Cargando…

Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy

PURPOSE: Quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) is the current clinical practice in proton therapy to evaluate the needs for replan. QACT could falsely indicate replan because of setup issues that would be solved on the treatment machine. Deforming the treatment planning CT (TPCT) to the pretr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stanforth, Alexander, Lin, Liyong, Beitler, Jonathan J., Janopaul‐Naylor, James R., Chang, Chih‐Wei, Press, Robert H., Patel, Sagar A., Zhao, Jennifer, Eaton, Bree, Schreibmann, Eduard E., Jung, James, Bohannon, Duncan, Liu, Tian, Yang, Xiaofeng, McDonald, Mark W., Zhou, Jun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9121026/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35128788
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13550
_version_ 1784711066249330688
author Stanforth, Alexander
Lin, Liyong
Beitler, Jonathan J.
Janopaul‐Naylor, James R.
Chang, Chih‐Wei
Press, Robert H.
Patel, Sagar A.
Zhao, Jennifer
Eaton, Bree
Schreibmann, Eduard E.
Jung, James
Bohannon, Duncan
Liu, Tian
Yang, Xiaofeng
McDonald, Mark W.
Zhou, Jun
author_facet Stanforth, Alexander
Lin, Liyong
Beitler, Jonathan J.
Janopaul‐Naylor, James R.
Chang, Chih‐Wei
Press, Robert H.
Patel, Sagar A.
Zhao, Jennifer
Eaton, Bree
Schreibmann, Eduard E.
Jung, James
Bohannon, Duncan
Liu, Tian
Yang, Xiaofeng
McDonald, Mark W.
Zhou, Jun
author_sort Stanforth, Alexander
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) is the current clinical practice in proton therapy to evaluate the needs for replan. QACT could falsely indicate replan because of setup issues that would be solved on the treatment machine. Deforming the treatment planning CT (TPCT) to the pretreatment CBCT may eliminate this issue. We investigated the performance of replan evaluation based on deformed TPCT (TPCTdir) for proton head and neck (H&N) therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty‐eight H&N datasets along with pretreatment CBCT and QACT were used to validate the method. The changes in body volume were analyzed between the no‐replan and replan groups. The dose on the TPCTdir, the deformed QACT (QACTdir), and the QACT were calculated by applying the clinical plans to these image sets. Dosimetric parameters’ changes, including ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1 for the clinical target volumes (CTVs) were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic curves for replan evaluation based on ΔD95 on QACT and TPCTdir were calculated, using ΔD95 on QACTdir as the reference. A threshold for replan based on ΔD95 on TPCTdir is proposed. The specificities for the proposed method were calculated. RESULTS: The changes in the body contour were 95.8 ± 83.8 cc versus 305.0 ± 235.0 cc (p < 0.01) for the no‐replan and replan groups, respectively. The ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1 are all comparable for all the evaluations. The differences between TPCTdir and QACTdir evaluations were 0.30% ± 0.86%, 0.00 ± 0.22 Gy, and −0.17 ± 0.61 Gy for CTV ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1, respectively. The corresponding differences between the QACT and QACTdir were 0.12% ± 1.1%, 0.02 ± 0.32 Gy, and −0.01 ± 0.71 Gy. CTV ΔD95 > 2.6% in TPCTdir was chosen as the threshold to trigger QACT/replan. The corresponding specificity was 94% and 98% for the clinical practice and the proposed method, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The replan evaluation based on TPCTdir provides better specificity than that based on the QACT.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9121026
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91210262022-05-21 Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy Stanforth, Alexander Lin, Liyong Beitler, Jonathan J. Janopaul‐Naylor, James R. Chang, Chih‐Wei Press, Robert H. Patel, Sagar A. Zhao, Jennifer Eaton, Bree Schreibmann, Eduard E. Jung, James Bohannon, Duncan Liu, Tian Yang, Xiaofeng McDonald, Mark W. Zhou, Jun J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: Quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) is the current clinical practice in proton therapy to evaluate the needs for replan. QACT could falsely indicate replan because of setup issues that would be solved on the treatment machine. Deforming the treatment planning CT (TPCT) to the pretreatment CBCT may eliminate this issue. We investigated the performance of replan evaluation based on deformed TPCT (TPCTdir) for proton head and neck (H&N) therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty‐eight H&N datasets along with pretreatment CBCT and QACT were used to validate the method. The changes in body volume were analyzed between the no‐replan and replan groups. The dose on the TPCTdir, the deformed QACT (QACTdir), and the QACT were calculated by applying the clinical plans to these image sets. Dosimetric parameters’ changes, including ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1 for the clinical target volumes (CTVs) were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic curves for replan evaluation based on ΔD95 on QACT and TPCTdir were calculated, using ΔD95 on QACTdir as the reference. A threshold for replan based on ΔD95 on TPCTdir is proposed. The specificities for the proposed method were calculated. RESULTS: The changes in the body contour were 95.8 ± 83.8 cc versus 305.0 ± 235.0 cc (p < 0.01) for the no‐replan and replan groups, respectively. The ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1 are all comparable for all the evaluations. The differences between TPCTdir and QACTdir evaluations were 0.30% ± 0.86%, 0.00 ± 0.22 Gy, and −0.17 ± 0.61 Gy for CTV ΔD95, ΔDmean, and ΔD1, respectively. The corresponding differences between the QACT and QACTdir were 0.12% ± 1.1%, 0.02 ± 0.32 Gy, and −0.01 ± 0.71 Gy. CTV ΔD95 > 2.6% in TPCTdir was chosen as the threshold to trigger QACT/replan. The corresponding specificity was 94% and 98% for the clinical practice and the proposed method, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The replan evaluation based on TPCTdir provides better specificity than that based on the QACT. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9121026/ /pubmed/35128788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13550 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Stanforth, Alexander
Lin, Liyong
Beitler, Jonathan J.
Janopaul‐Naylor, James R.
Chang, Chih‐Wei
Press, Robert H.
Patel, Sagar A.
Zhao, Jennifer
Eaton, Bree
Schreibmann, Eduard E.
Jung, James
Bohannon, Duncan
Liu, Tian
Yang, Xiaofeng
McDonald, Mark W.
Zhou, Jun
Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy
title Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy
title_full Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy
title_fullStr Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy
title_full_unstemmed Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy
title_short Onboard cone‐beam CT‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy
title_sort onboard cone‐beam ct‐based replan evaluation for head and neck proton therapy
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9121026/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35128788
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13550
work_keys_str_mv AT stanforthalexander onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT linliyong onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT beitlerjonathanj onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT janopaulnaylorjamesr onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT changchihwei onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT pressroberth onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT patelsagara onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT zhaojennifer onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT eatonbree onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT schreibmanneduarde onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT jungjames onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT bohannonduncan onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT liutian onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT yangxiaofeng onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT mcdonaldmarkw onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy
AT zhoujun onboardconebeamctbasedreplanevaluationforheadandneckprotontherapy