CTSC:TTIC.090109 - Revision history

Valerie.humblet: /* Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009 */

2009-12-10T19:25:12Z

Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009

Valerie.humblet: /* Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009 */

2009-09-15T01:47:16Z

Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009

Valerie.humblet: /* Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009 */

2009-09-15T01:47:03Z

Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009

Valerie.humblet: /* Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009 */

2009-09-15T01:46:40Z

Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009

Valerie.humblet: /* Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009 */

2009-09-15T01:37:50Z

Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009

Valerie.humblet: /* Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009 */

2009-09-15T01:36:06Z

Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009

Valerie.humblet at 18:25, 2 September 2009

2009-09-02T18:25:38Z

Valerie.humblet: /* Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009 */

2009-09-02T18:10:36Z

Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009

Valerie.humblet: p

2009-09-02T18:09:17Z

Valerie.humblet at 17:09, 2 September 2009

2009-09-02T17:09:43Z

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 * Gordon Harris
 * Simon Warfield
-* Jeff Yapp
+* Jeff Yap
 * Wendy Plensiak
 * Mark Anderson

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 * Jeff, Wendy and Ron have been working on the DCE-MRI (breast) data set sent by Kasia Macura (Hopkins) in preparation of the educational session at the ACRIN meeting on September 30, 2009 in Arlington, VA.
-** They are concern that even if we can clearly see the tumor shrinking, the intensity values of the images before and after don't look the same. They look almost like if different sequences were used. Even normal breast tissue look different. They will get back in touch with Kasia to check that she sent the right data.
+** They are concerns that even if we can clearly see the tumor shrinking, the intensity values of the images before and after don't look the same. They look almost like if different sequences were used. Even normal breast tissue look different. They will get back in touch with Kasia to check that she sent the right data.
 ** If those data turned out to be not usable for the ACRIN meeting, Bob has some lung data that are very interesting because they require registration before doing the DCE-MRI analysis. He will take to the owner of the data to ask permission to share them.

@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 ** They are concern that even if we can clearly see the tumor shrinking, the intensity values of the images before and after don't look the same. They look almost like if different sequences were used. Even normal breast tissue look different. They will get back in touch with Kasia to check that she sent the right data.
 ** If those data turned out to be not usable for the ACRIN meeting, Bob has some lung data that are very interesting because they require registration before doing the DCE-MRI analysis. He will take to the owner of the data to ask permission to share them.
 '''3. MRI Safety''' <br>

@@ Line 58: / Line 58: @@
 ** Simon mentioned that Ellen Grant at CHB works on standardizing some protocols for pediatric MS between MGH, MIT and CHB.
 ** BIDMC asked CHB (Simon in particular) for imaging protocols for newborns in the NICU. Bob will check if they have been implemented.
 * Plan of action:
 ** Valerie will gather the multi-site protocols already on hands.
-** The imaging consortium could put together a proposal for the next round of pilot grant. The goal would be to get funded to scan subjects at each institution, do a test-retest of subjects at different sites with different modalities. It might get more complicated for CT because if the radiation.
+** Gordon Williams suggested that the imaging consortium could put together a proposal for the next round of pilot grant. Everybody agreed. The goal would be to get funded to scan subjects at each institution, do a test-retest of subjects at different sites with different modalities. It might get more complicated for CT because if the radiations.

@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 '''4. Standardization of cross-site imaging acquisition''' <br>
-* The questions of quality control during acquisition, protocol compliance, introduction of research requirements to clinical environment were brought during the discussion. Those a important issues, no matter what the imaging technology is (MRI, US, PET, CT). As Annick mentioned, nationally there is a lot of attention to it. It is a great case for Harvard, if we can do it here within our institution, we would be able to set standards nationally.
+* The questions of quality control during acquisition, protocol compliance, introduction of research requirements to clinical environment were brought during the discussion. Those are important issues, no matter what the imaging technology is (MRI, US, PET, CT). As Annick mentioned, nationally there is a lot of attention to it. It is a great case for the Harvard Catalyst, if we can do it here within our institution, we would be able to set standards nationally.
 ** The first goal will be to push the standards internally. Bruce suggested to maybe try with the easiest modality. Simon agreed that it is an excellent idea to create standardization for clinical trial internally.
 ** Jeff mentioned that at Dana Farber, they did it with PET phantoms and got good results but nothing was done on the clinical side yet. Annick added that TIMC has many similar data on CT.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:36, 15 September 2009
Line 50:		Line 50:

