Skip to main content

Magnetic resonance image guidance in external beam radiation therapy planning and delivery

Japanese Journal of Radiology volume 35, pages 417–426 (2017)Cite this article

Abstract

The use of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in radiation oncology is improving dramatically. This review article discusses the necessity of image guidance and how MR finds a significant place in radiotherapy planning and delivery. The challenges to and current solutions for an in-house MR simulation, dedicated MR simulator, estimation of electron density using MR image sets and development of MR-compatible treatment planning systems are presented. This article also reviews the feasibility, advantages and limitations of MR image-guided radiation therapy (MR-IGRT) and its drive toward the integration of radiation beams with MR technology. Specifications of Co-60 MR technology and three other MR-linac projects worldwide are presented. Online and real-time MR guidance is also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Brock KK, Dawson LA. Point: principles of magnetic resonance imaging integration in a computed tomography-based radiotherapy workflow. In: Seminars in radiation oncology, Jul 31 2014, vol. 24(3). WB Saunders, p. 169–74.

  2. Wang H, Garden AS, Zhang L, Wei X, Ahamad A, Kuban DA, et al. Performance evaluation of automatic anatomy segmentation algorithm on repeat or four-dimensional computed tomography images using deformable image registration method. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72(1):210–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vemuri BC, Ye J, Chen Y, Leonard CM. Image registration via level-set motion: applications to atlas-based segmentation. Med Image Anal. 2003;7(1):1–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dean CJ, Sykes JR, Cooper RA, Hatfield P, Carey B, Swift S, et al. An evaluation of four CT–MRI co-registration techniques for radiotherapy treatment planning of prone rectal cancer patients. Br J Radiol. 2014. doi:10.1259/bjr/11855927.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Podgorsak EB. Radiation oncology physics: a handbook for teachers and students. IAEA 2008.

  6. Peters T. CT image reconstruction. SLIDES REVL. 2002:05697–745.

  7. Liang Z, Lauterbur PC. Principles of magnetic resonance imaging. New York: IEEE Press, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Simpson DR, Lawson JD, Nath SK, Rose BS, Mundt AJ, Mell LK. Utilization of advanced imaging technologies for target delineation in radiation oncology. J Am Coll Radiol. 2009;6(12):876–83.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Glatstein E, Lichter AS, Fraass BA, Kelly BA, van de Geijn J. The imaging revolution and radiation oncology: use of CT, ultrasound, and NMR for localization, treatment planning and treatment delivery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1985;11(2):299–314.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pereira GC, Traughber M, Muzic RF. The role of imaging in radiation therapy planning: past, present, and future. Biomed Res Int. 2014;10:2014.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Beavis AW. Image-guided radiation therapy: what is our Utopia? Br J Radiol. 2014. doi:10.1259/bjr/26132255.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jaffray DA. Image-guided radiotherapy: from current concept to future perspectives. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2012;9(12):688–99.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lou Y, Niu T, Jia X, Vela PA, Zhu L, Tannenbaum AR. Joint CT/CBCT deformable registration and CBCT enhancement for cancer radiotherapy. Med Image Anal. 2013;17(3):387–400.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Walker A, Liney G, Metcalfe P, Holloway L. MRI distortion: considerations for MRI based radiotherapy treatment planning. Aust Phys Eng Sci Med. 2014;37:103–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Crijns SP, Bakker CJ, Seevinck PR, De Leeuw H, Lagendijk JJ, Raaymakers BW. Towards inherently distortion-free MR images for image-guided radiotherapy on an MRI accelerator. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57(5):1349.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhang B, MacFadden D, Damyanovich AZ, Rieker M, Stainsby J, Bernstein M, et al. Development of a geometrically accurate imaging protocol at 3 Tesla MRI for stereotactic radiosurgery treatment planning. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55(22):6601.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang D, Doddrell DM. Geometric distortion in structural magnetic resonance imaging. Curr Med Imaging Rev. 2005;1(1):49–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang H, Balter J, Cao Y. Patient-induced susceptibility effect on geometric distortion of clinical brain MRI for radiation treatment planning on a 3T scanner. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58(3):465.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Reinsberg SA, Doran SJ, Charles-Edwards EM, Leach MO. A complete distortion correction for MR images: II. Rectification of static-field inhomogeneities by similarity-based profile mapping. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50(11):2651.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chen HH, Boykin RD, Clarke GD, Gao JH, Roby JW. Routine testing of magnetic field homogeneity on clinical MRI systems. Med Phys. 2006;33(11):4299–306.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jezzard P. The physical basis of spatial distortions in magnetic resonance images. In: Bankman IN, editor. Handbook of medical image processing and analysis. 2nd ed. London: Academic Press; 2009. p. 499–514.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Baldwin LN, Wachowicz K, Thomas SD, Rivest R, Fallone BG. Characterization, prediction, and correction of geometric distortion in 3T MR images. Med Phys. 2007;34(2):388–99.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Raaijmakers AJ, Raaymakers BW, Lagendijk JJ. Magnetic-field-induced dose effects in MR-guided radiotherapy systems: dependence on the magnetic field strength. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53(4):909.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang D, Doddrell DM, Cowin G. A novel phantom and method for comprehensive 3-dimensional measurement and correction of geometric distortion in magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;22(4):529–42.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mizowaki T, Nagata Y, Okajima K, Kokubo M, Negoro Y, Araki N, Hiraoka M. Reproducibility of geometric distortion in magnetic resonance imaging based on phantom studies. Radiother Oncol. 2000;57(2):237–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sun J, Dowling J, Pichler P, Menk F, Rivest-Henault D, Lambert J, et al. MRI simulation: end-to-end testing for prostate radiation therapy using geometric pelvic MRI phantoms. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60(8):3097.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jaffray DA, Carlone M, Breen S, Milosevic M, Menard C, Stanescu T, et al. Development of a novel platform for MR-guided radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;87(2):S13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Tadic T, Jaffray D, Stanescu T. TU-G-134-02: a harmonic field approach to quantifying MRI spatial accuracy for MRIgRT. Med Phys. 2013;40(6):460–1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Paulson ES, Erickson B, Schultz C, Allen Li X. Comprehensive MRI simulation methodology using a dedicated MRI scanner in radiation oncology for external beam radiation treatment planning. Med Phys. 2015;42(1):28–39.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. St Aubin J, Steciw S, Fallone BG. The design of a simulated in-line side-coupled 6 MV linear accelerator waveguide. Med Phys. 2010;37(2):466–76.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Nyholm T, Jonsson J. Counterpoint: opportunities and challenges of a magnetic resonance imaging–only radiotherapy work flow. In: Seminars in radiation oncology, Jul 31 2014, vol. 24(3). WB Saunders. p. 175–80.

