Cargando…

Evaluating organ delineation, dose calculation and daily localization in an open-MRI simulation workflow for prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND: This study describes initial testing and evaluation of a vertical-field open Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scanner for the purpose of simulation in radiation therapy for prostate cancer. We have evaluated the clinical workflow of using open MRI as a sole modality for simulation and pl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Doemer, Anthony, Chetty, Indrin J, Glide-Hurst, Carri, Nurushev, Teamour, Hearshen, David, Pantelic, Milan, Traughber, Melanie, Kim, Joshua, Levin, Kenneth, Elshaikh, Mohamed A, Walker, Eleanor, Movsas, Benjamin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4340286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25889107
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-014-0309-0
_version_ 1782359007565971456
author Doemer, Anthony
Chetty, Indrin J
Glide-Hurst, Carri
Nurushev, Teamour
Hearshen, David
Pantelic, Milan
Traughber, Melanie
Kim, Joshua
Levin, Kenneth
Elshaikh, Mohamed A
Walker, Eleanor
Movsas, Benjamin
author_facet Doemer, Anthony
Chetty, Indrin J
Glide-Hurst, Carri
Nurushev, Teamour
Hearshen, David
Pantelic, Milan
Traughber, Melanie
Kim, Joshua
Levin, Kenneth
Elshaikh, Mohamed A
Walker, Eleanor
Movsas, Benjamin
author_sort Doemer, Anthony
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study describes initial testing and evaluation of a vertical-field open Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scanner for the purpose of simulation in radiation therapy for prostate cancer. We have evaluated the clinical workflow of using open MRI as a sole modality for simulation and planning. Relevant results related to MRI alignment (vs. CT) reference dataset with Cone-Beam CT (CBCT) for daily localization are presented. METHODS: Ten patients participated in an IRB approved study utilizing MRI along with CT simulation with the intent of evaluating the MRI-simulation process. Differences in prostate gland volume, seminal vesicles, and penile bulb were assessed with MRI and compared to CT. To evaluate dose calculation accuracy, bulk-density-assignments were mapped onto respective MRI datasets and treated IMRT plans were re-calculated. For image localization purposes, 400 CBCTs were re-evaluated with MRI as the reference dataset and daily shifts compared against CBCT-to-CT registration. Planning margins based on MRI/CBCT shifts were computed using the van Herk formalism. RESULTS: Significant organ contour differences were noted between MRI and CT. Prostate volumes were on average 39.7% (p = 0.002) larger on CT than MRI. No significant difference was found in seminal vesicle volumes (p = 0.454). Penile bulb volumes were 61.1% higher on CT, without statistical significance (p = 0.074). MRI-based dose calculations with assigned bulk densities produced agreement within 1% with heterogeneity corrected CT calculations. The differences in shift positions for the cohort between CBCT-to-CT registration and CBCT-to-MRI registration are −0.15 ± 0.25 cm (anterior-posterior), 0.05 ± 0.19 cm (superior-inferior), and −0.01 ± 0.14 cm (left-right). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the potential of using an open-field MRI scanner as primary imaging modality for prostate cancer treatment planning simulation, dose calculations and daily image localization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4340286
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43402862015-02-26 Evaluating organ delineation, dose calculation and daily localization in an open-MRI simulation workflow for prostate cancer patients Doemer, Anthony Chetty, Indrin J Glide-Hurst, Carri Nurushev, Teamour Hearshen, David Pantelic, Milan Traughber, Melanie Kim, Joshua Levin, Kenneth Elshaikh, Mohamed A Walker, Eleanor Movsas, Benjamin Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: This study describes initial testing and evaluation of a vertical-field open Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scanner for the purpose of simulation in radiation therapy for prostate cancer. We have evaluated the clinical workflow of using open MRI as a sole modality for simulation and planning. Relevant results related to MRI alignment (vs. CT) reference dataset with Cone-Beam CT (CBCT) for daily localization are presented. METHODS: Ten patients participated in an IRB approved study utilizing MRI along with CT simulation with the intent of evaluating the MRI-simulation process. Differences in prostate gland volume, seminal vesicles, and penile bulb were assessed with MRI and compared to CT. To evaluate dose calculation accuracy, bulk-density-assignments were mapped onto respective MRI datasets and treated IMRT plans were re-calculated. For image localization purposes, 400 CBCTs were re-evaluated with MRI as the reference dataset and daily shifts compared against CBCT-to-CT registration. Planning margins based on MRI/CBCT shifts were computed using the van Herk formalism. RESULTS: Significant organ contour differences were noted between MRI and CT. Prostate volumes were on average 39.7% (p = 0.002) larger on CT than MRI. No significant difference was found in seminal vesicle volumes (p = 0.454). Penile bulb volumes were 61.1% higher on CT, without statistical significance (p = 0.074). MRI-based dose calculations with assigned bulk densities produced agreement within 1% with heterogeneity corrected CT calculations. The differences in shift positions for the cohort between CBCT-to-CT registration and CBCT-to-MRI registration are −0.15 ± 0.25 cm (anterior-posterior), 0.05 ± 0.19 cm (superior-inferior), and −0.01 ± 0.14 cm (left-right). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the potential of using an open-field MRI scanner as primary imaging modality for prostate cancer treatment planning simulation, dose calculations and daily image localization. BioMed Central 2015-02-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4340286/ /pubmed/25889107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-014-0309-0 Text en © Doemer et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Doemer, Anthony
Chetty, Indrin J
Glide-Hurst, Carri
Nurushev, Teamour
Hearshen, David
Pantelic, Milan
Traughber, Melanie
Kim, Joshua
Levin, Kenneth
Elshaikh, Mohamed A
Walker, Eleanor
Movsas, Benjamin
Evaluating organ delineation, dose calculation and daily localization in an open-MRI simulation workflow for prostate cancer patients
title Evaluating organ delineation, dose calculation and daily localization in an open-MRI simulation workflow for prostate cancer patients
title_full Evaluating organ delineation, dose calculation and daily localization in an open-MRI simulation workflow for prostate cancer patients
title_fullStr Evaluating organ delineation, dose calculation and daily localization in an open-MRI simulation workflow for prostate cancer patients
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating organ delineation, dose calculation and daily localization in an open-MRI simulation workflow for prostate cancer patients
title_short Evaluating organ delineation, dose calculation and daily localization in an open-MRI simulation workflow for prostate cancer patients
title_sort evaluating organ delineation, dose calculation and daily localization in an open-mri simulation workflow for prostate cancer patients
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4340286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25889107
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-014-0309-0
work_keys_str_mv AT doemeranthony evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT chettyindrinj evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT glidehurstcarri evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT nurushevteamour evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT hearshendavid evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT pantelicmilan evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT traughbermelanie evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT kimjoshua evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT levinkenneth evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT elshaikhmohameda evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT walkereleanor evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients
AT movsasbenjamin evaluatingorgandelineationdosecalculationanddailylocalizationinanopenmrisimulationworkflowforprostatecancerpatients