	<br>		<br>
		+
		+	'''4. Standardization of cross-site imaging acquisition''' <br>
		+
		+	* The questions of quality control during acquisition, protocol compliance, introduction of research requirements to clinical environment were brought during the discussion. Those a important issues, no matter what the imaging technology is (MRI, US, PET, CT). As Annick mentioned, nationally there is a lot of attention to it. It is a great case for Harvard, if we can do it here within our institution, we would be able to set standards nationally.
		+	** The first goal will be to push the standards internally. Bruce suggested to maybe try with the easiest modality. Simon agreed that it is an excellent idea to create standardization for clinical trial internally.
		+	** Jeff mentioned that at Dana Farber, they did it with PET phantoms and got good results but nothing was done on the clinical side yet. Annick added that TIMC has many similar data on CT.
		+	** Simon mentioned that Ellen Grant at CHB works on standardizing some protocols for pediatric MS between MGH, MIT and CHB.
		+	** BIDMC asked CHB (Simon in particular) for imaging protocols for newborns in the NICU. Bob will check if they have been implemented.
		+	* Plan of action:
		+	** Valerie will gather the multi-site protocols already on hands.
		+	** The imaging consortium could put together a proposal for the next round of pilot grant. The goal would be to get funded to scan subjects at each institution, do a test-retest of subjects at different sites with different modalities. It might get more complicated for CT because if the radiation.

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 # Consultations
 # DCE-MRI update
 # MRI safety ([[media: MRIsafety.ppt |download]]) here
-# Catalyst retreat on September 9
+# Standardization of cross-site imaging acquisition
 == Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009 ==
@@ Line 36: / Line 34: @@
 <br>
 '''3. MRI Safety''' <br>

@@ Line 43: / Line 43: @@
 ** Pregnancy is still controversial, especially when it comes to research and IRB approval. While pregnant women are scanned regularly for clinical reasons, the current guidelines are to exclude pregnant women from research studies. Each IRB establishes its own guidelines regarding the consent form. In some institution, if the women is not able to confirm that she is not pregnant and/or give the date of her last menstruation period, she is offered a pregnancy test. If she declines the test, she is not accepted in the study. In order to help investigator get IRB approval for their MRI scans, Valerie will collect IRB text fron BIDMC, Martinos Center and CHB to get some downloadable template on how to write the consent form the right way.
 ** The FDA now recommends that magnetic field up to 8T (and not 4T anymore) are safe for individual 1 month and older
 <br>

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:09, 2 September 2009
Line 37:		Line 37:
	<br>		<br>

−	'''2. MRI Safety''' <br>	+	'''3. MRI Safety''' <br>
		+
		+	* Valerie put together a tutorial called: MRI safety, guidelines for safe MR pratice. The tutorial is based on he MRI safety training from BIDMC, MGH, CHB, MIT and BWH plus information from the RSNA withe paper on MRI safety.
		+	* Members reviewed the slides.
		+	** Pregnancy is still controversial, especially when it comes to research and IRB approval. While pregnant women are scanned regularly for clinical reasons, the current guidelines are to exclude pregnant women from research studies. Each IRB establishes its own guidelines regarding the consent form. In some institution, if the women is not able to confirm that she is not pregnant and/or give the date of her last menstruation period, she is offered a pregnancy test. If she declines the test, she is not accepted in the study. In order to help investigator get IRB approval for their MRI scans, Valerie will collect IRB text fron BIDMC, Martinos Center and CHB to get some downloadable template on how to write the consent form the right way.
		+	** The FDA now recommends that magnetic field up to 8T (and not 4T anymore) are safe for individual 1 month and older
		+
		+	<br>

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 2 September 2009
Line 10:		Line 10:
	# MRI safety ([[media: MRIsafety.ppt \|download]]) here		# MRI safety ([[media: MRIsafety.ppt \|download]]) here
	# Catalyst retreat on September 9		# Catalyst retreat on September 9
		+
		+	== Harvard Translational Imaging Consortium Meeting Minutes September 1, 2009 ==
		+
		+	In attendance:
		+
		+	* Valerie Humblet
		+	* Gordon Harris
		+	* Simon Warfield
		+	* Jeff Yapp
		+	* Wendy Plensiak
		+	* Mark Anderson
		+	* Randy Gollub
		+	* Yong Gao
		+	* Annick Van den Abbeele
		+	* Gordon Williams
		+	* Bill Hanlon
		+	* Bob Lenkinski
		+	* Ron Kikinis
		+
		+	<br>
		+
		+	'''1. Update on imaging consultation requests''' <br>
		+
		+	* There was no new consultation this week.
		+
		+	<br>
		+
		+	'''2. MRI Safety''' <br>