  32. Johansson A, Karlsson M, Nyholm T. CT substitute derived from MRI sequences with ultrashort echo time. Med Phys. 2011;38(5):2708–14.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hsu SH, Cao Y, Lawrence TS, Tsien C, Feng M, Grodzki DM, Balter JM. Quantitative characterizations of ultrashort echo (UTE) images for supporting air–bone separation in the head. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60(7):2869.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Chen S, Quan H, Qin A, Yee S, Yan D. MR image-based synthetic CT for IMRT prostate treatment planning and CBCT image-guided localization. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016;17(3):6065.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Korhonen J, Kapanen M, Keyriläinen J, Seppälä T, Tenhunen M. A dual model HU conversion from MRI intensity values within and outside of bone segment for MRI-based radiotherapy treatment planning of prostate cancer. Med Phys. 2014;41(1):011704.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kapanen M, Tenhunen M. T1/T2*-weighted MRI provides clinically relevant pseudo-CT density data for the pelvic bones in MRI-only based radiotherapy treatment planning. Acta Oncol. 2013;52(3):612–8.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Martin S, Rodrigues G, Patil N, Bauman G, D’Souza D, Sexton T, et al. A multiphase validation of atlas-based automatic and semiautomatic segmentation strategies for prostate MRI. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;85(1):95–100.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Dowling JA, Burdett N, Greer PB, Sun J, Parker J, Pichler P, et al. Automatic atlas based electron density and structure contouring for MRI-based prostate radiation therapy on the cloud. In: Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2014, vol. 489(1). IOP Publishing. p. 012048.

