk analysis. The cost/benefit ratio of the method seems to be advantageous because it provides access to numerous information on daily activities, which makes it possible to improve the safety of patient care in radiotherapy. The information gathered allows relevant actions to be envisaged at both the technical and organizational levels, and to be linked to departmental projects.

Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Radiation Oncology: Initial Experience After Workflow Implementation.

BackgroundMobile health (mHealth) technologies are increasingly used in various medical fields. However, the potential of mHealth to improve patient care in radiotherapy by acquiring electronic patient reported outcome measures (ePROMs) during treatment has been poorly studied so far.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to develop and implement a novel Web app (PROMetheus) for patients undergoing radiotherapy. Herein, we have reported our experience with a focus on feasibility, patient acceptance, and a correlation of ePROMs with the clinical course of the patients.MethodsIn the period between January and June 2018, 21 patients used PROMetheus to score side effects, symptoms, and quality of life–related parameters during and after their treatment. Items of the Patient Reported Outcome version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) were chosen based on the primary site of disease, 27 items for head and neck tumors, 21 items for thoracic tumors, and 24 items for pelvic tumors.ResultsIn total, 17 out of the 21 patients (81%) regularly submitted ePROMs and more than 2500 data points were acquired. An average of 5.2, 3.5, and 3.3 min was required to complete the head and neck, thorax, and pelvis questionnaires, respectively. ePROMS were able to detect the occurrence of both expected and unexpected side effects during the treatment.In addition, a gradual increase in the severity of side effects over the course the treatment and their remission afterward could be observed with ePROMs. In total, 9 out of the 17 patients (53%), mostly those with head and neck and thoracic cancers, reported PRO-CTCAE grade III or IV fatigue with severe impairments of activities of daily life.ConclusionsThis study shows the successful implementation of an ePROM system and a high patient acceptance. ePROMs have a great potential to improve patient care in radiotherapy by providing a comprehensive documentation of symptoms and side effects, especially of ones that are otherwise underreported.

TU‐PIS‐Exhibit Hall‐5: Use of the Enterprise‐wide Dose Tracking Software Radimetrics In an Academic Medical System

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives: Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy. Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization. Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration. Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.

TU‐F‐BRB‐02: Motion Artifacts and Suppression in MRI

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives: Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy. Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization. Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration. Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.

TU‐PIS‐Exhibit Hall‐3: Simultaneous tracking of patient and real time staff dose to optimize interventional workflow

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives: Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy. Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization. Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration. Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.

TU‐PIS‐Exhibit Hall‐1: Tools for Collecting and Analyzing Patient Dose Index Information from Imaging Equipment

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives: Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy. Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization. Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration. Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.

