Rosie B Hales1, John Rodgers1, Lee Whiteside1, Lisa McDaid1, Joseph Berresford2, Geoff Budgell2, Ananya Choudhury3, Cynthia L Eccles4. 1. Radiotherapy, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. 2. Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. 3. Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. 4. Radiotherapy, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. Electronic address: cynthia.eccles@christie.nhs.uk.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Magnetic resonance-guided adaptive radiotherapy (MRgART) has the potential to improve treatment processes and outcomes for a variety of tumour sites; however, it requires significant clinical resources. Magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-linac) treatments require a daily multidisciplinary presence for delivery. To facilitate sustainable MRgART models, agreed protocols facilitating therapeutic radiographer (RTT)-led delivery must be developed to establish a service similar to conventional image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). This work provides a clinical perspective on the implementation of a protocol-driven 'clinician-lite' MRgART workflow at one institution. METHODS: To identify knowledge, skills, and competence required at each step in the MRgART workflow, an interdisciplinary informal survey and needs assessment were undertaken to identify additional or enhanced skills required for MRgART, over and above those required for conventional cone-beam computed tomography-based IGRT. The MRgART pathway was critically evaluated by relevant professionals to encourage multidisciplinary input and discussion, allowing an iterative development of the RTT-led workflow. Starting with the simplest online adaptation strategy, consisting of a virtual couch shift and online replanning, clear guidelines were established for the delivery of radical prostate radiotherapy with a reduction in staff numbers present. RESULTS: The MRgART-specific skills identified included MRI safety and screening, MR image acquisition, MRI-based anatomy, multimodality image interpretation and registration, and treatment plan evaluation. These skills were developed in RTTs via tutorials, workshops, focussed self-directed reading, teaching of colleagues, and end-to-end workflow testing. After initial treatments and discussions, roles and responsibilities of the three professional groups (clinicians, RTTs, and physicists) have evolved to achieve a 'clinician-lite' workflow for simple radical prostate treatments. DISCUSSION: Through applying a definitive framework and establishing agreed threshold and action levels for action within anticipated treatment scenarios similar to those in cone-beam computed tomography-based IGRT, we have implemented a 'clinician-lite' workflow for simple adaptive treatments on the MR-linac. The responsibility for online plan evaluation and approval now rests with physicists and RTTs to streamline MRgART. Early evaluation of the framework after treatment of 10 patients has required minimal online clinician input (1.5% of 200 fractions delivered). CONCLUSION: A 'clinician-lite' prostate treatment workflow has been successfully introduced on the MR-linac at our institution and will serve as a model for other tumour sites, using more complex adaptive strategies. Early indications are that this framework has the potential to improve patient throughput and efficiency. Further identification and validation of roles and responsibilities such as online contouring, and more interactive online planning, will facilitate RTTs to fully lead in the online workflow as adaptive radiotherapy becomes ever more complex.
INTRODUCTION: Magnetic resonance-guided adaptive radiotherapy (MRgART) has the potential to improve treatment processes and outcomes for a variety of tumour sites; however, it requires significant clinical resources. Magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-linac) treatments require a daily multidisciplinary presence for delivery. To facilitate sustainable MRgART models, agreed protocols facilitating therapeutic radiographer (RTT)-led delivery must be developed to establish a service similar to conventional image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). This work provides a clinical perspective on the implementation of a protocol-driven 'clinician-lite' MRgART workflow at one institution. METHODS: To identify knowledge, skills, and competence required at each step in the MRgART workflow, an interdisciplinary informal survey and needs assessment were undertaken to identify additional or enhanced skills required for MRgART, over and above those required for conventional cone-beam computed tomography-based IGRT. The MRgART pathway was critically evaluated by relevant professionals to encourage multidisciplinary input and discussion, allowing an iterative development of the RTT-led workflow. Starting with the simplest online adaptation strategy, consisting of a virtual couch shift and online replanning, clear guidelines were established for the delivery of radical prostate radiotherapy with a reduction in staff numbers present. RESULTS: The MRgART-specific skills identified included MRI safety and screening, MR image acquisition, MRI-based anatomy, multimodality image interpretation and registration, and treatment plan evaluation. These skills were developed in RTTs via tutorials, workshops, focussed self-directed reading, teaching of colleagues, and end-to-end workflow testing. After initial treatments and discussions, roles and responsibilities of the three professional groups (clinicians, RTTs, and physicists) have evolved to achieve a 'clinician-lite' workflow for simple radical prostate treatments. DISCUSSION: Through applying a definitive framework and establishing agreed threshold and action levels for action within anticipated treatment scenarios similar to those in cone-beam computed tomography-based IGRT, we have implemented a 'clinician-lite' workflow for simple adaptive treatments on the MR-linac. The responsibility for online plan evaluation and approval now rests with physicists and RTTs to streamline MRgART. Early evaluation of the framework after treatment of 10 patients has required minimal online clinician input (1.5% of 200 fractions delivered). CONCLUSION: A 'clinician-lite' prostate treatment workflow has been successfully introduced on the MR-linac at our institution and will serve as a model for other tumour sites, using more complex adaptive strategies. Early indications are that this framework has the potential to improve patient throughput and efficiency. Further identification and validation of roles and responsibilities such as online contouring, and more interactive online planning, will facilitate RTTs to fully lead in the online workflow as adaptive radiotherapy becomes ever more complex.
Authors: Marnix J A Rasing; Gonda G Sikkes; Nicole G P M Vissers; Alexis N T J Kotte; Joske H Boudewijn; Patricia A H Doornaert; Wietse S C Eppinga; Martijn Intven; Reijer H A Rutgers; Annick Scheeren; Louk M W Snoeren; Tiny B Vlig; Jochem R N van der Voort van Zyp; Lisa M Wijkhuizen; Peter S N van Rossum; Max Peters; Ina M Jürgenliemk-Schulz Journal: Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-08-24
Authors: Maaike T W Milder; Alba Magallon-Baro; Wilhelm den Toom; Erik de Klerck; Lorne Luthart; Joost J Nuyttens; Mischa S Hoogeman Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-07-28
Authors: Carri K Glide-Hurst; Percy Lee; Adam D Yock; Jeffrey R Olsen; Minsong Cao; Farzan Siddiqui; William Parker; Anthony Doemer; Yi Rong; Amar U Kishan; Stanley H Benedict; X Allen Li; Beth A Erickson; Jason W Sohn; Ying Xiao; Evan Wuthrick Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2020-10-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Daniel Wegener; Daniel Zips; Cihan Gani; Simon Boeke; Konstantin Nikolaou; Ahmed E Othman; Haidara Almansour; Frank Paulsen; Arndt-Christian Müller Journal: Radiologe Date: 2021-07-23 Impact factor: 0.635