  39. Coupé P, Manjón JV, Fonov V, Pruessner J, Robles M, Collins DL. Patch-based segmentation using expert priors: application to hippocampus and ventricle segmentation. NeuroImage. 2011;54(2):940–54.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Artaechevarria X, Munoz-Barrutia A, Ortiz-de-Solórzano C. Combination strategies in multi-atlas image segmentation: application to brain MR data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2009;28(8):1266–77.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Dowling JA, Sun J, Pichler P, Rivest-Hénault D, Ghose S, Richardson H, et al. Automatic substitute computed tomography generation and contouring for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-Alone external beam radiation therapy from standard MRI sequences. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015;93(5):1144–53.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Chin AL, Lin A, Anamalayil S, Teo BK. Feasibility and limitations of bulk density assignment in MRI for head and neck IMRT treatment planning. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15(5):4851.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Stanescu T, Jans HS, Pervez N, Stavrev P, Fallone BG. A study on the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based radiation treatment planning of intracranial lesions. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53(13):3579.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Beavis AW, Gibbs P, Dealey RA, Whitton VJ. Radiotherapy treatment planning of brain tumours using MRI alone. Br J Radiol. 1998;71(845):544–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Prabhakar R, Julka PK, Ganesh T, Munshi A, Joshi RC, Rath GK. Feasibility of using MRI alone for 3D radiation treatment planning in brain tumors. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2007;37(6):405–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lambert J, Greer PB, Menk F, Patterson J, Parker J, Dahl K, et al. MRI-guided prostate radiation therapy planning: investigation of dosimetric accuracy of MRI-based dose planning. Radiother Oncol. 2011;98(3):330–4.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Klein EE, Das IJ, Dong L, Rivard MJ. Oncology scan—improvements in dose calculation, deformable registration, and MR-guided radiation delivery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;86(3):395–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Nyholm T, Jonsson J. Counterpoint: opportunities and challenges of a magnetic resonance imaging–only radiotherapy work flow. In: Seminars in radiation oncology, Jul 31 2014, vol. 24(3). WB Saunders. p. 175–80.

  49. Hanvey S, Sadozye AH, McJury M, Glegg M, Foster J. The influence of MRI scan position on image registration accuracy, target delineation and calculated dose in prostatic radiotherapy. Br J Radiol. 2014. doi:10.1259/bjr/26802977.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Jonsson JH, Karlsson MG, Karlsson M, Nyholm T. Treatment planning using MRI data: an analysis of the dose calculation accuracy for different treatment regions. Radiat Oncol. 2010;5(1):62.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Prior P, Chen X, Botros M, Paulson ES, Lawton C, Erickson B, et al. MRI-based IMRT planning for MR-linac: comparison between CT-and MRI-based plans for pancreatic and prostate cancers. This work was present in part at the 2014 ASTRO annual meeting. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61(10):3819.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Burke B, Wachowicz K, Fallone BG, Rathee S. Effect of radiation induced current on the quality of MR images in an integrated linac-MR system. Med Phys. 2012;39(10):6139–47.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Kirkby C, Stanescu T, Rathee S, Carlone M, Murray B, Fallone BG. Patient dosimetry for hybrid MRI-radiotherapy systems. Med Phys. 2008;35(3):1019–27.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Raaijmakers AJ, Raaymakers BW, Lagendijk JJ. Experimental verification of magnetic field dose effects for the MRI-accelerator. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52(14):4283.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Oborn BM, Metcalfe PE, Butson MJ, Rosenfeld AB, Keall PJ. Electron contamination modeling and skin dose in 6 MV longitudinal field MRIgRT: impact of the MRI and MRI fringe field. Med Phys. 2012;39(2):874–90.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Fox C, Aleman D, Romeijn HE, Li JG, Dempsey JF. 2825: gamma-ray intensity modulated radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;66(3):S673–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Mutic S. WE-A-BRA-02: first commercial hybrid MRI-IMRT system. Med Phys. 2012;39(6):3934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Hu Y, Green OP, Parikh P, Olsen J, Mutic S. TH-E-BRA-07: initial experience with the ViewRay system-quality assurance testing of the imaging component. Med Phys. 2012;39(6):4013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Goddu S, Green OP, Mutic S. WE-G-BRB-08: TG-51 calibration of first commercial MRI-guided IMRT system in the presence of 0.35 tesla magnetic field. Med Phys. 2012;39(6):3968.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Jaffray D, Mutic S, Fallone B, Raaymakers B. MO-A-WAB-01: MRI-guided radiation therapy. Med Phys. 2013;40(6):390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Noel C, Olsen J, Green OP, Hu Y, Parikh P. TU-G-217A-09: feasibility of bowel tracking using onboard cine MRI for gated radiotherapy. Med Phys. 2012;39(6):3928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Olsen JR, Noel CE, Spencer CR, Green OP, Hu Y, Mutic S, et al. Feasibility of single and multiplane cine MR for monitoring tumor volumes and organs-at-risk (OARs) position during radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84(3):S742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Parikh PJ, Noel CE, Spencer C, Green O, Hu Y, Mutic S, Olsen JR. Comparison of onboard low-field MRI versus CBCT/MVCT for anatomy identification in radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84(3):S133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Hu Y, Green OL, Feng Y, Du D, Wooten OH, Li HH, et al. Image performance characterization of an MRI-guided radiation therapy system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;87(2):S13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Liney G, Rai R, Holloway L, Vinod S. A dedicated MRI scanner for radiotherapy planning: early experiences. Clin Radiat Ther. 2014.

