ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Artificial Intelligence (AI) models in radiation therapy are being developed with increasing pace. Despite this, the radiation therapy community has not widely adopted these models in clinical practice. A cohesive guideline on how to develop, report and clinically validate AI algorithms might help bridge this gap. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A Delphi process with all co-authors was followed to determine which topics should be addressed in this comprehensive guideline. Separate sections of the guideline, including Statements, were written by subgroups of the authors and discussed with the whole group at several meetings. Statements were formulated and scored as highly recommended or recommended. RESULTS: The following topics were found most relevant: Decision making, image analysis, volume segmentation, treatment planning, patient specific quality assurance of treatment delivery, adaptive treatment, outcome prediction, training, validation and testing of AI model parameters, model availability for others to verify, model quality assurance/updates and upgrades, ethics. Key references were given together with an outlook on current hurdles and possibilities to overcome these. 19 Statements were formulated. CONCLUSION: A cohesive guideline has been written which addresses main topics regarding AI in radiation therapy. It will help to guide development, as well as transparent and consistent reporting and validation of new AI tools and facilitate adoption.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Gadolinium-based contrast is often used when acquiring MR images for radiation therapy planning for better target delineation. In some situations, patients may still have residual MRI contrast agents in their tissue while being treated with high-energy radiation. This is especially true when MRI contrast agents are administered during adaptive treatment replanning for patients treated on MR-Linac systems. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the molecular stability of MRI contrast agents when exposed to high energy photons and the associated secondary electrons in a 1.5T MR-Linac system. This was the first step in assessing the safety of administering MRI contrast agents throughout the course of treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two common MRI contrast agents were irradiated with 7 MV photons to clinical dose levels. The irradiated samples were analyzed using liquid chromatography-high resolution mass spectrometry to detect degradation products or conformational alterations created by irradiation with high energy photons and associated secondary electrons. RESULTS: No significant change in chemical composition or displacement of gadolinium ions from their chelates was discovered in samples irradiated with 7 MV photons at relevant clinical doses in a 1.5T MR-Linac. Additionally, no significant correlation between concentrations of irradiated MRI contrast agents and radiation dose was observed. CONCLUSION: The chemical composition stability of the irradiated contrast agents is promising for future use throughout the course of patient treatment. However, in vivo studies are needed to confirm that unexpected metabolites are not created in biological milieus.