MO‐FG‐213‐04: Managing the Relationship

Academic‐industrial collaborations are playing an increasingly prominent role in medical physics research. Successful partnerships have enabled truly translational, benchtop‐to‐bedside research that has significantly and positively impacted our field. Given the current flat or depleting trends in federal funding, and the increasing emphasis in the medical physics community on demonstrating translatability, efficacy, and safety prior to widespread clinical use, it is anticipated that such partnerships will become ever more important in advancing our field. In the future, it is likely that neither academia alone, nor industry alone, will be able to bring significant innovation to successfully impact patient care in radiotherapy. Such innovation will require partnership and symbiosis through the lifetime of the project.This symposium is aimed at professionals from academia and the industry who are interested in either initiating new collaborations or maintaining and improving existing partnerships. We will hear from four thought leaders from industry and academia on critical aspects of building and maintaining successful academic‐industrial research partnerships. The following topics will be addressed:1. Motivations: The industry perspective [Kevin Brown, Elekta]What goes into the development of a company's R&D roadmapWhat are the motivations and expectations of the industry from academic partnersHow can academics make a successful pitch by identifying projects aligned with a company's roadmapWhy are some relationships successful and some notMilestones and progress reports ‐ Why do we need them2. Motivations: The academic perspective [T. Rock Mackie, Univ. of Madison, WI; Tomotherapy]What are the motivations and expectations of academic partners from the industryWhat are the cultural differences in academia vs industry on sharing information, exchanging ideasPartnership or entrepreneurship? When does each option make sense3. Industrial Grants and Research Contracts – a Primer [Norbert Pelc; Stanford University]What topics are suited to industrial grants vs. academic grantsHow do resources (personnel effort, tuition) get allocated and charged in academiaWhat are reasonable resource and timeline requests for small and big projects; from small and big companies“Fair market value” considerationsSections of a research agreement (IP including software confidential information, publications, data, exclusivity, support)4. Managing the relationship [John Wong, Johns Hopkins University]How to effectively collaborate with each otherHow to adapt to changes in the relationshipHow to renew funding with the industryModerated Panel Discussion [All speakers + moderators]Learning Objectives: Understand the motivations of each partner Elements that contribute to a successful partnership Avoiding pitfalls ‐ Challenges on either side that may derail a project How to frame a research grant and agreement How to sustain the collaborative relationship Amit Sawant: Funding from: NIH. Varian, Elekta and VisionRT; Michelle Svatos: Employee and shareholder: Varian, Board Member, TopasMC; Kevin Brown: Employee, Elekta; T. Rock Mackie: Consultant, Accuray; Norbert Pelc: Research support: Philips Healthcare, GE Healthcare; John Wong: Funding from NIH, Xstrahl and Elekta. Co‐founder and advisor for JPLC Associates, LLC.

TU‐PIS‐Exhibit Hall‐4: How to implement a dose monitoring solution in the real world: a technical perspective

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives: Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy. Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization. Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration. Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.

TU‐F‐BRB‐03: Clinical Implementation of MR‐Based Motion Management

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives: Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy. Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization. Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration. Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.

MO‐PIS‐Exhibit Hall‐1: Tools for Collecting and Analyzing Patient Dose Index Information from Imaging Equipment

No Abstract provided

TU‐F‐BRB‐01: Resolving and Characterizing Breathing Motion for Radiotherapy with MRI

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives: Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy. Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization. Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration. Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.

TU‐F‐BRB‐00: MRI‐Based Motion Management for RT

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives: Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy. Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization. Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration. Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.

TU‐PIS‐Exhibit Hall‐2: How to Move Beyond Dose Monitoring to Imaging Performance Utilization

The current clinical standard of organ respiratory imaging, 4D‐CT, is fundamentally limited by poor soft‐tissue contrast and imaging dose. These limitations are potential barriers to beneficial “4D” radiotherapy methods which optimize the target and OAR dose‐volume considering breathing motion but rely on a robust motion characterization. Conversely, MRI imparts no known radiation risk and has excellent soft‐tissue contrast. MRI‐based motion management is therefore highly desirable and holds great promise to improve radiotherapy of moving cancers, particularly in the abdomen. Over the past decade, MRI techniques have improved significantly, making MR‐based motion management clinically feasible. For example, cine MRI has high temporal resolution up to 10 f/s and has been used to track and/or characterize tumor motion, study correlation between external and internal motions. New MR technologies, such as 4D‐MRI and MRI hybrid treatment machines (i.e. MR‐linac or MR‐Co60), have been recently developed. These technologies can lead to more accurate target volume determination and more precise radiation dose delivery via direct tumor gating or tracking. Despite all these promises, great challenges exist and the achievable clinical benefit of MRI‐based tumor motion management has yet to be fully explored, much less realized. In this proposal, we will review novel MR‐based motion management methods and technologies, the state‐of‐the‐art concerning MRI development and clinical application and the barriers to more widespread adoption.Learning Objectives: Discuss the need of MR‐based motion management for improving patient care in radiotherapy. Understand MR techniques for motion imaging and tumor motion characterization. Understand the current state of the art and future steps for clinical integration. Henry Ford Health System holds research agreements with Philips Healthcare. Research sponsored in part by a Henry Ford Health System Internal Mentored Grant.