  66. Tadic T, Fallone BG. Design and optimization of a novel bored biplanar permanent-magnet assembly for hybrid magnetic resonance imaging systems. IEEE Trans Magn. 2010;46(12):4052–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Tadic T, Fallone BG. Design and optimization of superconducting MRI magnet systems with magnetic materials. IEEE Trans Appl Supercond. 2012;22(2):4400107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Fallone BG. The rotating biplanar linac–magnetic resonance imaging system. In: Seminars in radiation oncology, 31 Jul 2014, vol. 24(3). WB Saunders. p. 200–2.

  69. Raaijmakers AJ, Raaymakers BW, Lagendijk JJ. Integrating a MRI scanner with a 6 MV radiotherapy accelerator: dose increase at tissue–air interfaces in a lateral magnetic field due to returning electrons. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50(7):1363.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Keyvanloo A, Burke B, Aubin JS, Baillie D, Wachowicz K, Warkentin B, et al. Minimal skin dose increase in longitudinal rotating biplanar linac-MR systems: examination of radiation energy and flattening filter design. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61(9):3527.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Yun J, Wachowicz K, Mackenzie M, Rathee S, Robinson D, Fallone BG. First demonstration of intrafractional tumor-tracked irradiation using 2D phantom MR images on a prototype linac-MR. Med Phys. 2013;40(5):051718.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Yun J, Yip E, Gabos Z, Wachowicz K, Rathee S, Fallone BG. Improved lung tumor autocontouring algorithm for intrafractional tumor tracking using 0.5 T linac-MR. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2016;2(6):067004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Yip E, Yun J, Wachowicz K, Gabos Z, Rathee S, Fallone BG. Sliding window prior data assisted compressed sensing for MRI tracking of lung tumours. Med Phys. 2016;44(1):84–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Lagendijk JJ, Raaymakers BW, van Vulpen M. The magnetic resonance imaging–linac system. In: Seminars in radiation oncology, Jul 31 2014, vol. 24(3). WB Saunders. p. 207–9.

  75. Overweg J, Raaymakers BW, Lagendijk JJ, Brown K. System for MRI guided radiotherapy. In: Proceedings of the International Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Apr 18 2009, vol. 17. p. 594.

  76. Raaymakers BW, Lagendijk JJ, Overweg J, Kok JG, Raaijmakers AJ, Kerkhof EM, et al. Integrating a 1.5 T MRI scanner with a 6 MV accelerator: proof of concept. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54(12):N229.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Bol GH, Hissoiny S, Lagendijk JJ, Raaymakers BW. Fast online Monte Carlo-based IMRT planning for the MRI linear accelerator. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57(5):1375.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Crijns SP, Kok JG, Lagendijk JJ, Raaymakers BW. Towards MRI-guided linear accelerator control: gating on an MRI accelerator. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56(15):4815.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Crijns SP, Raaymakers BW, Lagendijk JJ. Proof of concept of MRI-guided tracked radiation delivery: tracking one-dimensional motion. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57(23):7863.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Köhler M, Vaara T, Grootel MV, Hoogeveen R, Kemppainen R, Renisch S. MR-only simulation for radiotherapy planning. Philips White Paper. 2015.

  81. Keall PJ, Barton M, Crozier S. The Australian magnetic resonance imaging–linac program. In: Seminars in radiation oncology, Jul 31 2014, vol. 24(3). WB Saunders. p. 203–6.

  82. Whelan B, Gierman S, Holloway L, Schmerge J, Keall P, Fahrig R. A novel electron accelerator for MRI-Linac radiotherapy. Med Phys. 2016;43(3):1285–94.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Constantin DE, Fahrig R, Keall PJ. A study of the effect of in-line and perpendicular magnetic fields on beam characteristics of electron guns in medical linear accelerators. Med Phys. 2011;38(7):4174–85.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Liney GP, Dong B, Begg J, Vial P, Zhang K, Lee F, Walker A, Rai R, Causer T, Alnaghy SJ, Oborn BM. Technical note: experimental results from a prototype high-field inline MRI-linac. Med Phys. 2016;43(9):5188–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Kolling S, Oborn B, Keall P. Impact of the MLC on the MRI field distortion of a prototype MRI-linac. Med Phys. 2013;40(12):121705.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Oborn BM, Kolling S, Metcalfe PE, Crozier S, Litzenberg DW, Keall PJ. Electron contamination modeling and reduction in a 1 T open bore inline MRI-linac system. Med Phys. 2014;41(5):051708.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Yan D, Vicini F, Wong J, Martinez A. Adaptive radiation therapy. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42(1):123.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Jia X, Ziegenhein P, Jiang SB. GPU-based high-performance computing for radiation therapy. Phys Med Biol. 2014;59(4):R151.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Montanari D, Scolari E, Silvestri C, Graves YJ, Yan H, Cervino L, et al. Comprehensive evaluations of cone-beam CT dose in image-guided radiation therapy via GPU-based Monte Carlo simulations. Phys Med Biol. 2014;59(5):1239.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Men C, Jia X, Jiang SB. GPU-based ultra-fast direct aperture optimization for online adaptive radiation therapy. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55(15):4309.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Yun J, Yip E, Gabos Z, Wachowicz K, Rathee S, Fallone BG. Improved lung tumor autocontouring algorithm for intrafractional tumor tracking using 0.5 T linac-MR. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2016;2(6):067004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Kontaxis C, Bol GH, Lagendijk JJ, Raaymakers BW. A new methodology for inter-and intrafraction plan adaptation for the MR-linac. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60(19):7485.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Bol GH, Lagendijk JJ, Raaymakers BW. Virtual couch shift (VCS): accounting for patient translation and rotation by online IMRT re-optimization. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58(9):2989.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Ahunbay EE, Peng C, Chen GP, Narayanan S, Yu C, Lawton C, Li XA. An on-line replanning scheme for interfractional variations. Med Phys. 2008;35(8):3607–15.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Chen GP, Ahunbay E, Li XA. Technical Note: development and performance of a software tool for quality assurance of online replanning with a conventional Linac or MR-Linac. Med Phys. 2016;43(4):1713–9.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Ahunbay EE, Ates O, Li XA. An online replanning method using warm start optimization and aperture morphing for flattening-filter-free beams. Med Phys. 2016;43(8):4575–84.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Lei Y, Wu Q. A hybrid strategy of offline adaptive planning and online image guidance for prostate cancer radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55(8):2221.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Li T, Thongphiew D, Zhu X, Lee WR, Vujaskovic Z, Yin FF, Wu QJ. Adaptive prostate IGRT combining online re-optimization and re-positioning: a feasibility study. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56(5):1243.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Oh S, Stewart J, Moseley J, Kelly V, Lim K, Xie J, et al. Hybrid adaptive radiotherapy with on-line MRI in cervix cancer IMRT. Radiother Oncol. 2014;110(2):323–8.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Vestergaard A, Hafeez S, Muren LP, Nill S, Høyer M, Hansen VN, et al. The potential of MRI-guided online adaptive re-optimisation in radiotherapy of urinary bladder cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2016;118(1):154–9.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Blanck O, Bode F, Gebhard M, Hunold P, Brandt S, Bruder R, et al. Dose-escalation study for cardiac radiosurgery in a porcine model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;89(3):590–8.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Bode F, Blanck O, Gebhard M, Hunold P, Grossherr M, Brandt S, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation by radiosurgery: implications for non-invasive treatment of atrial fibrillation. Europace. 2015;17(12):1868–74.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Ipsen S, Blanck O, Oborn B, Bode F, Liney G, Hunold P, et al. Radiotherapy beyond cancer: target localization in real-time MRI and treatment planning for cardiac radiosurgery. Med Phys. 2014;41(12):120702.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Yashoda Cancer Institute, Yashoda Hospitals, Nalgonda X Roads, Hyderabad, 500036, India

    Ilamurugu Arivarasan

  2. School of Advanced Sciences, VIT University, Vellore, India

    Ilamurugu Arivarasan, Chandrasekaran Anuradha & Velayudham Ramasubramanian

  3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Yashoda Hospitals, Hyderabad, India

    Shanmuga Subramanian & Ayyalusamy Anantharaman

Authors
  1. Ilamurugu Arivarasan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chandrasekaran Anuradha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shanmuga Subramanian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ayyalusamy Anantharaman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Velayudham Ramasubramanian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ilamurugu Arivarasan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arivarasan, I., Anuradha, C., Subramanian, S. et al. Magnetic resonance image guidance in external beam radiation therapy planning and delivery. Jpn J Radiol 35, 417–426 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-017-0656-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-017-0656-5

Keywords

  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • MR image guidance
  • MR simulator
  • MR-Linac
  • MR-IGRT